HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------
UNITE! Info #166en: 8/8 The "ozone hole" terror hoax
[Posted: 20.03.02]
[Continued from part 7/8]
18. THE ANTARCTIC OZONE "HOLE'S" FORGOTTEN
PAST, AND DOES IT HAVE A FUTURE? (ctd.)
[Maduro and Schauerhammer, 1992, ctd.:]
The Rigaud-Leroy paper, which appeared in the Novem-
ber 1990 issue of *Annales Geophysicae*, reports on
the scientists' search through old ozone records from
the French Antarctic Observatory going back to 1958.
Rigaud and Leroy discovered that ozone levels took a
precipitous decline at the beginning of 1958's au-
stral spring, August and September, and reached va-
lues as low as 110 dobson units - the lowest values
ever recorded in Antarctica! [Later, in 1993 and also
in 1998 and 1999, as low or even somewhat lower mini-
ma were recorded: 111 (a monthly mean), 90 respecti-
vely 92 DU, as seen in the table above, respectively,
will be seen below. - RM] These data were recorded
and published in the scientific literature in the
1960s, but had not been examined recently."
Figures for the Antarctic "ozone hole" in years later than
1997 which would be directly comparable to the ones in the
table (above) by Parson I've not been able to find. Here are
some more or less scattered data:
NASA, 06.10.1999, "New Antarctic Ozone Data Released", i.a.:
"A NASA satellite has shown that the area of ozone
depletion over the Antarctic -- the well-known ozone
'hole' -- is a bit less in 1999 than it was last
year. ... the size of the region of depleted Antarc-
tic ozone... extended to a record 10.5 million square
miles on Sept 19,1998. [A new way, then, of recko-
ning - by the area of the 'hole'. - RM] In this image
obtained on October 3, 1999 the size of the Antarctic
ozone hole is smaller than it was at the same time
last year.
...
The ozone levels are expected to decrease over the
next two weeks. The lowest amount of total-column
ozone recorded to date this year was 92 Dobson Units
on Oct. 1. In contrast, ozone levels of 90 Dobson
Units were observed at one point last year.
...
[An absolute minimum, recorded on one day, for in-
stance, no doubt can be considerably below a monthly
mean. That goes for the 1958 minimum too. - RM]
Globally, the ozone layer averages approximately 300
Dobson Units... In contrast, during the annual Ant-
arctic ozone 'hole,' the amount of ozone in the
ozone 'hole' is about 100 Dobson Units..."
In this report too, then, the NASA treats that austral
spring dip as a phenomenon which is constant over the years,
not maintaining for instance that it would be deepening.
The WMO, in contrast to its having ceased completely, after
1998, to say anything about global ozone levels or any trend
in these levels in its press releases (it quite often had
some scare stories in them in the years before), did continue
to "interest itself" in ozone over one region, and one region
only, later too - that over the Antarctic. In 2000 and 2001,
it published two whole series of particular bi-weekly "WMO
Antarctic Ozone Bulletins" on this, not on the situation
there during the whole year but only on the "more exciting"
periods, August to December, with eight issues each year.
Not in a single one of these "Bulletins" is any ozone level
reported as measured in Dobson Units. Thus their data cannot
be directly compared to those in the 1956-1997 table above.
Mentioned instead were "seasonal ozone levels" as percentages
of a "norm", which was (somewhat unprecisely) defined as the
average austral spring level in the years 1964-1976 - and
which thus *can* be compared, approximately at least, to the
values in that table (although these are from only one parti-
cular station) - and the "hole" was also sometimes characte-
rized, in these "Bulletins", by "its" area in km² or by the
"total loss of ozone" in megatons. Such data I shall pass
over here, when quoting a few passages from the issues:
WMO Antarctic Ozone Bulletin #1/2000,
issued on 11 August 2000:
"...In the coming weeks, as the sun rises over Ant-
arctica, chemical ozone loss can be expected to oc-
cur, comparable to, or perhaps greater than previous
years. Prevailing meteorological conditions in the
stratosphere, particularly during the Austral Spring,
will strongly influence the extent and intensity of
ozone loss..."
WMO Antarctic Ozone Bulletin #3/2000, 07.09.2000:
"The chemically primed vortex region has now begun
the ozone loss process in earnest, and with an inten-
sity exceeding all previous years. However, prevai-
ling meteorological conditions in the stratosphere...
may substantially reduce the total seasonal deple-
tion..."
['Why, look-a-there, intensity exeeding all previous
years! - But, we're sorry, things do seem to develop
a little disappointingly this year anyway.' - RM]
WMO Antarctic Ozone Bulletin #6/2000, 19.10.2000:
"During the past two weeks the ozone hole has con-
tinued to decrease in extent (area) and is now about
2/3 the maximum observed in early September. When
compared to the past decade it is now about average.
['Yes, no big hole this year, after all.' - And the
WMO too now talks of an *average austral spring level
for 1990-1999*, the same rather low one as that men-
tioned by NASA (in 1999, above) to be some 100 DU.
What the WMO in these "Bulletins" calls the "norm",
however, still is that much higher average austral
spring level for 1964-1976, some 300 DU. - RM]
The record depth (average deviation from pre-ozone
hole norms) reported in Bulletin #5 for the last 10
days of Sept. continued, with the average of the
first 10 days of Oct. revealing more than 60% deple-
tion in some areas."
[Meaning, that in some areas, the levels were at 40%
of 300 DU, that is, 120 DU, or somewhat lower. Even
at its maximum, then, which was in September that
year, the 2000 dip was shallower than the average
austral spring for the 1990s. - RM]
WMO Antarctic Ozone Bulletin #8/2000, 23.11.2000:
"Although it was the largest and the deepest ozone
hole on record in September...['A comfort, at least!'
- usually, the 'holes' have had their maxima in Octo-
ber - RM] during the past three weeks this year's
ozone hole continued the rapid dissipation reported
in Bulletin #7. Beginning in late October, it was the
smallest of the past decade, and during the past week
it has completely dissipated, the earliest since
1991. ['Sob!' - RM] In contrast, the 1999 ozone hole
was very persistent, retaining more than half of its
maximum mid-September area into mid-November." ['An-
other comforting thing we can show.' - RM]
WMO Antarctic Ozone Summary for 2000 (after the 2000
"Bulletins"; no such "Summary" for 2001 is shown):
"...Measurements made at the WMO GAW stations and by
satellites indicate that ozone [on 18 November 2000
or thereabouts - RM] is within about 10% of the pre
ozone hole norms [meaning, the 1964-1976 average au-
stral spring level, and the context shows that by
their strange expression they don't mean 'about 10%
*of*' that level, which would be only some 30 DU, but
'in a range about 10% *below* it', that is, 270 DU or
so, actually a quite *high* level, compared to the
average 1990s one - RM] over much of Antarctica and
most of the Southern Hemisphere."
WMO Antarctic Ozone Bulletin #4/2001, 11.10.2001:
"Observed ozone changes: Ground-based measurements
since 1 October have averaged 50% below the pre-
ozone-hole norms [meaning, some 150 DU - RM] at Ar-
rival Heights, Halley, and Syowa stations, and about
25% below norms [or some 225 DU - RM] at Dumont
d’Urville, Marambio and Vernadsky. Satellite measure-
ments confirm these values and that early October
ozone values over central Antarctica are more than
60% below norms [that is, lower than 120 DU - RM]."
WMO Antarctic Ozone Bulletin #6/2001, 08.11.2001:
"...This year the ozone hole also has been large and
deep when compared to previous years, ['also has'?
- see below - RM] and there is still no indication
that it will dissipate early."
WMO Antarctic Ozone Bulletin #7/2001, 22.11.2001:
"...This [an 'ozone mass deficit' figure for 2001 -
RM] contrasts with the ozone hole of 2000 which was
the largest on record, but had completely disappeared
by mid-November."
[That of 2000 'the largest on record'? 'Bulletin'
#8/2000 (see above) said it was 'the largest and
deepest on record *in September*', but also that 'be-
ginning in late October, it was the *smallest of the
past decade*', and that its disappearance was 'the
*earliest* since 1991'. - RM]
What one can conclude rather clearly from these WMO "Bulle-
tins", despite the enormous confusion-mongering in them, is
that the September-October dips in ozone levels over the Ant-
arctic in 2000 and 2001 were *shallower* and *more short-
lived* than in the immediately preceding years, that is, the
"Antarctic ozone hole" was *smaller*, in those two most re-
cent years.
This does not, in itself, completely refute the "CFC ozone
depletion" hoax, just as the fact that the ozone layer over
the northern hemisphere in 2000-2001 was (and still today is)
thicker than in many years before doesn't in itself do that
either. Since year-to-year variations due to the 11-year sun-
spot cycle and the 26-month QBO are so relatively large, ob-
servations over two-three years of course don't show much
about a possibly existing longer-term trend.
But the complete absence of any increase of that "Antractic
ozone hole" in the last eight years now, 1994-2001, running
quite contrary to the "predictions" by that "theory" that
"global ozone depletion" would continue "unabated" in the
1990s and would even "be at its very worst" precisely around
the year 2000, this is one fact that does refute that hoax.
As a propaganda "threat" by the ruling exploiters, oppres-
sors, war criminals and mass murderers and their miserable
bribed asshole-licking stooges, the Antarctic ozone "hole"
has no future whatsoever.
Those people of course remain in power, and will continue to
attempt to fool others with such crude lies and misrepresen-
tations on this subject as those in a recent "European Union
Report on the Ozone Layer" of 23 January 2002, summarized at
the abovementioned "wissenschaft-online" website of the ma-
gazine "Die Zeit" as follows (in my translation from the
German):
"In each of the five winters after 1993-94, marked
ozone losses in the Arctic stratosphere were noted.
[Now a 'newer' attempted hoax, after the 'Antarctic'
one so clearly has failed; on the total absence of
any *Arctic* 'ozone hole', see under point 17 above
- RM] The ozone concentration in these winter months
decreased by between 40 and 70 percent. [As they have
always done, since measurements began, in the 1950s.
- RM] This is stated in a report by the European
Union. According to that report, an improvement[!] is
to be expected, at the earliest, from the year 2010
on[!], and a complete recovery[!] of the ozone layer
can be expected only in some 50 years[!]. Mainly res-
ponsible[!] for the ozone depletion[!], the report
says, are various halogene compounds such as the
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)[!]. Since the first de-
crease[!] of the stratospheric ozone concentration
over Europe in the 1970s[!], the biologically active
UV radiation at ground level has increased[!]."
19. THE VITAL SUBSTANCES WHICH MUST AS FAR AS POSSIBLE
BE SAVED FROM THE MASS MURDERERS' BANS
Above all, it's the refrigeration industries of the poorer
and internationally-oppressed and -exploited countries, im-
portant for the possibility of storing and transporting vi-
tal foodstuffs and medicines, that are being harmed, very
seriously, by those bans against the CFCs and the related
substances which are now gradually coming into effect.
The so-called substitutes all have grave drawbacks and are
very difficult and expensive to produce - making for big
profits from these bans for certain chemistry companies
based in the USA and other imperialist countries, which pre-
cisely therefore have supported them too since the late
1980s.
But these bans have other seriously harmful effects too, for
the vast majority of people everywhere.
The excellent qualities of precisely the CFCs and many simi-
lar substances and the enormously harmful effects of bans
against them were pointed to in detail in Maduro's and
Schauerhammer's 1992 book, "The Holes in the Ozone Scare"
(written before some of the most extreme bans were decided
on); I'm quoting only a few passages on this:
"Just as the ozone depletion propagandists and the
news media never mention the scientific evidence re-
futing their theory, they never mention the conse-
quences of the CFC ban.
As worldwide refrigeration refrigeration experts
have been warning, the ban on CFCs will collapse the
worldwide cold chain that provides for the storage
and transportation of food. Their conservative esti-
mates are that between 20 and 40 million people are
going to die from starvation and food-borne diseases
every year because of the collapse of refrigeration.
It is estimated that an additional 5 million child-
ren will die from lack of immunization: Vaccines
have to be refrigerated, and the ban on CFCs will
prevent Third World countries from building the
units required to store the vaccines in remote
areas." (p. 5)
The most common CFCs are "CFC-11" and "CFC-12" (the latter
e.g. used in household refrigerators, also called "Freon-
12", a trade name used by the Du Pont chemical company),
with chemical formulas CFCl3 respectively CF2Cl2: Molecules
with a carbon atom surrounded by fluorine and chlorine ones,
instead of those 4 hydrogen ones in methane, CH4.
"Today, world production of CFCs is approximately
1.1 million tons a year. As noted in the introduc-
tion, CFCs are one of the most benign and versatile
chemicals ever invented. They are highly stable,
nonflammable, nonexplosive, nontoxic, odor-free,
noncorrosive and cheap - qualities that make them
extremely useful in industries and households.
Therefore, a wide array of uses has been found for
the: as refrigerants and coolants, as inflating
agents in foams and insulation, and as ingredients
in industrial solvents, cosmetics, household pro-
ducts, and cleaners.
Halons, a related group of chemical also banned un-
der the Montreal Protocol, are the most effective
fire-fighting chemicals known to man, have impor-
tant military applications, and play an essential
role in the protection of electronic equipment. Me-
thyl chloroform plays a critical role as a solvent
in the electronics and metalworking industries."
(p. 189)
Halons are molecules containing bromine (Br) instead of that
chlorine which characterizes CFCs; for instance, CF3Br. Me-
thyl chloroform is CH3CCl3.
"*What about replacements?*
...
Let's look at the leading contender to replace
CFCs, Du Pont Company's HFC-134a, also called Suva.
Suva is incompatible with all existing lubricants.
A new special-purpose (and very expensive) lubricant
has just been synthesized, which works for a short
period of time. But even tiny traces of the old lub-
ricants are enough to bring a chain reaction of cor-
rosion within the refrigerating machinery in which
Suva is used to replace CFCs. Suva is extremely cor-
rosive to metal parts and less energy efficient than
CFC-12. To top it off, Suva costs 10 to 30 times
more than the CFCs it replaces - although it is the
cheapest substitute yet developed." (p. 193)
And similarly difficult is it - according to the same au-
thors, writing in 1992 - to replace such other substances,
similar to CFCs, as halons and methyl chloroform. About "re-
placements" for various chemicals in general, they also
point out (p. 123):
"[Theodore] Atwood [a research engineer with a US
company, writing in the February 1991 issue of the
refrigeration industry magazine *ASHRAE Journal*]
cites and rebuts nine fallacies about CFC replace-
ment. One of these, that 'there must be an abundance
of suitable candidate fluids just awaiting discovery
and development, [is] grossly in error', he says:
'Chemistry, like all sciences, is rigidly bounded by
what nature will allow; it cannot create miracles on
demand. Unfortunately, we are already scraping the
bottom of the refrigerator barrel.
Despite extensive worldwide efforts spanning many
years (dating back before the CFC/ozone hypothesis),
no freshly discovered species of promising new re-
frigerants has emerged. While it is true that signi-
ficant numbers of new compounds are annually added
to the world's chemical roster, there is no corres-
ponding increase in potential new refrigeration mo-
lecules. Today's possibilities for synthesizing new
chemical compounds are primarily complex molecules
of potential interest as pharmaceuticals, polymers
and other applications that have no utility as re-
frigerants.' [p. 31]."
Thus, chemistry cannot - as far as can be seen, still today
- basically solve those serious problems which the reactio-
nary bans against these substances are causing. These bans
are *political attacks*, are *"green" sneak warfare* against
*practically everybody on earth*, and must be answered, by
scientific research and information of course, on the part of
such people as are not completely tools in the hands of the
ruling war criminals, but above all by political action, on
the largest possible scale too.
UNITE! / VEREINIGT EUCH! / UNISSEZ-VOUS! / ¡UNIOS! /
FÖRENA ER! Info en/de/fr/es/se series:
Advocates the political line of Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong.
Each item # will be posted in one or more language(s). Leaf-
lets in the INFORMATIONSBLAD series published by me, mainly
in Swedish, since 1975 are available on request.
Befürwortet die politische Linie von Marx, Lenin und Mao Ze-
dong. Jedes Nummer # wird in einer oder mehreren Sprache(n)
gesandt werden. Flugblätter der Reihe INFORMATIONSBLAD, von
mir hauptsächlich in Schwedisch seit 1975 veröffentlicht,
sind auf Anfrage erhaltlich.
Avocate de la ligne politique de Marx, Lénine et Mao Zedong.
Chaque numéro # sera envoyé en une ou plusieurs langue(s).
Volantes de la série INFORMATIONSBLAD, publiée par moi prin-
cipalement en suédois depuis 1975, sont accessibles sur de-
mande.
Partidaria de la línea política de Marx, Lenin y Mao Zedong.
Cada número # se envía en uno o más idiomas. Están a su dis-
posición, bajo petición previa, distintos folletos de la
serie INFORMATIONSBLAD, publicada por mi principalmente en
sueco desde 1975.
Förespråkar Marx', Lenins och Mao Zedongs politiska linje.
Varje nummer # kommer att sändas på ett eller flera språk.
Flygblad i serien INFORMATIONSBLAD, publicerad av mig huvud-
sakligen på svenska sedan 1975, kan fås på begäran.
Postal address:
Rolf Martens
Nobelvaegen 38U4
SE - 214 33 Malmoe
SWEDEN
Tel: +46 - 40 - 124832
E-mail (main, since Oct 1995:)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(reserve, since Oct 2000:)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------
ANTI-NATO INFORMATION LIST
==^================================================================
This email was sent to: archive@jab.org
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9617B
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================
