In UK atheists considred more moral than theists.

[Drich]

you guys aren't even taking the time to read what I write. I honestly have 2 other web sites I write on.. if you can't be bother to read what I write and respond to it then i will just be a disruption like you are to me. I'll blindly accuse you of lying or I will take what you say out of context build this whole big story and then call you a liar till you rage quit.

---

here's the thing sport.. CFC... are heavier than air, much. In Fact if there is a leak in a container it can stay indefinitely in an open air container if the material is not blown out or the container not tipped over.

Ozone... is 15 to 30Km high

Does the atmosphere, even..like..mix..bro?  

F. Sherwood Rowland of the University of California at Irvine, who won a Nobel Prize for his work on atmospheric chemistry, answers:

"This is indeed a persistent question--so much so that the most recent report of the World Meteorological Organization, entitled 'Scientific Assessment of Ozone Depletion: 1994,' included it among a list of common questions that have been persistently raised and long since answered. Susan Solomon of NOAA Aeronomy Laboratory in Boulder and I are listed in the document as the Coordinators of Common Questions about Ozone. We had as many as 22 of them, but pared them down to the most frequently asked ones.

"The response to this particular question reads as follows."

HOW CAN CHLOROFLUOROCARBONS (CFCs) GET TO THE STRATOSPHERE IF THEY'RE HEAVIER THAN AIR?

Although the CFC molecules are indeed several times heavier than air, thousands of measurements have been made from balloons, aircraft and satellites demonstrating that the CFCs are actually present in the stratosphere. The atmosphere is not stagnant. Winds mix the atmosphere to altitudes far above the top of the stratosphere much faster than molecules can settle according to their weight. Gases such as CFCs that are insoluble in water and relatively unreactive in the lower atmosphere (below about 10 kilometers) are quickly mixed and therefore reach the stratosphere regardless of their weight.
Much can be learned about the atmospheric fate of compounds from the measured changes in concentration versus altitude. For example, the two gases carbon tetrafluoride (CF4, produced mainly as a by-product of the manufacture of aluminum) and CFC-11 (CCl3F, used in a variety of human activities) are both much heavier than air. Carbon tetrafluoride is completely unreactive in the lower 99.9 percent of the atmosphere, and measurements show it to be nearly uniformly distributed throughout the atmosphere as shown in the figure. There have also been measurements over the past two decades of several other completely unreactive gases, one lighter than air (neon) and some heavier than air (argon, krypton), which show that they also mix upward uniformly through the stratosphere regardless of their weight, just as observed with carbon tetrafluoride. CFC-11 is unreactive in the lower atmosphere (below about 15 kilometers) and is similarly uniformly mixed there, as shown. The abundance of CFC-11 decreases as the gas reaches higher altitudes, where it is broken down by high energy solar ultraviolet radiation. Chlorine released from this breakdown of CFC-11 and other CFCs remains in the stratosphere for several years, where it destroys many thousands of molecules of ozone.

"The measurements of CFC-11 in the stratosphere were first described in 1975 by two research groups in Boulder, Colorado, and have been similarly observed innumerable times since. The uniform mixing of CF4 versus altitude was reported from balloons around 1980 and many times since, and from an infrared instrument aboard the space shuttle Challenger (which exploded in 1986) in 1985. My own research group has measured CFC-11 in hundreds of air canisters filled while flying in the NASA DC-8. We once did a descent directly over the North Pole and found uniform mixing in the lower atmosphere, and slightly less CFC-11 in the stratosphere.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...bons-cfcs/

Just for you....sport, lol.

Take extra care to notice the dates.  24 years ago, that was already a question answered 19 years prior.  Itself an example of something known since before chemistry split off from alchemy.  Suspension.

ITS NOT THE CFC MORON! It is the chlorine the 1st C in the CFC. the idea being the sun decays the molecule and splits the C-F-C molecule into it's decayed components Chlorine being one that does not degrade, and it is the Chlorine that eats ozone
http://www.arctic.uoguelph.ca/cpe/enviro...estroy.htm

The C while attached to the FC is inert 

The articles I posted showed it would take far far longer for the sun to break down the cfc molecule releasing the chlorine... Which was the first article (hole in ozone not chemically possible)  but here the real question moron. If chlorine is the problem and it is not contain at the ground level then why not ban unchained chlorine? unless chlorine can't get to the upper atmosphere!

Has that retarded brain kicked over yet? will you even bother to read that I made an allowance for the eventual mixing of the two components? it was the very next paragraph
I said:

it was said when we first were made to take our freon tests it would take 75 years to drop the levels low enough to effect the ozone layer. why? because it was supposedly the chlorine which broke apart from the molecule chain which caused atmospheric saturation takes a very long time to decay in the open air. so we should technically be getting worse/hole bigger for the next 50 years.

yet the hole is gone.

Do you see what I wrote in the quote box? I said we were told it would take 75 years for the break down of the cfc to occur. meaning I know the refrigerant should would eventually be exposed to the ozone but through atmospheric saturation and not BS winds. meaning the counts would be n the parts per billions which is why it would take so long to see the effect... This is what they told us in the 90s, get it? any change to this time line only further proves my point!

Not only that the second half just completely blows you out of the water! in that Duponte is the one who funded the research you are now quoting according to the second link I posted. they spear headed the condemnation of their own product so they could sell the same stuff for 10x more! that is what makes this crimminal and what makes 'science' the whore/willing to sell it self for 'funding' of almost any kind. You can find a desperate scientist to almost say whatever you pay them to say and find some sort of 'evidence' to back themselves up! 

Again big tobacco is a prime example
The people who sold asbestos as a miracle insulation
the whole pot thing is another example of 'science' being used to sell you people on what you want to hear. first pot was a Zombie maker and now it is the purest form of compassion/morality embodied and science lead the charge
global cooling, then warming and now climate change and yes hole in the ozon to sell more freon. In truth that last one is making me rich so... maybe yall shut up and do you part sealing the hole in the ozone while I use my old cfc air conditioner and pay 1/2 what you do in electric