Climate change

[five points]

I'll bite back and assume you didn't pull that list off some half-baked Fox News or Facebook post.

Just a couple for starters...

Explain how Silent Spring, Acid Rain, Ozone Hole are either false or highly exagerrated.

The thesis of Silent Spring was that a pesticide called DDT would accumulate in the environment and cause huge harm. (Spoiler: that never really happened).  DDT was very effective in preventing malaria. The scare caused DDT to be banned, and there was later a re-emergence in malaria cases worldwide, including in places where it had almost been eradicated, although the debate over cause and effect is still going on. Suffice to say there's been no catastrophe, apart from the malaria deaths. https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/1999/sep/01/guardianleaders

Acid rain was the 1980s scare that sulphur and nitrogen oxides would combined with water in the atmosphere to form sulphuric and nitric acids, and fall as rain to destroy trees, lakes and watercourses. It was grossly exaggerated.  https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/what-made-the-acid-rain-myth-finally-evaporate-1.900603

The 1990s Ozone Hole depletion theory was that the use of chloroflurocarbons (CFCs) was destroying the ozone layer surrounding the earth. The ozone would disappear and along with it the protection it offered from the sun. Again the passage of time revealed that this too was grossly exaggerated.  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ozone-hole-was-super-scary-what-happened-it-180957775/

You can educate yourself on the rest as well as I can. Look up Google if you're stuck.

[RadioGAAGAA]

The 1990s Ozone Hole depletion theory was that the use of chloroflurocarbons (CFCs) was destroying the ozone layer surrounding the earth. The ozone would disappear and along with it the protection it offered from the sun. Again the passage of time revealed that this too was grossly exaggerated.  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ozone-hole-was-super-scary-what-happened-it-180957775/

Unsurprisingly the guy that can't remember attacking a 16 year old 3 posts ago cannot read his own links:

Each year during ozone hole season, scientists from around the world track the depletion of the ozone above Antarctica using balloons, satellites and computer models. They have found that the ozone hole is actually getting smaller: Scientists estimate that if the Montreal Protocol had never been implemented, the hole would have grown by 40 percent by 2013. Instead, the hole is expected to completely heal by 2050.

[five points]

The 1990s Ozone Hole depletion theory was that the use of chloroflurocarbons (CFCs) was destroying the ozone layer surrounding the earth. The ozone would disappear and along with it the protection it offered from the sun. Again the passage of time revealed that this too was grossly exaggerated.  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ozone-hole-was-super-scary-what-happened-it-180957775/

Unsurprisingly the guy that can't remember attacking a 16 year old 3 posts ago cannot read his own links:

Each year during ozone hole season, scientists from around the world track the depletion of the ozone above Antarctica using balloons, satellites and computer models. They have found that the ozone hole is actually getting smaller: Scientists estimate that if the Montreal Protocol had never been implemented, the hole would have grown by 40 percent by 2013. Instead, the hole is expected to completely heal by 2050.

Happy to respond but not as long as you insult and vilify using false pretences.

[magpie seanie]

The 1990s Ozone Hole depletion theory was that the use of chloroflurocarbons (CFCs) was destroying the ozone layer surrounding the earth. The ozone would disappear and along with it the protection it offered from the sun. Again the passage of time revealed that this too was grossly exaggerated.  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ozone-hole-was-super-scary-what-happened-it-180957775/

Unsurprisingly the guy that can't remember attacking a 16 year old 3 posts ago cannot read his own links:

Each year during ozone hole season, scientists from around the world track the depletion of the ozone above Antarctica using balloons, satellites and computer models. They have found that the ozone hole is actually getting smaller: Scientists estimate that if the Montreal Protocol had never been implemented, the hole would have grown by 40 percent by 2013. Instead, the hole is expected to completely heal by 2050.

Happy to respond but not as long as you insult and vilify using false pretences.

When you're wrong as you have been repeatedly on this thread can you not just admit you were wrong? The Ozone hole problem was not exaggerated. The science clearly laid out what was happening and what would happen. Steps were taken to stop this happening and hey presto - it didn't happen.

You did attack Greta Thunberg which you should immediately retract and apologise for. I'm hoping that your lack of understanding is the cause and not some other (worse) motive.

[J70]

I'll bite back and assume you didn't pull that list off some half-baked Fox News or Facebook post.

Just a couple for starters...

Explain how Silent Spring, Acid Rain, Ozone Hole are either false or highly exagerrated.

The thesis of Silent Spring was that a pesticide called DDT would accumulate in the environment and cause huge harm. (Spoiler: that never really happened).  DDT was very effective in preventing malaria. The scare caused DDT to be banned, and there was later a re-emergence in malaria cases worldwide, including in places where it had almost been eradicated, although the debate over cause and effect is still going on. Suffice to say there's been no catastrophe, apart from the malaria deaths. https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/1999/sep/01/guardianleaders

Acid rain was the 1980s scare that sulphur and nitrogen oxides would combined with water in the atmosphere to form sulphuric and nitric acids, and fall as rain to destroy trees, lakes and watercourses. It was grossly exaggerated.  https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/what-made-the-acid-rain-myth-finally-evaporate-1.900603

The 1990s Ozone Hole depletion theory was that the use of chloroflurocarbons (CFCs) was destroying the ozone layer surrounding the earth. The ozone would disappear and along with it the protection it offered from the sun. Again the passage of time revealed that this too was grossly exaggerated.  https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ozone-hole-was-super-scary-what-happened-it-180957775/

You can educate yourself on the rest as well as I can. Look up Google if you're stuck.

Silent spring - are you for real?
DDT, specifically, is the textbook example of a persistent toxin that bioaccumulates. Mercury is another example. They're not metabolized, but stored in the body, so as the molecules move up the food chain, the concentrations in the body increase. DDT had devastating effects on raptors especially, due to it causing thinning of egg shells, but is also toxic to many forms of aquatic life. There is no legitimate debate about this.
Assuming though, for the sake of argument, that no legitimate alternative to DDT existed to fight malaria (which is false), that does not render the concerns first publicized by Rachel Carson as false.
Something can be two things at once. Asbestos is the "miracle mineral", with amazing heat- and chemical- and structural- proofing properties. That doesn't make it any less toxic.

On acid rain, you're going to need a little more then an article by William Reville. The 2005 report from the very NAPAP committee he claims downplayed the effects of acid rain acknowledges them, states that some areas may not recover due to continued exposure, and documents the reductions in emissions arising out of the 1990 Clean Air Act legislation in the US, which introduced the highly successful cap and trade policy.

Someone else has pointed out flaws in your ozone bit, but your claims strike me as equivalent to someone saying, post -quadruple bypass operation, that the doctors where scare-mongering when they warned him he could die if he didn't change his lifestyle.

[RadioGAAGAA]

Happy to respond but not as long as you insult and vilify using false pretences.

Not until you grow a set of balls and withdraw your personal attack on a 16 year old kid because you don't have the means to debate her message.

[five points]

When you're wrong as you have been repeatedly on this thread can you not just admit you were wrong? The Ozone hole problem was not exaggerated. The science clearly laid out what was happening and what would happen. Steps were taken to stop this happening and hey presto - it didn't happen.

The problem was indeed exaggerated though, as here, which blamed supersonic flights: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13217923-200-science-supersonic-threat-to-ozone-layer/

You did attack Greta Thunberg which you should immediately retract and apologise for. I'm hoping that your lack of understanding is the cause and not some other (worse) motive.

Since when does noting that someone has special needs constitute an attack on them? Greta has acknowledged her Aspergers diagnosis herself and not unreasonably sees it as a character asset.  https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/02/greta-thunberg-responds-to-aspergers-critics-its-a-superpower  And any child or adult who believes that the world is about to end and that their future has been stolen is indeed troubled. Again, noting that does not constitute an attack. I feel sorry for her.

[five points]

Silent spring - are you for real?
DDT, specifically, is the textbook example of a persistent toxin that bioaccumulates. Mercury is another example. They're not metabolized, but stored in the body, so as the molecules move up the food chain, the concentrations in the body increase. DDT had devastating effects on raptors especially, due to it causing thinning of egg shells, but is also toxic to many forms of aquatic life. There is no legitimate debate about this.
Assuming though, for the sake of argument, that no legitimate alternative to DDT existed to fight malaria (which is false), that does not render the concerns first publicized by Rachel Carson as false.
Something can be two things at once. Asbestos is the "miracle mineral", with amazing heat- and chemical- and structural- proofing properties. That doesn't make it any less toxic.

Raptors saved. Millions die from malaria. And no exaggeration? Wow.

On acid rain, you're going to need a little more then an article by William Reville. The 2005 report from the very NAPAP committee he claims downplayed the effects of acid rain acknowledges them, states that some areas may not recover due to continued exposure, and documents the reductions in emissions arising out of the 1990 Clean Air Act legislation in the US, which introduced the highly successful cap and trade policy.

Most of the world has never enjoyed Clean Air Act legislation yet acid rain is no longer counted as a serious problem.

[five points]

Someone else has pointed out flaws in your ozone bit, but your claims strike me as equivalent to someone saying, post -quadruple bypass operation, that the doctors where scare-mongering when they warned him he could die if he didn't change his lifestyle.

Except the earth didn't need a quadruple bypass operation to duck the ozone hole bullet.

[J70]

Silent spring - are you for real?
DDT, specifically, is the textbook example of a persistent toxin that bioaccumulates. Mercury is another example. They're not metabolized, but stored in the body, so as the molecules move up the food chain, the concentrations in the body increase. DDT had devastating effects on raptors especially, due to it causing thinning of egg shells, but is also toxic to many forms of aquatic life. There is no legitimate debate about this.
Assuming though, for the sake of argument, that no legitimate alternative to DDT existed to fight malaria (which is false), that does not render the concerns first publicized by Rachel Carson as false.
Something can be two things at once. Asbestos is the "miracle mineral", with amazing heat- and chemical- and structural- proofing properties. That doesn't make it any less toxic.

Raptors saved. Millions die from malaria. And no exaggeration? Wow.

Where's the exagerration?

You said the environmental effects did not happen. Changing story?

On acid rain, you're going to need a little more then an article by William Reville. The 2005 report from the very NAPAP committee he claims downplayed the effects of acid rain acknowledges them, states that some areas may not recover due to continued exposure, and documents the reductions in emissions arising out of the 1990 Clean Air Act legislation in the US, which introduced the highly successful cap and trade policy.

Most of the world has never enjoyed Clean Air Act legislation yet acid rain is no longer counted as a serious problem.

Really?

Where was it a problem to begin with? What did the Scandinavians do?

What about places like China and India? Russia?

[J70]

Someone else has pointed out flaws in your ozone bit, but your claims strike me as equivalent to someone saying, post -quadruple bypass operation, that the doctors where scare-mongering when they warned him he could die if he didn't change his lifestyle.

Except the earth didn't need a quadruple bypass operation to duck the ozone hole bullet.

Just the Montreal Protocol thankfully.

Which was more like aspirin and giving up smoking and red meat I guess.

[five points]

Really?

Where was it a problem to begin with?

What about places like China and India? Russia?

Antartica, chiefly. https://www.nytimes.com/1987/10/28/us/ozone-hole-raising-concern-for-scientists-safety.html

[RadioGAAGAA]

The problem was indeed exaggerated though, as here, which blamed supersonic flights: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13217923-200-science-supersonic-threat-to-ozone-layer/

Jesus H. Christ.

Do you actually read your own links?

Story: "A new generation of Supersonic Transports that fly higher than Concorde could damage the Ozone layer"

5points: "14 Concordes didn't damage the Ozone layer so all the science is a load of crap."

Thomas Peter, Christoph Bruhl and Paul Crutzen, of the Max Planck Institute
for Chemistry in Mainz calculated the effect on the ozone layer of a fleet
of 600 SSTs flying at either an altitude of 22 kilometres or between 17
and 20 kilometres, which is in line with studies announced recently by NASA.

[five points]

Except the earth didn't need a quadruple bypass operation to duck the ozone hole bullet.

Just the Montreal Protocol thankfully.

Which was more like aspirin and giving up smoking and red meat I guess.

My point exactly, except in global terms we still smoke and eat red meat.

[thewobbler]

Okay, a question.

The Mayor of Courmayeur is blaming global warming for a part of a local glacier being in danger of breaking away.

Would it be wrong to ask him to consider that if he was somehow able to be be transported fleetingly to this place 1,000 years ago, 2,000 years ago, 5,000 years ago and 10,000 years ago, that he would likely not recognise the topology of the area in each epoch, and might even think them each as different places?

Again I'm not saying he's wrong in his proclamations. But for anyone to be convinced that the world they grew up in, was exactly as how nature intended it to be forever, well it's a narrow mindset..