Not quite as simple as that, Mick. While it's true that chlorinated refrigerants are typically high-molecular weight and dense, the atmosphere isn't a static system. There's constant movement with the temperature differential caused by the combination of sunlight and gravity; warm air close to the Earth's surface (and any pollutants in it) gets dragged upward until it cools and falls again. This means that the composition of the atmosphere is pretty much homogeneous regardless of altitude, like having a ceiling fan running in a warm room.Son of a gun-ner wrote:The particular gas/chemical in question that was the cause of the hole all the way up high in the sky is actually a heavy gas/chemical, one that was used in the ground hugging mustard gas that sadly Saddam Hussein had used on the Kurds (for me, the main reason he had to go).
"Follow the money" is usually a good rule of thumb, but there's really no scientific argument against banning CFCs. Ozone levels do fluctuate over time, but not as significantly as they did in the 50-odd years CFCs were in use. The current crop of HFCs and PFCs aren't as effective as CFCs, nobody would bother making them if the alternative weren't so harmful.
It really wouldn't have been. Even if the Nazis' crimes against humanity hadn't made them pariahs to the rest of the world, their flawed economic model, lack of manpower/resources and general incompetence would have ensured a Soviet victory regardless. Having the British, Americans, Canadians, French, Australians and New Zealanders et al. on side merely sped things up.Jnewboy wrote:Its weird to think what would have happened if all those planes and pilots had been used on the Eastern Front. Even more so if they had not wasted all those men and equipment in Africa. If Germany and England had come to an understanding or at least agreed to a lasting cease fire the Eastern Front would have been very different.