For the most part, all this is showing that the changes are from climate change, but they don't want to admit that humans changing atmospheric content of the atmosphere has enough of an effect to reject it.
That's not really the win you think it is.
At this time, two scientists claimed that the widespread industrial use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) was destroying the protective ozone layer in the atmosphere. Subsequently, an annual appearance of an ozone hole was discovered over Antarctica. As a result, CFCs were banned by international agreement in 1995. ... The Nobel Prizes were accepted and the activists moved on to other scares and proposed bans. However, the ozone hole kept on expanding and contracting as it has always done. This year, the hole is as large as it has been for the last 30 years. The changes are due to natural variation, hence the media blackout
Now, this right here is bullshit. CFC's were genuinely terrible for the environment, and have a long-term effect on the atmosphere. And just because a ban takes place in 1995, it doesn't mean that no further CFC's will be used anywhere on Earth. Long term solution, with a long-term effect generate long-term results.
The biggest problem here is those last two sentences. The hole in the Ozone layer, which is not know to exist prior to the industrial revolution (I'd like to add), has been sealing very slowly over the past two decades. It's a major accomplishment, not a failure.
The hole in the Ozone layer, which is not know to exist prior to the industrial revolution (I'd like to add)
Almost as if it wasn't "known to exist" until the 1980s when we developed equipment that could measure it in the first place. Never mind that the first CFC was synthesized in 1928, close to 90 years after the industrial revolution.
Check this out, I can do it too: "82% of the geographical features on the far side moon were not known to exist prior to Weird Al's birth." This is 100% true. The first time they were seen was 3 days after his birth. If that's not causality, I don't know what is. He made those craters.
Chemistry is the causality, not the fact that you started measuring it. Also, those CFC were predominantly in refrigeration units, which were not common in the 1920's.
Your argument is closer to: "Germ Theory is a scam made up by the medical industry because diseases existed prior to it, and we don't know that any of those were caused by viruses or bacteria."
My argument is the line I quoted from you is, "Microbes were not known to exist prior to [event that preceded the intention of the microscope]" and a lame way of implying a relation when you know it's a non-sequitur.
For the most part, all this is showing that the changes are from climate change, but they don't want to admit that humans changing atmospheric content of the atmosphere has enough of an effect to reject it.
That's not really the win you think it is.
Now, this right here is bullshit. CFC's were genuinely terrible for the environment, and have a long-term effect on the atmosphere. And just because a ban takes place in 1995, it doesn't mean that no further CFC's will be used anywhere on Earth. Long term solution, with a long-term effect generate long-term results.
The biggest problem here is those last two sentences. The hole in the Ozone layer, which is not know to exist prior to the industrial revolution (I'd like to add), has been sealing very slowly over the past two decades. It's a major accomplishment, not a failure.
Almost as if it wasn't "known to exist" until the 1980s when we developed equipment that could measure it in the first place. Never mind that the first CFC was synthesized in 1928, close to 90 years after the industrial revolution.
Check this out, I can do it too: "82% of the geographical features on the far side moon were not known to exist prior to Weird Al's birth." This is 100% true. The first time they were seen was 3 days after his birth. If that's not causality, I don't know what is. He made those craters.
Chemistry is the causality, not the fact that you started measuring it. Also, those CFC were predominantly in refrigeration units, which were not common in the 1920's.
Your argument is closer to: "Germ Theory is a scam made up by the medical industry because diseases existed prior to it, and we don't know that any of those were caused by viruses or bacteria."
My argument is the line I quoted from you is, "Microbes were not known to exist prior to [event that preceded the intention of the microscope]" and a lame way of implying a relation when you know it's a non-sequitur.