On Mar 20, 1:14*am, Roger Coppock wrote:
NASA: Environmental disaster avoided on ozone loss

By SETH BORENSTEIN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Here's rare good news about an environmental crisis:
We dodged disaster with the ozone layer. A NASA study about ozone-
munching chemicals from aerosol sprays and refrigeration used a
computer model to play a game of what-if. What if the world 22 years
ago didn't agree to cut back on chlorofluorocarbons which cause a
seasonal ozone hole to form near the South Pole?

NASA atmospheric scientist Paul Newman said the answer is a "bizarre
world."

By 2065, two-thirds of the protective ozone layer would have vanished
and "the ozone hole covers the Earth." And the CFCs, which are long-
lived potent greenhouse gases, would have pushed the world's
temperature up an extra 4 degrees.
[ . . . ]
"It is a real horrible place," Newman told The Associated Press.
But that dreadful scenario was "a world avoided," according to the
paper published this week in the journal Atmospheric Chemistry and
Physics.

After scientists raised warnings in the early 1970s — later earning a
Nobel Prize — 193 nations agreed in the1987 treaty called the Montreal
Protocol to cut CFC emissions. CFCs had been used in air conditioning,
aerosol sprays, foam packaging and other products.

Newman, the co-chair of the protocol's scientific panel, said the
study provides hope that the world can do the same thing on another
looming but even harder to solve environmental problem: Global
warming.

"There's a huge lesson to be learned here," said Paul Wapner, director
of Global Environmental Politics at American University. "In
significant cases, human beings can get together and arrive at
international or global principles and avoid ecological catastrophe."

On the Net:

NASA's ozone study:

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/fea...d_avoided.html

The United Nations' ozone page:

http://ozone.unep.org/

The entire article is he

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...h9TB0qV69YNVYL...

No kidding. Computer models prove that? Amazing. Considering that
they've been clearly shown to be unable to predict anything useful in
terms of the climate. But they can be used to confirm the horrors of
ozone on the world. Dr Susan Solomon ought to be propud of her work on
behalf of the anti-ozone movement and now on behalf of the IPCC.

Just more garbage-in garbage-out Mannian manipulation of data and
algorithems to fake some modicum of credibility. It has failed as
usual.

Some people just have no professional pride. That they would actually
go thru that kind of charade and actually put their signatures on it.
Shame.