Re: UNITE! Info #167en: The "ozone hole" hoax refuted [WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK --- Resending. For some reason, it didn't get posted Hello Rolf, I would be very pleased if you bind to the rules and stays on topic. As you list in your message, the place for this subject are newsgroups/listservs such as sci.environment, sci.energy, etc. NOT antinato listserv. Thanks for your comprehension. Regards, Francisco Javier Bernal co-list manager On 31 Mar 2002 at 11:04, Rolf Martens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK > --- > > UNITE! Info #167en: The "ozone hole" hoax refuted > [Posted: 31.03.02] > > > Note / Anmerkung / Note / Nota / Anmärkning: > On the UNITE! / VEREINIGT EUCH! / UNISSEZ-VOUS! / > ¡UNIOS! / FÖRENA ER! Info en/de/fr/es/se series: > See information on the last page / Siehe Information auf der > letzten Seite / Verrez information à la dernière page / Ver > información en la última página / Se information på sista sidan > > > INTRO NOTE: > > In this Info simply is repeated a posting sent recently, on > 29.03.02, to several newsgroups and e-mail addresses, '"Ozone > hole" hoax today easy for all to refute!'. > > This brings, as a summary, some main points of the 8-part > Info #166en of 20.03.02, 'The "ozone hole" terror hoax', ad- > ding a couple of new informations. > > The only "replies" to that posting, or to Info #166en, so far, > by writers to newsgroups 'sci.environment', 'sci.energy' etc > who have been making propaganda for the hoax have been the > self-revealing "comment" on 29.03 by Lloyd R. Parker > @emory.edu>, directed to me: > > >You're not only ignorant, but a liar. Slink away. > (and nothing further) > > and the "repeat performance" likewise on 29.03 by Paul F. > Dietz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, replying to Brad Tittle > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, who among other things had cited the > fact brought under point 1) in my posting below: > > >Brad, do be aware that there is a tremendous amount of > >garbage out on the net purporting to debunk the very well > >established[! - RM] connection[!] between CFC emissions and > >the antarctic ozone hole. This pseudoscience has about the > >validity of creationism or flat earth geology... > > (etcetera, likewise not citing one single "fact" "in support > of" the actual pseudoscience of the "ozone hole" hoax nor > commenting concretely on its refutation in Info #166en or in > my briefer 29.03 posting). > > I commented briefly yesterday 30.03 on those two "replies", > under 'Yes, the game *is* up, "ozone hole" hoax defenders!'. > That posting isn't repeated here. > > On 29.03 too, I sent publicly an "Invitation to join Thick > Ozone Layer Truth Bureau", referring to a planned small in- > stitution of some kind which there's a need for today, to in- > form governments, NGOs and not least the international public > of some easily ascertained basic facts concerning this ques- > tion, and to probe further into it too. > > So far, nobody else has shown an interest in joining such a > Bureau. I've "established" one anyway, to be provisionally run > by me and to publish, from time to time, Bulletins from the > address <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Thick Ozone Layer Truth). > > End of intro note > > > > "Ozone hole" hoax today easy for all to refute! > [Originally posted on 29.03.2002] > > The "CFC ozone depletion" hoax is a nasty one. It has served > to cover up bans, decided on by the governments of the main > "rich" countries in 1987-1995 (the "Montreal Protocol" etc) > and now coming into effect, more and more being forced on the > poorer countries too, against substances which are quite > vital for various branches of industry and which cannot be > effectively replaced. This hits practically everybody on > earth. The hoax continues today, in all the mass media, in > the school textbooks, etc, in a large number of countries. > > Back in those days, 10-15 years ago, many scientists pointed > to the fact that the so-called "scientific basis" "justi- > fying" those bans, which certain politicians were in such > extreme hurry to enforce, at that time "at the very best" was > "quite shaky". > > Today, "shaky" is no longer the word for that "basis". > > Today, everybody can easily see that the so-called "manmade > ozone depletion" or "ozone hole" "theory" precisely *is* a > HOAX, a COMPLETE hoax and NOTHING BUT a hoax. > > You don't have to be an atmospheric scientist, say, or a > "pro" chemist, physicist etc, to see this with your own eyes. > > All the qualifications you need are a) ability to read, b) > some very elementary science education (9th-graders' level, > say), c) a rudimentary technique for finding your way through > the Internet World Wide Web. > > True, the minds of a few people (including some rather well- > educated persons who've been debating this question on some > newsgroups, for instance) are blocked, so that they can't/ > won't see even the most obv
UNITE! Info #167en: The "ozone hole" hoax refuted [WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK]
HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---
UNITE! Info #167en: The "ozone hole" hoax refuted
[Posted: 31.03.02]
Note / Anmerkung / Note / Nota / Anmärkning:
On the UNITE! / VEREINIGT EUCH! / UNISSEZ-VOUS! /
¡UNIOS! / FÖRENA ER! Info en/de/fr/es/se series:
See information on the last page / Siehe Information auf der
letzten Seite / Verrez information à la dernière page / Ver
información en la última página / Se information på sista sidan
INTRO NOTE:
In this Info simply is repeated a posting sent recently, on
29.03.02, to several newsgroups and e-mail addresses, '"Ozone
hole" hoax today easy for all to refute!'.
This brings, as a summary, some main points of the 8-part
Info #166en of 20.03.02, 'The "ozone hole" terror hoax', ad-
ding a couple of new informations.
The only "replies" to that posting, or to Info #166en, so far,
by writers to newsgroups 'sci.environment', 'sci.energy' etc
who have been making propaganda for the hoax have been the
self-revealing "comment" on 29.03 by Lloyd R. Parker , directed to me:
>You're not only ignorant, but a liar. Slink away.
(and nothing further)
and the "repeat performance" likewise on 29.03 by Paul F.
Dietz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, replying to Brad Tittle
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, who among other things had cited the
fact brought under point 1) in my posting below:
>Brad, do be aware that there is a tremendous amount of
>garbage out on the net purporting to debunk the very well
>established[! - RM] connection[!] between CFC emissions and
>the antarctic ozone hole. This pseudoscience has about the
>validity of creationism or flat earth geology...
(etcetera, likewise not citing one single "fact" "in support
of" the actual pseudoscience of the "ozone hole" hoax nor
commenting concretely on its refutation in Info #166en or in
my briefer 29.03 posting).
I commented briefly yesterday 30.03 on those two "replies",
under 'Yes, the game *is* up, "ozone hole" hoax defenders!'.
That posting isn't repeated here.
On 29.03 too, I sent publicly an "Invitation to join Thick
Ozone Layer Truth Bureau", referring to a planned small in-
stitution of some kind which there's a need for today, to in-
form governments, NGOs and not least the international public
of some easily ascertained basic facts concerning this ques-
tion, and to probe further into it too.
So far, nobody else has shown an interest in joining such a
Bureau. I've "established" one anyway, to be provisionally run
by me and to publish, from time to time, Bulletins from the
address <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Thick Ozone Layer Truth).
End of intro note
"Ozone hole" hoax today easy for all to refute!
[Originally posted on 29.03.2002]
The "CFC ozone depletion" hoax is a nasty one. It has served
to cover up bans, decided on by the governments of the main
"rich" countries in 1987-1995 (the "Montreal Protocol" etc)
and now coming into effect, more and more being forced on the
poorer countries too, against substances which are quite
vital for various branches of industry and which cannot be
effectively replaced. This hits practically everybody on
earth. The hoax continues today, in all the mass media, in
the school textbooks, etc, in a large number of countries.
Back in those days, 10-15 years ago, many scientists pointed
to the fact that the so-called "scientific basis" "justi-
fying" those bans, which certain politicians were in such
extreme hurry to enforce, at that time "at the very best" was
"quite shaky".
Today, "shaky" is no longer the word for that "basis".
Today, everybody can easily see that the so-called "manmade
ozone depletion" or "ozone hole" "theory" precisely *is* a
HOAX, a COMPLETE hoax and NOTHING BUT a hoax.
You don't have to be an atmospheric scientist, say, or a
"pro" chemist, physicist etc, to see this with your own eyes.
All the qualifications you need are a) ability to read, b)
some very elementary science education (9th-graders' level,
say), c) a rudimentary technique for finding your way through
the Internet World Wide Web.
True, the minds of a few people (including some rather well-
educated persons who've been debating this question on some
newsgroups, for instance) are blocked, so that they can't/
won't see even the most obvious of facts on such a matter,
irrespective of how many times they're pointed out to them.
But that's another matter; certain factors in the society of
today are causing this. Nobody - except, at best, they them-
selves - can help those people. To you others, I want to
show this:
THE SWINDLERS' "PREDICTIONS":
The "ozone depletion" propagandists have said that there
"has been" a "global ozone depletion" at least in the 1980s
("beginning", perhaps, a few years before 1980 too) and that
"it" "would continue" and "be even somewhat bigger" in the
1990s. Precisely "around the year 2000", they've said, the
ozone layer would be at its "most vulnerable" - "due to the
latency of effects of CFC etc releases before 1987".
A "depletion" of "some 3% per decade",
