New Ozone Hole Scare Won’t Save the Great Climate Hoax

Written by John O'Sullivan on February 12, 2018. Posted in Current News

‘Ozone layer is not recovering over populated areas’, scientists warn;  And so the UK’s The Guardian newspaper (February 6, 2018) spins more eco fake news. While the hole over Antarctica has been closing, the protective ozone is thinning at the lower latitudes, where the sunlight is stronger and billions of people live. (Be scared, will ya!)

So, what’s the truth behind it all?

The ozone ‘hole’ was the big environmental scare story in the 1980’s, before man-made global warming. The ‘hole’ was blamed on human emissions of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) and other related industrial chemicals which were then banned by global treaty (Montreal protocol) in 1987 (see satellite images below).

Obviously, something’s not worked.

As Professor Joanna Haigh at Imperial College London, a member of the international research team who created the new study warns:

 “It is a worry. Although the Montreal protocol has done what we wanted it to do in the upper stratosphere, there are other things going on that we don’t understand.”

But critics say Haigh’s entire ‘ozone hole’ narrative is just another environmental scam spun by elites and dying simply because the real world won’t cooperate with the theory. Some scientists even say evidence now shows an actual layer of atmospheric ozone doesn’t exist.

For over a century, scientists thought that ozone collects in a layer in the stratosphere, roughly 12 to 18 miles above the surface, and absorbs ultraviolet (UV) light. We know ozone is a very heavy gas made from three oxygen atoms (O3) and in the atmosphere is able to absorb the sun’s rays (see graphic below).

But it was not until the space age and earth-observing satellites in the 1970’s that humans were able to more objectively monitor our planet’s surface and make precise measurements.

Those measurements did confirm an ‘ozone hole’ over Antarctica. But how long had it been there? No one knew.

Unfortunately, we were all too trusting of government ‘scientists’ back then. At the time many of us believed their frightening, hair-raising, terrifying, petrifying, spine-chilling, blood-curdling, horrifying, alarming, appalling, formidable, fearsome, nerve-racking, unnerving stories that the ‘hole’ was man-made. Now we know those very same atmospheric scientists who today clamor about CO2 and man-made global warming were first on the bandwagon of that frightful ozone problem.

Quickly, grant-chasing scientists got the mass media triggered. Newspapers ran stories of fears for the scientists’ wellbeing at the South Pole; those ‘brave’ ozone researchers faced becoming “blind and horrifically sunburned.” (NY Times Oct 27, 1987.

Independent experts in radiation science (not government grant-chasers) are among the most sceptical. Dr Padmanabha Rao, Former Professor of Medical Physics, Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, India is one not afraid to speak out.

Dr Rao has this advice:

“Professor Joanna Haigh at Imperial College London, should keep smiling and be happy, free from worry about her Ozone layer. I reported that the atmospheric temperature at any height depends upon the presence of dominant solar emission there produced by γ, β, and  X-ray emissions. Solar UV dips the temperature to minus zero degrees Centigrade, while EUV causes a further steep fall in temperature. Bharat radiation and visible light maintain almost the same temperatures of EUV present at slightly greater height from earth. Near infrared radiation raises the temperatures from 5000 to 20000 near 500 km height above earth, while it combines with visible light and raises the atmospheric temperature just to -580 to 17 0C within 10 km height above earth that helps sustenance of life.”

For Dr Rao and many independent scientists in the know, the ozone hole scam is simply the little brother of the far greater man-made global warming scam. They watched in dismay as a series of international meetings and negotiations culminated in the ‘Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer,’ agreed upon on 16 September 1987.

In effect, the world banned the production and consumption of all those manufactured compounds blamed for depleting ozone in the stratosphere–chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), halons, carbon tetrachloride, and methyl chloroform.

Alarmists touted the ban as an ecological victory to save the planet and spent decades building a carefully-crafted narrative, one such example, http://www.theozonehole.com/ tells us:

“In 1984 British Antarctic Survey scientists, Joseph Farman, Brian Gardiner, and Jonathan Shanklin, discovered a recurring springtime Antarctic ozone hole. Their paper was published in Nature, May 1985, the study summarized data that had been collected by the British Antarctic Survey showing that ozone levels had dropped to 10{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} below normal January levels for Antarctica.”

But how did anyone know what was ‘normal’ when there was so little data before the satellite era?

Regardless, Eco-warriors argued the ‘hole’ would thus repair itself naturally and the planet saved and kept piling on the media pressure.

Newspapers and TV worked hand in hand with the alarmists. We were told about the blind sheep—increased UV radiation was thought to cause cataracts—and yarns about increased skin cancer. “It’s like AIDS from the sky,” a terrified environmentalist told Newsweek’s gullible staff.

Even a compliant NASA (1992) cried that without ozone in the atmosphere, “the Sun’s intense UV rays would sterilize the Earth’s surface.” But critics noted that NASA’s warnings “were exquisitely timed to bolster the agency’s budget requests” (Bailey, 1993).

Al Gore’s book, Earth in the Balance, repeated the ozone myths, stating: “In Patagonia, hunters now report finding blind rabbits; fishermen catch blind salmon” (Gore, 1992). Johns Hopkins University investigated the evidence and attributed the cases of sheep blindness to a local infection (“pink eye”) (Pearce, 1993).

But the passage of time is never the friend of junk science theories. As with global warming, less biased scientists saw more evidence accumulate and it was clear that over time, such wide variations do occur in nature. Today we see any claimed ozone layer is extremely thin and varies greatly over the course of days and seasons. It is high in summer, low in winter; high in daytime, low at night.

But what about those ‘unintended consequences’ of the CFC ban?

Dr Rory Hession:

“As a physician, I have seen the unintended consequences. Hand held inhalers for people with asthma were ‘dirt cheap’, but now cost $40-$50 due to the propellant. Many people cannot afford this.” (July 19, 2017 at 7:07 pm)

And Joseph Blackston MD JD FACP:

“Dr. Hession, You are 100{154653b9ea5f83bbbf00f55de12e21cba2da5b4b158a426ee0e27ae0c1b44117} correct. I am also a physician, board-certified, and work as an Emergency Physician. These “MDI’s” or “metered dose inhalers were literally dirt cheap ($10-12) for many years, just as you say. The medication (albuterol) is readily available as a generic and has been around for 35 years. Now, even the cheapest of these MDI’s are $60-80. People on Medicaid pay zero. People with Blue Cross pay $10-15. People with NO insurance pay the FULL PRICE.” (July 19, 2017 at 11:46 pm)

Science is Nuanced and Complicated

In truth, most people saw nothing of any ‘hole’ until it was detected and depicted so graphically by satellite. For all we know, the ‘hole’ may have been coming and going for thousands, if not millions of years. There just is no hard evidence either way. But, we do know those CFC’s are heavier than air, so not so likely that they could rise up and stay in the atmosphere anyway. Crucially, those heavy CFC’s break down under UV radiation. The higher those gases ascended, the more likely they would break down before reaching the ozone. So, where’s the harm?

As Dr Dr Rao explains, the science is nuanced and more complicated than government researchers would have you believe:

“Solar γ, β, and X-ray emissions and the successive Bharat Radiation, EUV, UV, visible light, and near infrared radiation reach different heights depending upon energy. They produce these series of emissions twice and finally reach around 10 km height above earth. Notably, γ, β, and X-ray emissions with relatively high energy produce enough Sunlight and heat in tropical regions such as South India, South Africa etc on earth. The γ, β, and X-ray emissions with relatively low energy reach regions such as UK, Europe, Canada etc. on earth somewhat close to North pole, generate UV as a result temperatures fall to minus zero degrees, At North and South poles they generate EUV and causes a steep fall in temperatures. The current explanation reveal that previously believed Ozone layer does not exists.” [1]

Thankfully, well-qualified, dedicated researchers, such as Tony Heller (see: ‘Twenty-Five Years Since The Ozone Hole Killed Us All’) show hard evidence exposing the lies behind the fake science. Heller reports, “There never was a Northern Hemisphere Ozone Hole, and the one over Antarctica has not changed in size since the CFC ban was implemented.” (see graph below)

Moreover, anyone reading carefully what these study scientists say, rather than the fake media headlines, can see they admit ozone levels vary at different altitudes. They also concede they don’t understand why and have no idea as to the cause. Is there a crisis? No – as the report states, “Overall, the effects balance out”.

Indeed, Bryan Johnson, a research chemist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration who helps monitor the ozone hole from year to year admits the eco-scare stories are all linked: “There are three phases to atmospheric concerns,” he says:

“First there was acid rain. Then it was the ozone hole. Now it’s greenhouse gases like CO2.”

Remember, it cost billions of dollars for consumers and many manufacturers since the 1980’s to change equipment and replace refrigerants. Today, to fight ‘climate change’ we have higher taxes for wind farms, electric vehicles, solar panel projects, etc. Who benefits financially?

[1] All the Sunlight that Earth Receives is not directly from Sun, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology, Vol. 4, Issue 11, November 2015, DOI: 10.15680/IJIRSET.2015.0411050

John O’Sullivan, CEO, Principia Scientific International (PSI). PSI is legally incorporated in the UK as a non-profit serving a charitable purpose to advance knowledge of the traditional scientific method, as per the philosophy and ideas of Karl Popper.

Please donate $25 today to support PSI’s mission.

Trackback from your site.