Unless maybe it's not as simple as they made it out to be....
2007-05-29
06:05:24
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Environment
➔ Global Warming
Good point - there's rarely an explanation of the prior contradictory theory. Almost never a good one. It's always "oh, forget that, believe us now."
2007-05-29
06:17:30 ·
update #1
Jacob it remains the case that the level of concentration has declined precipitously and that the levels of new CFC production have dwindled by over 90% - - yet the problem not only persists but gets worse.
The official explanation is that well, the effects of the pre-ban CFCs were even greater than we thought - i.e., big bad capitalism was so bad, the badness it caused still exists and grows today.
Doesn't that sound just a bit like Animal Farm to you?
2007-05-29
06:37:57 ·
update #2
Margaret again, the link provided would seem to indicate that the problem should be on the wane, but it isn't. Yes some countries still use CFCs but global production is less than 1/10th of what it was, and atmospheric CFC levels and levels of its components are declining - - the problem should at the very least not be getting worse.
It seems pretty clear that while CFCs may be a factor, it's not as cut and dried as the pictorial indicates, and that gets back to my issue - - - - even if you're sure that the gist of something is true, if the message sweeps seemingly contradictory items under the rug (AGW/MWP) rather than explaining them, or exaggerates (teflon birds) or just plain lies (Monsanto butterflies), why is it any wonder that there are so many skeptics?
Do the greenies not have only themselves to blame?
2007-05-29
06:53:59 ·
update #3