From rmg3@access5.digex.net Sun Jul 14 15:39:34 EDT 1996
Article: 229262 of alt.politics.libertarian
Path: news2.digex.net!digex.net!not-for-mail
From: rmg3@access5.digex.net (Robert Grumbine)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.libertarian,talk.environment,alt.president.clinton,alt.politics.usa.republican,alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich,alt.politics.usa.misc,alt.politics.usa.constitution,alt.politics.usa.congress,alt.politics.reform,alt.politics.libertarian,alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.clinton,alt.news-media,alt.journalism,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.current-events.usa,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Re: More about the OZONE fraud
Followup-To: talk.environment
Date: 14 Jul 1996 15:33:54 -0400
Organization: Under construction
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <4sbi32$o0q@access5.digex.net>
References: <4oomdn$j32@alpine.valleynet.com>   <31E83BAB.72D2@16stepstotheswimming.pool>
NNTP-Posting-Host: access5.digex.net
Xref: news2.digex.net talk.politics.misc:590130 talk.politics.libertarian:135880 talk.environment:68877 alt.president.clinton:101820 alt.politics.usa.republican:296702 alt.politics.usa.newt-gingrich:84962 alt.politics.usa.misc:118526 alt.politics.usa.constitution:89113 alt.politics.usa.congress:63357 alt.politics.reform:101979 alt.politics.libertarian:229262 alt.politics.correct:153830 alt.politics.clinton:310095 alt.news-media:35803 alt.journalism:54764 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:447018 alt.current-events.usa:28063 alt.conspiracy:209382

In article <31E83BAB.72D2@16stepstotheswimming.pool>,
Rich Newtging   wrote:
>I would like someone who is better versed in this subject than I am to 
>supply a simple answer to a simple question.
>I have stipulated before that cfc's in all liklihood do have harmful 
>effects on ozone - lab tests seem to confirm. BUT - CFC's are HEAVIER 
>THAN AIR. When released into the atmosphere, they sink RIGHT TO THE 
>GROUND. 
>I don't care what happens in the lab...if CFC's sink, not rise, then 
>they aren't going to get up TO the ozone layer to do any damage.

  Let's follow this logic through.  The molecular weight of CFC's is
large.  Let's call it 100 (though in fact there is a large range).
Below is a table of the molecular weight of some gases of interest:
Water Vapor    18
Nitrogen       28
'AIR'          29
Oxygen         32
Argon          40
Carbon Dioxide 44
Ozone          48
CFC's         over 100

  If that principle were to apply to the troposphere and stratosphere,
then there could be no ozone layer in the stratosphere (the ozone would
sink), CFC's, Ozone, Carbon Dioxide, and Argon would constitute the
lowest 100 meters of the atmosphere (relative to sea level) -- so much
for breathing, and water vapor would not exist near the surface at all
as it is far to light to stay down here.  The next level should be 
scorched barren from the presence of a 100% oxygen layer.

  In fact, however, aside from water vapor (due to clouds) and chemically
active gases (ozone, cfc's in the upper stratosphere), the composition
of the lowest 100 km of the atmosphere is _observed_ to be uniform.
These observations go back at least to the 1930's.

  The reason that you and I can breathe a primarily oxygen-nitrogen
atmosphere is that the atmosphere in the lowest 100 km is quite 
turbulent and the gravitational separation is simply overwhelmed by
the turbulence.  _Above_ 100 km, there isn't so much turbulence, and
the atmosphere does separate gravitationally.  (Again, observed,
though the observations are more recent.)

  Followups to talk.environment.

-- 
Robert Grumbine rmg3@access.digex.net
Sagredo (Galileo Galilei) "You present these recondite matters with too much 
evidence and ease; this great facility makes them less appreciated than they 
would be had they been presented in a more abstruse manner." Two New Sciences