UV light isn't being generated by the Earth. There is nothing to 'trap'. It is not possible to trap light. The Magick Bouncing Photon argument doesn't work.
What UV? Earth doesn't generate UV!
Well, no. Lightning, for instance, produces UV light.
UV is never converted to heat upon absorption. It converts to chemical reactions.
False. UV light can be absorbed and converted to heat just like any other wavelength of light.
Only by twits in the 'climate' division of NASA.
... I'm starting to think you should have become more familiar with my point before posting this.
Air temperature has nothing to do with ozone production, at least not until you get to a few thousand degrees.
Sorry, I should have said that colder temperature remove more ozone. I'll get into that in a later point in this post.
CFCs don't affect ozone. You can put them both in a common tank and nothing will happen.
Well, you might notice that the atmosphere is not a tank in a lab...
What CFC's? Did you know that cosmic rays occur EVERYWHERE ON EARTH?
Yes and no, cosmic rays are deflected and move along electromagnetic fields. The cosmic rays that do hit the earth at the proper angle are pulled along the electromagnetic flied and so are concentrated in the atmosphere at the polls where the field bends into the poll. That concentration of cosmic rays is what cause the auoras at the polls. The light is a byproduct of the chemical reactions caused by the cosmic ray bombardment.
Likewise, the amount of cosmic rays that hit earth changes dramatically with the solar cycles. The Earth is close enough to the sun that during the un's energetic cycles the Earth is inside the sun's magnetosphere, and so the Earth is protected from a lot of cosmic rays... during a low cycle, like we are entering into now, the Earth is outside the magnetosphere so the amount of cosmic rays increases significantly.
There is CO2 in Antarctica, just like everywhere else.
CO2 is not uniformly distributed around the globe, and is in lower concentrations in cold regions than it is in hot regions. Equatorial oceans vent CO2 as the water flowing from the north and south polls are warmed, and in the colder regions towards the polls the ocean is a net CO2 sink, where colder water has a higher capacity to absorb CO2 and so it does. Likewise, land areas have different CO2 generation, and the CO2 doesn't immediately spread across the globe.
It is not possible to measure the temperature of the Earth.
It is possible to make a fairly accurate map the atmospheric temperature using satellites. Before then, you are correct, the ability to measure the temperature of the earth was greatly reduced, and until the last 80 years or so there was practically zero coverage of the southern hemisphere.
Buzzword fallacy. What do you mean by 'solar effect'?
Maybe you should read the paper. :roll:
Argument from randU fallacy. CFC's do not affect either ozone or CO2.
Neither I or the paper made a claim about CFCs effecting CO2, but CFCs do effect Ozone. When UV hits a CFC it creates a chlorine molecule, the chlorine molecule breaks apart of O3 molecule. The reason that this happens so readily in the polar region is because the temperatures need to be below -78°C to create and maintain free chlorine molecules.
Mitigation of what? Void argument.
mitigation of global warming.
