Liberals versus Deodorant

Onceler said:
"And if the left had just left both alone the CFCs produced by man would be destroying the ozone produced by man. Don't know why this is so hard for you Lorax."

Um....AND it would be destroying the stratospheric ozone, you moron. And don't try to pretend that you knew the difference between both kinds of ozone at the onset of this thread. Way too transparent.

Dano's plan? Instead of banning a toxic substance, reinstate the use of another toxic substance that destroys it (even though that other toxic substance will destroy the "good" ozone, as well).

Do you ever hear yourself?
Click to expand...
CFCs are not toxic you dense moron, in fact they were specifically invented as a non-toxic replacement for common refrigerants in use at the time in the 1920's.

You just make up shit and pass it off as science, you are flat out wrong in the above, I know you didn't lie but you are just a stupid man, so your stupidity is called out.
Feel free to make more stupid statements and I will do the same for those too - together we can build a better Lorax!
 
Who's stupid on this thread?

You started out asserting "the left wants to ban ozone itself," as though tropospheric ozone has ANYTHING to do with stratospheric ozone. You were called on it, and ignored it for as long as you could. I wouldn't let it go away, so you tried to spin your way out of it with "well, if we'd just allow CFC's again, they'd destroy all of that nasty tropospheric ozone that destroys our tissue," acknowledging that CFC's DO destroy the ozone, and somehow thinking that once the reinstated CFC's do their good work at the tropospheric level, they'll just call it a day & retire before they get up to the stratosphere.

Again - can you hear yourself? If I have mischaracterized any of the arguments you have made, please let me know exactly where....
 
C'mon, Dano? That's the best response you can muster? You're right that "toxic" was the wrong word to use with CFC's...you got me there! Too bad you ignored the rest, after...what is it that you always call it? Oh, yeah - focusing on the weakest point in my argument. In this case, misusing "toxic" when I should have used the more accurate (but a little more cumbersome) "destructive to that which protects our planet from ultraviolet rays".

Aside from this glaring hypocrisy on your part, now that we've settle that....how about addressing the issue at hand, which is your woeful lack of knowledge regarding good & bad ozone?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top