Chemtrail Central
Login
Member List
Image Database
Chemtrail Forum
Active Topics
Who's Online
Search
Research
Flight Explorer
Unidentifiable
FAQs
Phenomena
Disinformation
Silver Orbs
Transcripts
News Archive
Channelings
Etcetera
PSAs
Media
Vote


Chemtrail Central
Search   FAQs   Messages   Members   Profile
DELETED

Post new topic Reply to topic
Chemtrail Central > CT Science

Author Thread
Louis Aubuchont


tagged & banned


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 946
Location: Parsonsfield, Maine
DELETED PostThu Jul 19, 2007 3:32 am  Reply with quote  

DELETED DUE TO THE POLICY OF CTC IN LETTING THE DEBUNKERS AND TROUBLEMAKERS LIKE "FUIwon'tDoWhatUTellMe" AKA, "MAY41970' OVERRUN THE SITE.

FOR THAT REASON I WILL NOT HAVE MY POST ARCHIVED HERE AND I NO LONGER WISH TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE


Last edited by Louis Aubuchont on Thu Nov 22, 2007 7:31 pm; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile Send private message
Sore Throat





Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1923
Location: x
Feeling Cooked Yet? PostThu Jul 19, 2007 4:46 am  Reply with quote  


quote:
1. A method for reducing the destruction of ozone in the atmosphere comprising the steps of:


Why would they want to do that???

 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
mmmmbarium


tagged & banned


Joined: 27 Dec 2005
Posts: 385
Location: Hell on Earth
Re: Feeling Cooked Yet? PostThu Jul 19, 2007 9:43 pm  Reply with quote  

quote:
Originally posted by Sore Throat

quote:
1. A method for reducing the destruction of ozone in the atmosphere comprising the steps of:


Why would they want to do that???




then why is the spraying happening in the lower atmosphere? If UV light and ozone was the case, then the spraying would have to be at much higher altitudes.

And being that the earth's atmosphere is fluid and dynamic, then why dont they spray only over the ocean as to not attract attention?

As we can see, a good part of the spraying is done over populated areas.
 View user's profile Send private message
Louis Aubuchont


tagged & banned


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 946
Location: Parsonsfield, Maine
DELETED PostFri Jul 20, 2007 12:06 am  Reply with quote  

DELETED DUE TO THE POLICY OF CTC IN LETTING THE DEBUNKERS AND TROUBLEMAKERS LIKE "FUIwon'tDoWhatUTellMe" AKA, "MAY41970' OVERRUN THE SITE.

FOR THAT REASON I WILL NOT HAVE MY POST ARCHIVED HERE AND I NO LONGER WISH TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE


Last edited by Louis Aubuchont on Thu Nov 22, 2007 7:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile Send private message
Sore Throat





Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1923
Location: x
Tongue firmly in cheek PostSat Jul 21, 2007 2:42 am  Reply with quote  

Louis,

I hope you understand that my response to you was clearly tongue in cheek.

Despite wishfull Pollyannas, the depletion of ozone in our upper atmosphere remains quite severe.

And you are quite right, proposals for massive geoengineering projects abound for a variety of reasons.

Given the costs and likely unintended consequences, to both human health and the environment, it is quite unlikely that wisdom of such activities would ever be debated in public or that the required consent of the governed will be obtained before initiating such programs. That is not the direction our dying "democracy" is heading.

The compliant mainsteam media will make sure that the exposure of such activities never sees the light of day.

One of the main reasons we are a dying democracy is the failure of the media to keep the population truthfully informed.

Unfortunately the majority of our "journalists" have become nothing more than whores willing to accept precisely controlled guidelines regulating what they are allowed to report.

http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/



ftp://toms.gsfc.nasa.gov/pub/omi/images/global/FULLDAY_GLOB.PNG



http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/monthly/monthly_2006-09.html



 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Louis Aubuchont


tagged & banned


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 946
Location: Parsonsfield, Maine
DELETED PostSun Jul 22, 2007 10:53 pm  Reply with quote  

DELETED DUE TO THE POLICY OF CTC IN LETTING THE DEBUNKERS AND TROUBLEMAKERS LIKE "FUIwon'tDoWhatUTellMe" AKA, "MAY41970' OVERRUN THE SITE.

FOR THAT REASON I WILL NOT HAVE MY POST ARCHIVED HERE AND I NO LONGER WISH TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE


Last edited by Louis Aubuchont on Thu Nov 22, 2007 7:33 pm; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile Send private message
Sore Throat





Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1923
Location: x
Trend Lines PostMon Jul 23, 2007 4:10 am  Reply with quote  

Louis,

Look at the documented trend in ozone depletion and growth of the seasonal Antarctic ozone hole.

Do you think that an awarenesss of the consequences of CFC use for refrigerants and switch to substitutes suddenly, and rather dramatically, resulted in a stabilization of both trends, and that this has held for the past ten years?

Any idea how many megatons of CFCs are still is use, especially third world countries?

Just when did Chemtrails spraying begin in earnest?

When did you become aware?

Coincidence?


http://ozonewatch.gsfc.nasa.gov/



Last edited by Sore Throat on Sat Aug 04, 2007 5:06 am; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
weatherman714


tagged & banned


Joined: 11 Jun 2005
Posts: 953
Location: Maryland
Something to ponder PostTue Jul 24, 2007 1:10 am  Reply with quote  

The extreme temperatures are what allow for the reactions to take place that destory ozone. Now ponder this question. Ozone reflects the harmful UV rays that imperal life on this planet. If it takes temperatures on the order of -80F and below for these reactions to occur, is this natures way of allowing extra radation to the surface to enhance the greenhouse effect and warm temperatures to support life? Just a thought...
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
Sore Throat





Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1923
Location: x
Radiation, radiation ...all is not created equal PostTue Jul 24, 2007 5:04 am  Reply with quote  

Weatherman714,

No sure what channel you're watching.

While infrared radiation may enhance life by warming the planet, please provide sources for the beneficial health effects of ultraviolet radiation other than the production of vitamin D.

Color me curious.

Now that I've pondered your question, can you consider mine?

Why do you think the rate of ozone depletion suddenly leveled off in 1998?

What changed the prevailing trend?
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Sore Throat





Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1923
Location: x
A vexing question ? ? PostWed Aug 01, 2007 12:31 am  Reply with quote  

weatherman714,

I am surprised.

No insightful response to my question as to what caused the abrupt change in the atmospheric ozone depletion trend in 1998?

Don't tell me that you, of all people, are stumped on this vitally important matter.
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Louis Aubuchont


tagged & banned


Joined: 08 Mar 2005
Posts: 946
Location: Parsonsfield, Maine
DELETED PostFri Aug 03, 2007 3:31 am  Reply with quote  

DELETED DUE TO THE POLICY OF CTC IN LETTING THE DEBUNKERS AND TROUBLEMAKERS LIKE "FUIwon'tDoWhatUTellMe" AKA, "MAY41970' OVERRUN THE SITE.

FOR THAT REASON I WILL NOT HAVE MY POST ARCHIVED HERE AND I NO LONGER WISH TO BE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE


Last edited by Louis Aubuchont on Thu Nov 22, 2007 7:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
 View user's profile Send private message
Sore Throat





Joined: 01 Sep 2000
Posts: 1923
Location: x
Global warming fight may get boost from ozone plan PostSun Aug 05, 2007 3:04 am  Reply with quote  

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/8/3/worldupdates/2007-08-03T152547Z_01_NOOTR_RTRMDNC_0_-288013-1&sec=Worldupdates


Global warming fight may get boost from ozone plan

By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

OSLO (Reuters) - Countries can take a big and easy step this year to combat climate change by agreeing to tighten a U.N. treaty outlawing gases that damage the ozone layer, the U.N. Environment Programme said on Friday.

Most efforts to cut greenhouse gases focus on axing use of fossil fuels such as coal and oil, with everyone from leaders of major industrialised nations to rock stars lining up this year to urge deeper cuts and shifts to cleaner energies.

But UNEP said the 1987 Montreal Protocol on ozone may take one of the biggest steps to reduce climate change this year if nations agree at talks in September to speed up the phase-out of HCFCs, used in refrigerants. HCFCs destroy ozone and are also powerful greenhouse gases.

"In combating climate change there are many 'quick wins'," said Achim Steiner, head of UNEP, noting simple measures such as a phase-out of old-fashioned, incandescent light bulbs or steps to boost the energy efficiency of buildings.

"Perhaps heads of state might want to consider adding an accelerated phase out of HCFCs to a 'quick win' climate list," he told Reuters.

He noted that U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon will host a high level international meeting on climate change in New York on Sept. 24, just after the 191-nation meeting in Montreal, Canada, on Sept. 17-21 to discuss extra ozone layer protection.

The Montreal Protocol banned chemicals, once common from hairsprays to refrigerants, that were thinning the ozone layer shielding the planet from damaging ultra-violet rays that can cause skin cancer. UNEP says the ozone layer is now on track to recover to its pre-1980 thickness by 2050-75.

HEATWAVES

Some estimates indicate that as a side effect its curbs are doing more than the Kyoto Protocol, the main U.N. plan to combat climate change, in limiting the greenhouse gases that are widely blamed for stoking floods, heatwaves, and rising seas.

UNEP said many countries favour doing more to cut use of HCFCs even though use of the chemicals is rising sharply in developing nations, where the gases were introduced as a less ozone-damaging alternative than a group of gases known as CFCs.

"The acceleration (of HCFC use) is taking place in a number of developing countries, but is most pronounced in China and India," said Paul Horwitz, Deputy Executive Secretary of UNEP's Ozone Secretariat.

"A major reason is the increased use of air conditioning and refrigeration equipment that rely on HCFCs," he said.

Overall, production of ozone-depleting substances has tumbled to 83,000 tonnes a year from 1.8 million in 1987 thanks to the Montreal Protocol. But developing nations' emissions from HCFCs are set to double by 2015 to the equivalent of 50,000 tonnes of ozone-depleting substances.

HCFCs -- or hydrochlorofluorocarbons -- are more powerful greenhouse gases than many other alternatives to CFCs. Manufacture of the most widely used HCFC emits byproducts that are among the most potent global warming gases.

At the Montreal talks, six proposals are on the table to speed up an acceleration of the phase-out of HCFCs, now due by 2030 in developed nations and by 2040 in developing countries.

UNEP says that a group of Dutch and U.S. scientists estimated that, over 1990 to 2010, the Montreal Protocol will avert perhaps 8-11 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases a year, against just two billion under Kyoto.

And the Montreal Protocol could deliver further cuts of a billion tonnes if a phase-out of HCFCs is accelerated.
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail

Post new topic Reply to topic
Forum Jump:
Jump to:  

All times are GMT.
The time now is Wed Nov 22, 2017 11:24 am


  Display posts from previous:      




© 21st Century Thermonuclear Productions
All Rights Reserved, All Wrongs Revenged, Novus Ordo Seclorum, All Your Base