No global warming my ass!

Yes


Interesting how easy it was to take action on CFCs.

I've been aware of it since science informed me of it. You should try the whole science-informing-you-thing sometime

You'll find that very few of your "GW fundies" deny this, but then you're good at making shit up.

Fancy giving us some solid statistics on this, and less vague statements?

Blah blah fucking blah. Always accusing everyone else of having a political agenda. Well try not doing, because I don't. You're just yet another one of these people who put everyone into their imaginary left or right box.

See above.

Sorry, no idea what you're on about here.

I'm glad you didn't list yourself.

ha ha ha ha

Until we can confirm the Earth's sphericity, maybe we should keep calling it "flat" for now

So fossile fuels may not be a finite fuel source? Oooh...the arabs are gonna be so pissed off when they find out.

Don't ya know it.

So you'd never believe something unless it was proven with all certainty?

How do you propose we curb volcanic emissions?

I'd like to hear how he reconciles volcanism with his flat earth

Nick the Krakatoa explosion alone released more CFC's and pollutants into the air than in all of human history, how do you propose that curbing a few aerosol emissions can effect the atmosphere?

"We're as doomed as doomed can be I must say!"

For homework he should view the Mighty Mouse cartoon about the event

Uh, link?

I ask again, with such natural occurences dramatically depleting ozone levels, how do you suppose we deal with this?

Can I bring magnetic flips into this discussion yet?

OK... Chemical composition of 87 octane gasoline is C8H18.... molecular weight is 114 (Carbon molecular weight is 12, H is 1). When you burn gasoline, you are uncombining the hydrogen from the carbon and combining it with atmospheric oxygen to form CO2... the explosion comes when you combine the hydrogen component with oxygen as well.

Carbon dioxide CO2 has a molecular weight of 44 (C=12, O=16). Each molecule of gasoline burned yelds 8 CO2 molecules. 44x8 = 352. So we are talking about roughly a 3:1 conversion ratio.... 3.088 to be exact. A gallon of gasloine weighs about 6.25 lbs, not 8. 6.25 multiplied by our conversion factor yeilds 19.29 lbs of CO2.

The Oxygen is not contained in the gasoline... when you burn it. you add the oxygen from the atmosphere which weighs over 3 times the hydrogen that was perviously combined with it.

This the most childish thing I've read all day. Obviously there is nothing we can do about volcanoes.

You're using the "well x does it, so it doesn't matter if y does it", and trying to substitute x for nature and y for human beings. It's fact that CFCs destroy ozone, so wouldn't it logically follow that we would try and decrease that as much as possible.

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/co2.shtml

If x does 99% of it, and we can only control the remaining y, I don't see much climactic benefit in minimizing y, but lots of economic hurt.

The above two quotes PROVES that we are all a bunch of freakin' geeks!!

You think a five year warm spell in Michigan signifies a global trend and you're calling me childish?

I ran across this, by Professor F. Sherwood Rowland, one of the Nobel laureates who discovered that CFC's have an effect on the ozone layer, and in his final paragraph he even comments that more large volcanic explosions would set back any hopes of healing the ozone layer.

Yes, and don't worry, English as spoken by 'er 'ighness has never been my forte either

This is why I can't take you seriously.

Yeah, cause there was so much economic hurt when we got rid of CFC's.

There was

That goes two ways, so the status quo wins!

You are aware of when CFCs first were used by us, and when ozone thinning was first detected?

Well maybe you can explain what evenflow means by his statement, because considering the way he's written it, it's either completely wrong, or completely incomprehensible to anyone but himself, and hence as irrelevant as most of what he writes

So the discovery of something coincides with it's existance? This is how the native americans must've felt when Columbus showed up.

I'm sure Krakatoa, Tambora, or the myriad volcanic eruptions preceeding the discovery of the ozone hole had no effect on ozone levels at the time.

Still no analysis of the correlation between solar activity and temperature, eh sparky?