October 28, 2016

“Hole in the ozone layer” hoax was the dry run for “global warming”

Tim BallRebel Columnist

When a plan begins to fail, you either reconsider the plan or double-down by resorting to earlier successful actions.

The climate change argument is failing as evidence shows the science is wrong, all forecasts fail, polls show lack of public concern and the Paris Climate Conference Agreement is collapsing.

However, there is a bigger reason why it all fails:

There was no problem in the first place.

As I said years ago, “The Kyoto Protocol is a political solution to a non-existent problem without scientific justification.”

Emails leaked from the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) in 2009 exposed the corrupt science and forced a Kyoto replacement, the Green Climate Fund.

It is now failing, so they double down. Political and financial reward is at stake and the global warming lie is too big to fail.

Worse, the lie is based on another lie that chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) were destroying the ozone layer.

Desperate to make people think they are acting on climate change ,and the Paris Agreement is working, they resurrect the Montreal Protocol. This was created to eliminate CFCs but the plan only appeared to work. There is no hole in the ozone, even at its thinnest, which occurs in winter when there is no sunlight; it is one-third the global average.

The term was created to scare people: “We’ve torn a hole in the sky, and harmful radiation will give children skin cancer!”

I appeared before the Parliamentary Committee on Ozone. It was a political circus. Friends of the Earth had representatives there with no scientific knowledge; I asked them. A scientist showed graphs of ozone levels over Toronto. He didn’t tell the politicians it was computer model data because there was no real data then. The politicians didn’t know, and that caused me to change my presentation.

I explained the scientific method of creating a hypothesis, then testing it by trying to disprove it. It is easy to discredit a theory because the hypothesis is based on stated assumptions. Show one is wrong, and the hypothesis collapses.

Ozone is created by the ultraviolet (UV) light portion of sunlight hitting free oxygen (O2) in the atmosphere. They assumed the level of UV radiation is constant. In fact, it varies widely and is the major cause of ozone variation, but that’s what allowed them to focus on and blame CFCs.

Dupont, who produced the CFCs, said nothing. They created them as an inert, harmless gas to replace ammonia, the problematic refrigerant gas. I talked to some of them. They knew the science was bad. Their silence was likely because the patent on CFCs was expiring and they had a replacement anyway, called hydrochlorofluorcarbons (HCFC).

There was no empirical evidence that CFCs were destroying the ozone, just like there is no empirical evidence that CO2 is causing warming or climate change. The similarity between the deceptions comes about because the same people were involved. They were bureaucrats like Susan Solomon, a bureaucratic scientist at NOAA who was contributing author to the IPCC Third Assessment Report (2001) and co-chair of Working Group I (the Physical Science Report of the Fourth Assessment Report (2007). Ms Solomon was the source of claims that CFCs were destroying ozone in the ozone layer.

After the hearing, I told the media that the replacement HCFCs were as problematic as the CFCs. Dupont produced the replacement, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and now they are, indeed, problematic.

They claim that a reduction in HFCs will reduce global warming and would reduce cumulative global consumption of HFCs by the equivalent of 700 million metric tons of carbon dioxide through 2025. That is about 1.5 per cent of the world’s 2010 greenhouse gas emissions, or the same as taking 15 million cars off the road for 10 years.

These estimates are completely wrong.

They’re based on what is called the global warming potential (GWP) of HFCs. These are calculated assuming CO2 stays in the atmosphere for 100 years. Figure 1 shows the IPCC figure against the real value of approximately six years calculated by many researchers.

As Lawrence Solomon explained in his book "The Deniers":

“The IPCC chose to assume CO2 remained in the atmosphere for up to 100 years (red bar in graph). If a shorter residence time was assumed, the IPCC climate models would not be able to predict the accelerated warming that is hypothesized to be caused by human CO2 emissions.”

Some developing countries (specifically India, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq and the Gulf states) will not freeze their use of HFCs until 2028. China, the world's largest producer of HFCs, will not actually start to cut their production or use until 2029.

Even if Canada reduces HFCs totally, imagine how much more goes into the atmosphere from automobiles and refrigerators as the Indian and Chinese economies grow.

Sadly, our leaders are unilateral fools.

However, the ultimate irony is that CO2 is a likely major replacement refrigerant contender.



You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2016-11-12 14:58:01 -0500
The “ban” in Western nations was very useful because “by complete coincidence” the patent on this terrible “earth destroying” chemical R-12 was soon to expire. But, have no fear, the holder had miraculously developed a new more expensive chemical to replace it.
commented 2016-10-29 02:31:23 -0400
Andrew accepting more lies makes something true?
commented 2016-10-29 02:30:41 -0400
Andrew they phased it out in some places , China only began phasing it out in 2007 , maybe do some research instead of just parroting internet garbage. It was not hard to get until around 2000.
commented 2016-10-29 02:09:39 -0400
In Canada, the eco-hoax was an evolution of legitimate concerns bout environmental pollution around the Great Lakes basin in the late 60s and early 70s… It was evident in that era that pollution, such as unmitigated industrial waste being dumped into the Great Lakes, mostly from American sources, was creating serious environmental concerns such as algal bloom on the shallowest of the Great Lakes – Lake Erie… Meanwhile, there were serious sources of air pollution such as the smelters in Sudbury, Ontario and the four industrial abrasives factories, such as Union Carbide, in the Niagara region… “Pollution Probe” was formed at that time by a group of concerned students at the University of Toronto at that time… (Little known, their original intent was to limit roadside litter alongside the newly expanded Hwy. 400 north of Toronto to Barrie, by patrolling that highway on weekends and reporting litterers via the then popular CB radios!) Those early legitimate campaigns against pollution did limit such things as air pollution across Ontario, the use of phosphates in laundry detergents, the dumping of minerals and farm runoff into Lake Erie, and the control of air stacks in Niagara and Sudbury… (Rather than bite the bullet, Union Carbide relocated from Welland, Ontario to Beauharnois, Quebec..) It was after the first obvious targets of man made pollution that things got off the rails with eco-nuts searching for new and too often imagined causes… Hence ozone, then global cooling, mass starvation, overpopulation, species decline, ice cap melting, and finally, now, Global Warming… The greatest victim in this progression is TRUTH… Legitimate pollution concerns being subverted to fashionable causes to impose agendas on our society…
commented 2016-10-28 23:54:20 -0400
ANDREW STEPHENSON… Was that you just burping?…
commented 2016-10-28 22:32:25 -0400
New satellite ozone data and other atmospheric studies based on actual measurements confirm that the ozone layer is not a homogeneous, flat and that atmospheric dynamics, not chemistry, is the driving factor that determines the thickness of the ozone layer. The scientific research reported here strips any shred of credibility from the claims of the ozone depletion theorists leaving the Montreal Protocol backed only by the Malthusian “the sky is falling” ideology of its founders.
Crista-Spas is a group of instruments (Crista), deployed on a space platform (Spas), that measures atmospheric gases in such detail that it can create three-dimensional images of the distribution of the gases in the stratosphere. These 3-D images show that the models behind the ozone depletion scare are completely, and axiomatically, wrong.

The 3-D images demonstrate that the ozone is organized in complex dynamic vertical and filamentary structures that are constantly changing, in patterns as complex as those of weather systems near the surface. In contrast, the computer models used by the promoters of the ozone depletion and global warming scares assume that the ozone layer is homogeneous, and use linear equations to model the stratosphere.

Any attempt to model complex nonlinear processes (such as those demonstrated to occur in the ozone layer) with zonal averaging and linear equations, will invariably give wrong results, (as climate warming models have) regardless of how big a supercomputer is used. The methodology is axiomatically wrong. Yet, this erroneous methodology is what the promoters of the ozone depletion scare have been using to forecast ozone depletion rates and to make policy.

The primary role of dynamical processes in determining the thickness of the ozone layer has also been established in other extensive climate field work. They discovered that changes in the ozone layer were directly caused by the horizontal and vertical movement of air masses (that is, wind dynamics). A close analysis of the data also demonstrated that chemistry played no role in the thickness of the ozone layer over these stations.
commented 2016-10-28 20:35:02 -0400
They banned CFCs… the levels peaked and began declining … and antarctic ozone concentrations have been increasing since as well.

There aren’t really a lot of viable alternative explanations.
commented 2016-10-28 19:46:39 -0400
So, let’s see: in the 1980’s they banned CFCs. In 2016 they banned HFC’s. What’s next: KFC?
commented 2016-10-28 18:27:46 -0400
The Ozone “global crisis” and the media hysteria whipped up by globalist MSM certainly was a trial run for a future larger corporate shake down – a shake down test of public perception, resistance to junk science and doom mongering narratives, public perception to government collusion with the interests selling a “cure” and enriching the small cabal who had interests in the Freon II.

The ozone scare sure sold a shitload of Dupont-franchised refrigerant and the new mandated appliances using it – the scare worked quite well for vested interests.

Warming fear mongering has done the same thing for those interests selling shoddy inefficient green energy technology – none of which has been any more effective at impacting the climate than new refrigerators did.
commented 2016-10-28 17:20:42 -0400
I’m glad that Tim Ball has a voice on the Rebel. I don’t believe anything the climate deniers say anymore. Misleading the people about this is beyond evil.
commented 2016-10-28 16:58:30 -0400
Philip: I agree.
commented 2016-10-28 16:57:19 -0400
All this because of bovine flatulation. Who would have thought.
commented 2016-10-28 15:17:20 -0400
The Rebel needs to start putting Tim Ball on some professionally made videos. He has a great message but nobody wants to read any more.