134a Refrigerant

"Nathan W. Collier" > wrote in message
...
> "Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
> m...
> > Well, let's read your post!
> > <>
> > debacle? i love how you liberals (who claim to stand for human rights)
> > overlook that iraq is free from tyranny. iraqi women are now allowed to
> > GO
> > TO SCHOOL, to hold jobs, to live as equal citizens. no stephen, id say
> > iraq
> > has been an overwhelming success to date. that could change tomorrow,
but
> > as it is right now with bush leading the way iraq is a success.
> > </>
> >
> > Der, uh, I think you mentioned school
>
>
> hey einstein, NOW theyre able to go to school. they werent under saddams
> rule when they were being raped by his sons. sheesh, youre reading
> comprehension is as pitiful as everything else youve had to say.


http://www.sovereignty.org.uk/sitein...m/altview.html

<>
It was Saddam's revolution that ended Iraqi backwardness. Education,
including higher and technological education, became the top priority. More
important, centuries of vicious discrimination against girls and women was e
nded by one stroke of the modernizing dictator's pen.
I used to drive past the Mustansariya University on my way home from
downtown Baghdad. It was miraculous -- I use the word advisedly -- it was
nothing short of miraculous to see hundreds of girl-students thronging the
campus, none in "burkhas" or "chador" -- the head-to-toe black cape that
was, and is, essential dress for women in most of the Islamic world -- and
almost all in skirts and blouses that would grace a Western university.
</>

Like it or not, Saddam was not an Islamicist.
__
Steve
..

Bullsh*t!
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
http://www.billhughes.com/

Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> <>
> We think that within the next 20 years we are likely to see an ozone hole
> perhaps as big as the present one over Antarctica but over the North Pole."
> Joseph Farman, Brian Gardiner and Jonathan Shanklin, are the BAS scientists
> who discovered the Antarctic ozone hole.
> Professor Shanklin also is the Director of the British Astronomical
> Association's Comet Section and the President of the Cambridge Natural
> History Society
> </>
>
> __
> Steve
> .

I'm for you going to Africa and testing for skin cancer. It's an
easy bet I'll never see the this ozone hole all you people that suck off
the government talk of.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
http://www.billhughes.com/

Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Just what am I supposed to be 'miss lead' ing
> about? The fact is, you can't show *one link*
> that supports your assertion that CFCs don't
> affect the ozone layer... that's pretty telling,
> isn't it? I mean, all these links you've posted,
> and I'm able to find info to support my argument
> with each one!
>
> Just who's misleading whom? And what are the
> consequences of this misleading? If I'm wrong,
> you pay a little extra for refrigerant. If you're wrong,
> everyone gets skin cancer. Which of us would
> be best to trust?
> __
> Steve
> .

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
m...
> Like it or not, Saddam was not an Islamicist.

you just REFUSE to comment directly on the whole young girls being raped by
his sons thing. why is that? why can you not acknowledge any good at all?

......silly me, i know why you cant.

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com

"Nathan W. Collier" > wrote in message
...
> "Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
> m...
> > If you won't listen to thousands of scientists
>
> the scientists youre quoting have not made their statements absolute!

No scientist will. That's not how science works. Educate
yourself.

> > You can't even prove you're not in a
> > militia!
>
> what a dumb ass herring.

You can't! And you don't even know why!
I'll give you a clue... it's impossible to prove
an absolute negative. Chew on that...

> > You didn't take much science in school, did
> > you?
>
> red herring. BOTTOM LINE, you claim to have been a "tech" but choke when
i
> ask to see your credentials. :-)

I have a college degree in science... what
are *your* credentials vis-a-vis knowlege
of the scientific method? I got the degree
*after* topping out as a technician...
industrial controls, RF, cryo, that kind of
thing. I was Chief Site Tech at a $6M
NRAO VLBA site... I guess you could
call that a 'tech'...

> > Can you give an example of evidence that would
> > satisfy you?
>
> absolute statements (no "could be/should be" crap) from an authoritative
> source.

http://www.epa.gov/docs/ozone/science/heavier.html

Myth: CFCs Are Heavier Than Air, So They Can't Reach the Ozone Layer

CFCs and other ozone depleting substances (ODS) are heavier than air. In a
still room, they will pool on the floor. However, the atmosphere is anything
but still. Numerous measurements have confirmed that these molecules are
mixed nearly uniformly worldwide. In the same way that vinegar and oil
normally separate when still, but mix when shaken, ozone depleting
substances and air are thoroughly stirred together by winds in the
troposphere.
Winds are also why the location of CFC and other ODS emissions is
essentially irrelevant. CFCs released from a car in the U.S. are as likely
to find their way to the stratosphere over India as are molecules released
from much closer countries like China. Once they mix through the
troposphere, CFC molecules eventually move into the stratosphere. Thousands
of measurements over several decades have firmly proven the existence of
these heavier-than-air molecules in the ozone layer.
As the graph above shows, the concentration of CFC-11 is essentially
constant at altitudes up to 10 km. The UV radiation needed to break CFC-11
apart is shielded by the ozone layer. Because no natural processes destroy
CFCs, it survives to be uniformly distributed, both vertically and
horizontally. Concentrations drop off rapidly, however, in the stratosphere.
As the molecules rise into and above the ozone layer, they are exposed to
strong UV, break down, and release chlorine. These measurements are one link
between CFCs, increased levels of chlorine in the stratosphere, and ozone
depletion.

http://info-pollution.com/common.htm

Common myths about ozone depletion:
Myth: CFCs cannot reach the stratosphere because they are heavier than air.
Fact: Air in the lower atmosphere (which extends far above the stratosphere)
moves in masses, not as individual molecules. A number of studies have found
CFCs and the products of their breakdown in the stratosphere (Rowland, EPA).
Myth: Volcanoes and other natural sources contribute much more chlorine than
CFCs to the ozone layer.
Fact: Chlorine compounds from natural sources are soluble, and so are
washed out of the atmosphere. CFCs, by contrast, are not soluble and so are
able to reach the stratosphere. A number of studies have shown that the
majority of chlorine in the stratosphere comes from man-made chemicals
(Rowland, Taubes, Russell et al, EPA).
Myth: The Antarctic ozone "hole" was there all along, it was discovered in
the 1970's because that's when satellite measurements started.
Fact: The hole was discovered using a ground based instrument that had been
in use since 1956. There was no hole until about 1976. That means about 20
years with no hole. Since the 70s the hole has continued to increase in size
and intensity (Farman, et al, Jones & Shanklin).
Myth: The "hole" was present when the first measurements were made in 1956.
Fact: The first ozone measurements made in the Antarctic were lower than
similar measurements made in the Arctic. However, this is the natural
condition, not the decrease that is referred to as the ozone "hole". As
noted above, there was no "hole" during the first 20 or so years of
measurement. (Parson, Christie).
Myth: Some French researchers found an ozone hole in 1958.
Fact: Paul A. Newman (Newman) looked at all the facts and found that "There
is no credible evidence for an ozone hole in 1958."
Myth: Spray cans deplete the ozone layer.
Fact: Spray cans (in the United States) have not used CFCs as propellants
for about 20 years.
Myth: Of course there is an ozone hole in the winter, there is no sunlight
to make new ozone.
Fact: The ozone hole occurs in the spring, after the sunlight returns.
There is little destruction or creation of ozone during the winter (Parson)
Myth: DuPont supported the ban on freon because the patent was about to run
out.
Fact: The patent for making freon was issued in 1928, it ran out in the
1940s, long before any concern about ozone depletion. (The History of
Freon)

References
Christie, Maureen, The Ozone Layer: A Philosophy of Science Perspective,
Cambridge University Press, 2000
Farman, et al., "Large Losses of Total Ozone in Antarctica Reveal Seasonal
ClOx/NOx Interaction", Nature, May 16, 1985, pp 207-210.
Jones & Shanklin, "Continued Decline of Total Ozone over Halley, Antarctica,
since 1985", Nature, August 3, 1995 pp 409-411.
Newman, Paul A., "Antarctic Total Ozone in 1958", Science, April 22, 1994,
pp 543-546.
Parson, Robert wrote a lengthy FAQ on ozone depletion, the best source of
information I have found.
Rowland, Sherwood, "The Need for Scientific Communication with the Public"
Science, June 11, 1993, pp 1571-1576.
Russell, et al, "Satellite Confirmation of the Dominance of
Chlorofluorocarbons in the Global Stratospheric Chlorine Budget" Nature,
February 8, 1996, pp 526-529.
Taubes, Gary, "The Ozone Backlash", Science, June 11, 1993, pp 1580-1583.
__
Steve
..

"L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message
...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > <>
> > We think that within the next 20 years we are likely to see an ozone
hole
> > perhaps as big as the present one over Antarctica but over the North
Pole."
> > Joseph Farman, Brian Gardiner and Jonathan Shanklin, are the BAS
scientists
> > who discovered the Antarctic ozone hole.
> > Professor Shanklin also is the Director of the British Astronomical
> > Association's Comet Section and the President of the Cambridge Natural
> > History Society
> > </>

> Bullsh*t!


Common myths about ozone depletion:

Myth: CFCs cannot reach the stratosphere because they are heavier than air.
Fact: Air in the lower atmosphere (which extends far above the stratosphere)
moves in masses, not as individual molecules. A number of studies have found
CFCs and the products of their breakdown in the stratosphere (Rowland, EPA).
Myth: Volcanoes and other natural sources contribute much more chlorine than
CFCs to the ozone layer.
Fact: Chlorine compounds from natural sources are soluble, and so are
washed out of the atmosphere. CFCs, by contrast, are not soluble and so are
able to reach the stratosphere. A number of studies have shown that the
majority of chlorine in the stratosphere comes from man-made chemicals
(Rowland, Taubes, Russell et al, EPA).
Myth: The Antarctic ozone "hole" was there all along, it was discovered in
the 1970's because that's when satellite measurements started.
Fact: The hole was discovered using a ground based instrument that had been
in use since 1956. There was no hole until about 1976. That means about 20
years with no hole. Since the 70s the hole has continued to increase in size
and intensity (Farman, et al, Jones & Shanklin).
Myth: The "hole" was present when the first measurements were made in 1956.
Fact: The first ozone measurements made in the Antarctic were lower than
similar measurements made in the Arctic. However, this is the natural
condition, not the decrease that is referred to as the ozone "hole". As
noted above, there was no "hole" during the first 20 or so years of
measurement. (Parson, Christie).
Myth: Some French researchers found an ozone hole in 1958.
Fact: Paul A. Newman (Newman) looked at all the facts and found that "There
is no credible evidence for an ozone hole in 1958."
Myth: Spray cans deplete the ozone layer.
Fact: Spray cans (in the United States) have not used CFCs as propellants
for about 20 years.
Myth: Of course there is an ozone hole in the winter, there is no sunlight
to make new ozone.
Fact: The ozone hole occurs in the spring, after the sunlight returns.
There is little destruction or creation of ozone during the winter (Parson)
Myth: DuPont supported the ban on freon because the patent was about to run
out.
Fact: The patent for making freon was issued in 1928, it ran out in the
1940s, long before any concern about ozone depletion. (The History of
Freon)
References
Christie, Maureen, The Ozone Layer: A Philosophy of Science Perspective,
Cambridge University Press, 2000
Farman, et al., "Large Losses of Total Ozone in Antarctica Reveal Seasonal
ClOx/NOx Interaction", Nature, May 16, 1985, pp 207-210.
Jones & Shanklin, "Continued Decline of Total Ozone over Halley, Antarctica,
since 1985", Nature, August 3, 1995 pp 409-411.
Newman, Paul A., "Antarctic Total Ozone in 1958", Science, April 22, 1994,
pp 543-546.
Parson, Robert wrote a lengthy FAQ on ozone depletion, the best source of
information I have found.
Rowland, Sherwood, "The Need for Scientific Communication with the Public"
Science, June 11, 1993, pp 1571-1576.
Russell, et al, "Satellite Confirmation of the Dominance of
Chlorofluorocarbons in the Global Stratospheric Chlorine Budget" Nature,
February 8, 1996, pp 526-529.
Taubes, Gary, "The Ozone Backlash", Science, June 11, 1993, pp 1580-1583.
__
Steve
..

"Nathan W. Collier" > wrote in message
...
> "Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
> m...
> > Like it or not, Saddam was not an Islamicist.
>
> you just REFUSE to comment directly on the whole young girls being raped
by
> his sons thing. why is that? why can you not acknowledge any good at
all?

Why bother? The whole point is, you confused
Iraq with Afghanistan... just like Bush did.
You bring up young girls raped just to
try and cloud the issue... there's a lot
more raping going on in Sudan, but
Bush is foot-dragging on the legislation
that would send the UN there. We don't
really think you give a damn about any
Iraqi women... you're just trying to save
face... you got in an argument with a
non-pussy tree hugger, and you lost it...
and made a complete fool of yourself
trying. Science, Nate... Science.
Read about it sometime.
__
Steve
..

"L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message
...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > Just what am I supposed to be 'miss lead' ing
> > about? The fact is, you can't show *one link*
> > that supports your assertion that CFCs don't
> > affect the ozone layer... that's pretty telling,
> > isn't it? I mean, all these links you've posted,
> > and I'm able to find info to support my argument
> > with each one!
> >
> > Just who's misleading whom? And what are the
> > consequences of this misleading? If I'm wrong,
> > you pay a little extra for refrigerant. If you're wrong,
> > everyone gets skin cancer. Which of us would
> > be best to trust?

> I'm for you going to Africa and testing for skin cancer. It's an
> easy bet I'll never see the this ozone hole all you people that suck off
> the government talk of.

'Suck off the government'? Perhaps you're referring to
the super-rich, who have recently been given massive
tax breaks... that would qualify as 'suck'.

Until you pull your head out, Bill, you won't
see much, I'll grant you that!

Common myths about ozone depletion:

Myth: CFCs cannot reach the stratosphere because they are heavier than air.

Fact: Air in the lower atmosphere (which extends far above the stratosphere)
moves in masses, not as individual molecules. A number of studies have found
CFCs and the products of their breakdown in the stratosphere (Rowland, EPA).

Myth: Volcanoes and other natural sources contribute much more chlorine than
CFCs to the ozone layer.

Fact: Chlorine compounds from natural sources are soluble, and so are
washed out of the atmosphere. CFCs, by contrast, are not soluble and so are
able to reach the stratosphere. A number of studies have shown that the
majority of chlorine in the stratosphere comes from man-made chemicals
(Rowland, Taubes, Russell et al, EPA).

Myth: The Antarctic ozone "hole" was there all along, it was discovered in
the 1970's because that's when satellite measurements started.

Fact: The hole was discovered using a ground based instrument that had been
in use since 1956. There was no hole until about 1976. That means about 20
years with no hole. Since the 70s the hole has continued to increase in size
and intensity (Farman, et al, Jones & Shanklin).

Myth: The "hole" was present when the first measurements were made in 1956.

Fact: The first ozone measurements made in the Antarctic were lower than
similar measurements made in the Arctic. However, this is the natural
condition, not the decrease that is referred to as the ozone "hole". As
noted above, there was no "hole" during the first 20 or so years of
measurement. (Parson, Christie).

Myth: Some French researchers found an ozone hole in 1958.

Fact: Paul A. Newman (Newman) looked at all the facts and found that "There
is no credible evidence for an ozone hole in 1958."

Myth: Spray cans deplete the ozone layer.

Fact: Spray cans (in the United States) have not used CFCs as propellants
for about 20 years.

Myth: Of course there is an ozone hole in the winter, there is no sunlight
to make new ozone.

Fact: The ozone hole occurs in the spring, after the sunlight returns.
There is little destruction or creation of ozone during the winter (Parson)

Myth: DuPont supported the ban on freon because the patent was about to run
out.

Fact: The patent for making freon was issued in 1928, it ran out in the
1940s, long before any concern about ozone depletion. (The History of
Freon)

References

Christie, Maureen, The Ozone Layer: A Philosophy of Science Perspective,
Cambridge University Press, 2000

Farman, et al., "Large Losses of Total Ozone in Antarctica Reveal Seasonal
ClOx/NOx Interaction", Nature, May 16, 1985, pp 207-210.

Jones & Shanklin, "Continued Decline of Total Ozone over Halley, Antarctica,
since 1985", Nature, August 3, 1995 pp 409-411.

Newman, Paul A., "Antarctic Total Ozone in 1958", Science, April 22, 1994,
pp 543-546.

Parson, Robert wrote a lengthy FAQ on ozone depletion, the best source of
information I have found.

Rowland, Sherwood, "The Need for Scientific Communication with the Public"
Science, June 11, 1993, pp 1571-1576.

Russell, et al, "Satellite Confirmation of the Dominance of
Chlorofluorocarbons in the Global Stratospheric Chlorine Budget" Nature,
February 8, 1996, pp 526-529.

Taubes, Gary, "The Ozone Backlash", Science, June 11, 1993, pp 1580-1583.

__
Steve
..

Another study you free loaders don't take into consideration is
that the ozone layer has always naturally fluctuated on an eleven year
sun spot cycle. I bet you haven't even heard of the almost direct solar
flare hits earth's taken in just this last year:
http://www.crh.noaa.gov/fsd/astro/sunspots.htm Of course not! It doesn't
fit your Chlorofluorocarbons scenario.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
http://www.billhughes.com/

Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> <>
> We think that within the next 20 years we are likely to see an ozone hole
> perhaps as big as the present one over Antarctica but over the North Pole."
> Joseph Farman, Brian Gardiner and Jonathan Shanklin, are the BAS scientists
> who discovered the Antarctic ozone hole.
> Professor Shanklin also is the Director of the British Astronomical
> Association's Comet Section and the President of the Cambridge Natural
> History Society
> </>
>
> __
> Steve
> .

I want to see this BS degree, if you can't display it then we will
know you are a liar.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
http://www.billhughes.com/

Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> No scientist will. That's not how science works. Educate
> yourself.
>
> You can't! And you don't even know why!
> I'll give you a clue... it's impossible to prove
> an absolute negative. Chew on that...
>
> I have a college degree in science... what
> are *your* credentials vis-a-vis knowlege
> of the scientific method? I got the degree
> *after* topping out as a technician...
> industrial controls, RF, cryo, that kind of
> thing. I was Chief Site Tech at a $6M
> NRAO VLBA site... I guess you could
> call that a 'tech'...
>
> http://www.epa.gov/docs/ozone/science/heavier.html
>
> Myth: CFCs Are Heavier Than Air, So They Can't Reach the Ozone Layer
>
> CFCs and other ozone depleting substances (ODS) are heavier than air. In a
> still room, they will pool on the floor. However, the atmosphere is anything
> but still. Numerous measurements have confirmed that these molecules are
> mixed nearly uniformly worldwide. In the same way that vinegar and oil
> normally separate when still, but mix when shaken, ozone depleting
> substances and air are thoroughly stirred together by winds in the
> troposphere.
> Winds are also why the location of CFC and other ODS emissions is
> essentially irrelevant. CFCs released from a car in the U.S. are as likely
> to find their way to the stratosphere over India as are molecules released
> from much closer countries like China. Once they mix through the
> troposphere, CFC molecules eventually move into the stratosphere. Thousands
> of measurements over several decades have firmly proven the existence of
> these heavier-than-air molecules in the ozone layer.
> As the graph above shows, the concentration of CFC-11 is essentially
> constant at altitudes up to 10 km. The UV radiation needed to break CFC-11
> apart is shielded by the ozone layer. Because no natural processes destroy
> CFCs, it survives to be uniformly distributed, both vertically and
> horizontally. Concentrations drop off rapidly, however, in the stratosphere.
> As the molecules rise into and above the ozone layer, they are exposed to
> strong UV, break down, and release chlorine. These measurements are one link
> between CFCs, increased levels of chlorine in the stratosphere, and ozone
> depletion.
>
> http://info-pollution.com/common.htm
>
> Common myths about ozone depletion:
> Myth: CFCs cannot reach the stratosphere because they are heavier than air.
> Fact: Air in the lower atmosphere (which extends far above the stratosphere)
> moves in masses, not as individual molecules. A number of studies have found
> CFCs and the products of their breakdown in the stratosphere (Rowland, EPA).
> Myth: Volcanoes and other natural sources contribute much more chlorine than
> CFCs to the ozone layer.
> Fact: Chlorine compounds from natural sources are soluble, and so are
> washed out of the atmosphere. CFCs, by contrast, are not soluble and so are
> able to reach the stratosphere. A number of studies have shown that the
> majority of chlorine in the stratosphere comes from man-made chemicals
> (Rowland, Taubes, Russell et al, EPA).
> Myth: The Antarctic ozone "hole" was there all along, it was discovered in
> the 1970's because that's when satellite measurements started.
> Fact: The hole was discovered using a ground based instrument that had been
> in use since 1956. There was no hole until about 1976. That means about 20
> years with no hole. Since the 70s the hole has continued to increase in size
> and intensity (Farman, et al, Jones & Shanklin).
> Myth: The "hole" was present when the first measurements were made in 1956.
> Fact: The first ozone measurements made in the Antarctic were lower than
> similar measurements made in the Arctic. However, this is the natural
> condition, not the decrease that is referred to as the ozone "hole". As
> noted above, there was no "hole" during the first 20 or so years of
> measurement. (Parson, Christie).
> Myth: Some French researchers found an ozone hole in 1958.
> Fact: Paul A. Newman (Newman) looked at all the facts and found that "There
> is no credible evidence for an ozone hole in 1958."
> Myth: Spray cans deplete the ozone layer.
> Fact: Spray cans (in the United States) have not used CFCs as propellants
> for about 20 years.
> Myth: Of course there is an ozone hole in the winter, there is no sunlight
> to make new ozone.
> Fact: The ozone hole occurs in the spring, after the sunlight returns.
> There is little destruction or creation of ozone during the winter (Parson)
> Myth: DuPont supported the ban on freon because the patent was about to run
> out.
> Fact: The patent for making freon was issued in 1928, it ran out in the
> 1940s, long before any concern about ozone depletion. (The History of
> Freon)
>
> References
> Christie, Maureen, The Ozone Layer: A Philosophy of Science Perspective,
> Cambridge University Press, 2000
> Farman, et al., "Large Losses of Total Ozone in Antarctica Reveal Seasonal
> ClOx/NOx Interaction", Nature, May 16, 1985, pp 207-210.
> Jones & Shanklin, "Continued Decline of Total Ozone over Halley, Antarctica,
> since 1985", Nature, August 3, 1995 pp 409-411.
> Newman, Paul A., "Antarctic Total Ozone in 1958", Science, April 22, 1994,
> pp 543-546.
> Parson, Robert wrote a lengthy FAQ on ozone depletion, the best source of
> information I have found.
> Rowland, Sherwood, "The Need for Scientific Communication with the Public"
> Science, June 11, 1993, pp 1571-1576.
> Russell, et al, "Satellite Confirmation of the Dominance of
> Chlorofluorocarbons in the Global Stratospheric Chlorine Budget" Nature,
> February 8, 1996, pp 526-529.
> Taubes, Gary, "The Ozone Backlash", Science, June 11, 1993, pp 1580-1583.
> __
> Steve
> .