Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: elmatador who wrote (60505)	2/22/2005 10:34:21 AM
From: Raymond Duray	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

elmat, Re: Only explanation is: Ozone hole guys are in contradiction with global wamring ones!!!! There is one other possibility you might want to consider before spouting off. :) That is the fact that surface temperatures in Northern Alaska have been terrifically above long term averages starting in the 1980s. The other colder temperatures are in the stratosphere, not at the surface, and they have declined from the normal -55 degrees fahrenheit down to as low as -80 degrees fahrenheit which is why clorinated molecules can successfully attack the ozone layer. What you don't seem to understand is that there are two layers of the atmosphere that are reacting entirely differently to the impact of CO2 saturation of the atmosphere. Perhaps you could spend a bit more time learning the science of global warming before you continue to make such elementary mistakes? Thanks. :)

To: elmatador who wrote (60505)	2/23/2005 2:18:39 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74559

<The ozone layer is located in the so called stratosphere, the lowest layer of the atmosphere, at an altitude of about 8 km in the Poles, and its function is to protect the earth's surface from harmful solar UV radiation. More than 170 countries have ratified the Montreal Protocol, an environmental treaty established in 1987 to protect the ozone layer. Should further cooling of the Arctic stratosphere occur, increasing ozone losses can be expected for the next couple of decades. A hole in the ozone layer can lead to intensified UV harmful radiation affecting inhabited Polar regions and Scandinavia, possibly down to central Europe. This could have consequences for human health (increased cases of skin cancer) as well as for biodiversity.> The northern hemisphere isn't subject to any harm from increased UV getting through the stratosphere because the air is so dirty and dusty and full of haze the sun is a dull glow in the sky. I watched the sun set high the sky in winter in Beijing. It was a clear "blue" sky, but plenty of fug in the air. The sun simply set as a deep red orb about 30 degrees up in the air, disappearing behind the airborne goop. Ultraviolet light reaching the ground would have been trivial and beneficial to plants. While it's not quite as bad in Europe and North America, the sun is still a hazy approximation to the intensely brilliant real thing as seen here in the world's melanoma capital. People getting skin cancer in Europe are silly sunbathing types, or careless people who make too much of a good thing of some summery days. Ultraviolet light coming in over the Arctic is irrelevant. In winter, when the ozone depletion occurs, there isn't much sun anyway. In summer, as the sun starts smashing oxygen into ozone, the light is brightening and ozone blocks the ultraviolet. 20 years ago, ozone depletion was a big topic along with acid rain. Both are a bit of a yawn these days. As the tsunami victims found on Boxing Day, sea level rises that happen suddenly are the thing to worry about, not 2 metre sea level rises over 50 years. Trying to rev up worry about ozone depletion now is odd. It's too cold and too hot at the same time in the Arctic apparently. That's like we are supposed to worry about inflation deflation in the world's economic system. The panic merchants want to have it both ways. Mqurice