if there was an ice age that ended before the industrial revelution how did it end cfcs and can't be the cause

Question

is there really that problem because the world obviously has already warmed before people got involved with it (ice age ended didn't it)

the tear in the ozone layer is what is being blamed fr global warming and cfcs and carbon monoxide emissions are hailed as big contributors

Answer 1

Research has shown that average global temperature closely reflects the carbon dioxide concentrations in the air.

During ice ages, the carbon dioxide level is usually 180-210 parts per million (ppm). During interglacial periods, the levels are closer to 280-300 ppm. The current concentration of carbon dioxide is 380 ppm.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Carbon_Dioxide_400kyr.png

[The next part is quoted from Wikipedia]
"Since the late 1970s the use of CFCs has been heavily regulated because of its destructive effects on the ozone layer. This damage was discovered by Sherry Rowland and Mario Molina, who first published a paper suggesting the connection in 1974. It turns out that one of CFCs' most attractive features—their unreactivity—has been instrumental in making them one of the most significant pollutants. CFCs' lack of reactivity gives them a lifespan which can exceed 100 years in some cases. This gives them time to diffuse into the upper stratosphere. Here, the sun's ultraviolet radiation is strong enough to break off the chlorine atom, which on its own is a highly reactive free radical. This catalyses the break up of ozone into oxygen by means of a variety of mechanisms..."
[End of Wikipedia quote]

The main reason people want to protect the ozone layer is because it screens out ultraviolet radiation, which if allowed to pass through the ozone, can damage DNA and lead to increased rates of cancer. Though the ozone layer does have some effect on temperature, this is minimal compared to the effect of greenhouse gases.

Answer 2

You've got two questions. I'll answer the first. CFCs don't really affect "global warming." They supposedly affect the ozone hole, but research has shown that more harm has been done by removing CFCs than any ozone depletion caused by CFCs. The whole question here is cause and effect. Many believe that since CFCs have been increasing, and the ozone hole is increasing, the CFCs are causing it. The fact is that this a logical fallacy, and that data contradicts it. Also, another fallacy of the same kind is used to say that CO2 causes global warming. What if it's the other way around? What if rising temperatures cause an increase in CO2? It's more plausible than CO2 causing global warming, because CO2 is 1% of all greenhouse gases, and Mars is also experiencing global warming.

Answer 3

Yes, the others are correct chlorofluorocarbons or CFC's do not play any role in global warming. The "ice age" you are referring to is called the little ice age and did not get nearly as cold as the other more major ice ages. Yes the earth has warmed before and obviously without human influence, the concern is that it is warming more rapidly, and the CO2 concentration (which does cause global warming) is higher than it has been in observable history. Also, the temperatures are rising at a rate that has never been seen before, and so there is concern for the ice melt, not to overflow continents, but to change the gulf stream current, which keeps northern Europe from having the climate of Maine.

Answer 4

You are confused. CFCs don't cause global warming, they cause ozone depletion. This can result in failed crops and skin cancer due to the extra UV reaching the surface.