http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090331153014.htm

When the author of this piece knows so little of the relevant physics that he tells me that CFCs are too heavy rise in the atmosphere as that would defy physical laws I know he’s spouting garbage on part of his story. Consequently I’m not inclined to give any credence to the rest of it!

Which is as dumb as the other conspiracy theory.

Now, tell me how your conspiracy theory supports Anthony’s inability to understand the scientific papers he quotes that totally demolish his supposition?

REPLY: Don, what makes you say that? Also I have a question for you, why is your mind closed to the possibility? – Anthony

About 20 years ago I heard a rumor, and I believe it is a rumor but I think it is an interesting one. It goes like this. DuPont’s CFC patent was going to expire and they were going to losing a large market share of the refrigerant market. Along comes the hole in the ozone theory and they covertly jump on it while patenting the next refrigerant R22 or R32 or something like that. It all worked out for them. Didn’t help me much when I was work on my boats fish hold refrigerant which was R12. But that’s just a rumor too. I didn’t buy the CFC/Ozone connect then just like I don’t buy the AGW theory now. The science is way to young for either one to start making trillion dollars mistakes.

WRT Dupont and the Ozone Hole – Read Ref: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig6/blackstock5.html

In no time at all a crowd had gathered, clearly without even reading so much as the abstract…

More charitably, perhaps Anthony and the crowd read the abstract but didn’t understand what “halogenated molecules” means, and that CFCs are an example.

Anthony posted about a paper that seeks to explain in greater detail one part of the mechanism by which CFCs are depleting the ozone layer. In no time at all a crowd had gathered, clearly without even reading so much as the abstract, hollering that this disproves everything they’ve been told about ozone layer depletion, and can they have their old refrigerants back now!

No, no, no! Neither the latest paper by Lu, nor his earlier papers with Sanche, question the premise that halogenated compounds react with stratospheric ozone to cause the ‘ozone hole’. His paper presents more evidence to support the theory that cosmic rays play a role in the dissociation of halogenated compounds, i.e. they help break down the CFCs to more reactive species, a link in the complex series of reactions believed to reduce the ozone concentration.

‘Galactic Cosmic Rays May Be Responsible For The Antarctic Ozone Hole’ is accurate enough as a headline, as long as one takes the trouble to read that the cosmic rays do this by liberating halogens from CFCs.

http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Ozo/vortex.html
&
http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Ingles/OzoneTheory.html

Nothing is obvious until it is measured quantitatively in the natural system. Qualitative assessments coupled with weak corollaries and forced laboratory reactions only provide theoretical mechanisms for the possibility of those reactions to be occurring in nature.

And guess what Lu’s been doing the past several years …

Lu cites an earlier paper of which he was co-author:

Then the evidence of the correlation between CRs, chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) dissociation, and O3 loss was found from satellite data by Lu and Sanche…

Now, Lu says he’s discovered the causation underlying the correlation.

It is this dissociation of chlorofluorocarbon which gives rise to the chlorine which is fed into the reactions given above by a previous poster:

Cl· + O3 → ClO· + O2

ClO· + O3 → Cl· + 2 O2

Anyway …

<blockquote.
The Antarctic Ozone Hole is said to be caused only by Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC’s)

This claim by Anthony is incorrect in itself, as other halogen-containing molecules such as methyl bromide are also known to contribute.

His theory is far from being a ‘nail in the CFC-ozone coffin’, it’s more of an additional foundation for the theory!

In fact it’s building on his previous work in the area …

The money quote lies right in the abstract:

The results provide strong evidence of the physical mechanism that the CR driven electron-induced reaction of halogenated molecules plays the dominant role in causing the ozone hole.

Halogenated molecules such as CFCs, methyl bromide, etc.

Plain-english form: We may have pinned down the dominant reaction by which CFCs cause ozone depletion.

Not: “The Antarctic Ozone Hole is said to be caused only by Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC’s). According to this new study, perhaps not.” as Anthony claimed in his original post.

Anthony – will you be correcting your post now that you understand you’re totally representing the paper’s conclusions?

It’s clear that many of those posting in this have not taken the trouble to read the paper and instead have taken the opportunity to rant about the Montreal protocol or relate their personal anecdotes about Freons! What Prof. Lu is proposing is an additional mechanism by which CFCs can break down and so deplete Ozone. His suggestion still requires the presence of CFCs and Polar Stratospheric Clouds (the reason why the depletion is worst in the antarctic). His theory is far from being a ‘nail in the CFC-ozone coffin’, it’s more of an additional foundation for the theory!

Here’s the chemical reaction. CFC contain Chlorine (Cl)

Cl· + O3 → ClO· + O2

ClO· + O3 → Cl· + 2 O2

Since the chlorine is regenerated at the end of these reactions, a single Cl atom can destroy many thousands of ozone molecules.

http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Ingles/Crista.html

Some of the links from that page are interesting, too.