SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: LindyBill who wrote (52313)10/16/2002 5:45:19 AM
From: zonder  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
Re: Further, God has not regulated CFC's nor has made any pronouncements against them.

LindyBill - The sentence above is an excerpt from one of the links that you have provided for your argument on how CFCs do not harm the ozone.

In this issue, as with most, I'd rather listen to scientists. Sorry, it's nothing personal.

I just posted a page from Scientific American that says CFCs destroy ozone:
sciam.com

Here's an article from New Scientist.
newscientist.com

Another from Wired:
wired.com

I do not know which scientific magazines you follow, but I have never seen anything about this theory you have stated that CFCs have nothing to do with ozone depletion in the atmosphere.

Looking at the links you have provided, I must say that I am a little disappointed by their content – scientific and otherwise. Let us look at the link #2, sguthrie.tripod.com

First of all, I do not know who the author of this page is, but he is no scientist and he borders on being a religious nut - Not only is he a little hazy on what chlorofluorocarbons are, but his references on God and the Bible strike me as a little odd in a scientific article :)

5. CFC is the abbreviation for a chlorofluorocarbon. This is the molecular structure found in freon gas.

Not really. CFC is not a "molecular structure found in freon gas". Looking at Academic Press, it is "a hydrocarbon in which some or all of the hydrogen atoms have been replaced by chlorine and fluorine; its use as an aerosol is prohibited because of the depleting effect on stratospheric ozone." How interesting that even the definition of the word verifies that its harm to ozone :)

Anyway, going down the page, we see that the guy has some strange titles, such as "IV. ARGUMENT FROM COMPASSION" and, my personal favorite, "V. ARGUMENT FROM DIVINE REVELATION", which has some quite interesting footnotes such as:
11. Even if one were to accept God as the property owner, the argument fails since ozone depletion does not affect God. Further, God has not regulated CFC's nor has made any pronouncements against them.


(this made me laugh so much :)))
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext