From: len@schur.math.nwu.edu (Len Evens)
Subject: Re: Ozone ADDITION, not depletion?
Organization: Dept of Math, Northwestern Univ
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:06:01 GMT

In article <1993Jan21.000603.12125@gn.ecn.purdue.edu> constant@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Tino) writes:
>In article <1993Jan20.222158.20969@wega.rz.uni-ulm.de> SCHLOERER@rzmain.rz.uni-ulm.de (Jan Schloerer) writes:
>>May we have a reference, please ?   This might merit consideration or,
>>which I admittedly suspect, it might be another one of those errors like
>>"Dobson saw an ozone hole in 1956"  
>
>I'm sorry that you have such a problem with hard facts, Jan.
>
>Read:
> 
>"...the values [at Halley Bay] for September and October 1956 were about
> 150 [dobson] units below what was expected. In November the ozone values
> suddenly jumped up to those expected from the Spitzbergen [near the North
> Pole] results. It was not until a year later, when the same type of annual
> variation was repeated, that we realized that the early results were indeed
> correct and that Halley Bay showed most interesting difference from other
> parts of the world. It was clear that the winter vortex over the South 
> Pole was maintained late into the spring and that this kept the ozone 
> values low. When it suddenly broke up in November both the ozone values 
> and the stratosphere temperatures suddenly rose."
>
>          - Gordon M.B. Dobson, "Forty Years' Research on Atmospheric 
>            Ozone at Oxford: A History," _Applied Optics_, March 1968.
>
>ALSO
>
>P. Rigaud and B. Leroy, "Presumptive Evidence for a Low Value of Total Ozone 
>Content above Antarctica in September, 1958," _Annales Geophysicae_, Vol. 11
>
>WILL TELL YOU THAT IN 1958 THE OZONE HOLE WAS DEEPER IN ANTARCTICA THAN
>ANY OTHER RECORDED VALUES!!!
>
>
>Please explain this one. Anyone?
>
>Tino
>-- 
>     "Here are the young men, the weight on their shoulders..." - J.D.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>             Purdue University School of Nuclear Engineering
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Has anyone in this newsgroup heard of an infinite loop?

It goes this way.   

Someone posts a quote or paraphrase on the 1950's observations.   
Someone does a thorough analysis explaining why the quotes are out
of context and don't show what the the previous poster claims.
Someone posts a quote or paraphrase on the 1950's observations.   
Someone does a thorough analysis explaining why the quotes are out
of context and don't show what the the previous poster claims.
Someone posts a quote or paraphrase on the 1950's observations.   
Someone does a thorough analysis explaining why the quotes are out
of context and don't show what the the previous poster claims.
Someone posts a quote or paraphrase on the 1950's observations.   
Someone does a thorough analysis explaining why the quotes are out
of context and don't show what the the previous poster claims.
.
.
.

Leonard Evens      len@math.nwu.edu      708-491-5537
Dept. of Mathematics, Northwestern Univ., Evanston, IL 60208
From: alanm@hpindda.cup.hp.com (Alan McGowen)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 22:39:42 GMT
Subject: Re: Temperate zone habitat loss
Organization: HP Information Networks, Cupertino, CA