Date: Mon, 14 Jun 1999 10:46:12 -0400
Reply-To: "Joe L." <jliasse@TOAST.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: "Joe L." <jliasse@TOAST.NET>
Subject: Re: Who has the real skinny on R-12?
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
One thing I have noticed missing from all the "scientific" information
is mention of natural cycles. If I recall my college geology correctly this
earth has been through several "Ice Ages" where the planet near froze over;
interspersed with several ages when the planet heated up to the point where
the polar caps near disappeared compleatly. All of this occuring appearently
without the influance of Ronald Reagan.
From all reports I have read this cycle will continue wether Al Gore
wants it to or not.
----- Original Message -----
From: Bulley <gmbulley@BULLEY-HEWLETT.COM>
To: <vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM>
Sent: Sunday, June 13, 1999 10:10 PM
Subject: Re: Who has the real skinny on R-12?
> I was on a business trip to DC, meeting with some EPA folks (really). Just
> got in.
>
> Short form (cause I got a bunch to do):
>
> Ozone in the upper atmosphere reflects most of the sun's harmful
> ultraviolet rays away from the delicate life (like you, me, and BOB). The
> ozone layer is naturally very thin. R-12, even in miniscule quantities
> (Like a couple molecules) sparks a chain reaction in the upper atmosphere
> that converts ozone (good stuff, when up there) into substances that are
> useless to protect the planet from ultraviolet light, and which continue
to
> erode the ozone layer. It is complicated, and invisible to those on the
> ground, but it is happening.
>
> Ozone arrives in the upper atmosphere a number of ways, some natural, and
> some manmade. Thunderstorms are a driver, mixing ground air high up into
> the atmosphere. Volcanoes do some of the work as well. Unfortunately, our
> beloved space launches are a tremendous source of ozone production and
> distribution to the upper atmosphere, but I understand that NASA is
working
> on that.
>
> R-134 I don't have the low-down on. IF it is a greenhouse gas, that is a
> gas that traps heat in the atmosphere), as purported, than we switched to
> the far lesser of two evils. It would take a LOT of R-134 to trap heat in
> the atmosphere, far more than I understand is ever to be used for any
> conceivable purpose.
>
> Either way, a WARMER planet will drastically change life as we know it:
> (underwater London, beaches in Tennessee, deserts in the Midwest, etc.).
> Bummer.
>
> A depletion in our ozone would pretty much END life here, as most life
> (that I can think of) dies in strong UV. Cancel delivery of the newspaper
> and the milk, you won't need, 'em.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> G. Matthew Bulley
> Bulley-Hewlett & Associates
> www.bulley-hewlett.com
> Cary, NC USA
> 888.468.4880 tollfree
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: KENWILFY@AOL.COM [SMTP:KENWILFY@AOL.COM]
> Sent: Saturday, June 12, 1999 8:52 PM
> To: vanagon@GERRY.VANAGON.COM
> Subject: Re: Who has the real skinny on R-12?
>
> In a message dated 6/11/99 3:17:47 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> Steve@Schwenk-Law.com writes:
>
> << Please, Ken, if you have doubts, read the scientific literature, not
> EPA.
> You
> can't be serious that this is all a wacky conspiracy.
> steve
> >>
> Hey all I was doing was asking questions. To me the whole thing doesn't
> make
> sense. They make a big deal about how that R-12 is going to mess up the
> ozone layer, then they approve a replacement for it (R-134a) that is a
> known
> "green house" gas. So we don't mess up the environment one way we mess it
> up
> another (assuming the ozone hole idea and the global warming ideas are
both
> actually true).
> I just wanted to know if anyone else saw the inconsistancies here.
> As I have said before I am not a scientist or a chemist. But I hopefully
> do
> have the common sense God gave Lettuce (which some scientists or chemists
> seem to lack).
> Not a Flame.
> Where is Super Bulley when you really need him?
> Ken Wilford
> Van-Again
> John 3:16
>
| 
