134a Refrigerant
#491
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:romdnQhg2f-1ejvfRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:6phpe.630$%j7.347@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com. ..
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:ouednXGiVs8SzDjfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
> >> Evidence exists that the polar vortex is a natural phenomenon and
existed
> >> before cfc's were widely used. Has to do with the large temperature
> >> variation between the Antarctic continent and the surrounding
ocean...the
> >> land mass is supercooled during the Antarctic winter, and the increased
> >> temperature varaiation causes massive upper-level winds that disperse
the
> >> atmospheric ozone over the Antarctic.
> >
> > Exactly... the CFC's didn't cause the vortex, but the vortex
> > exacerbates the CFC problem. Glad to see you're finally
> > coming around... :)
> So you're admitting that cfc's don't cause the ozone hole. Thank you.
>
Matt, come back when you learn how to read. Of course,
CFC's don't cause the ozone hole... *God* caused the
ozone hole, to pay us back for Mormonism and 'Friends'.
__
Steve
..
#492
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:romdnQhg2f-1ejvfRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:6phpe.630$%j7.347@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com. ..
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:ouednXGiVs8SzDjfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
> >> Evidence exists that the polar vortex is a natural phenomenon and
existed
> >> before cfc's were widely used. Has to do with the large temperature
> >> variation between the Antarctic continent and the surrounding
ocean...the
> >> land mass is supercooled during the Antarctic winter, and the increased
> >> temperature varaiation causes massive upper-level winds that disperse
the
> >> atmospheric ozone over the Antarctic.
> >
> > Exactly... the CFC's didn't cause the vortex, but the vortex
> > exacerbates the CFC problem. Glad to see you're finally
> > coming around... :)
> So you're admitting that cfc's don't cause the ozone hole. Thank you.
>
Matt, come back when you learn how to read. Of course,
CFC's don't cause the ozone hole... *God* caused the
ozone hole, to pay us back for Mormonism and 'Friends'.
__
Steve
..
#493
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:romdnQhg2f-1ejvfRVn-sQ@comcast.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:6phpe.630$%j7.347@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com. ..
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:ouednXGiVs8SzDjfRVn-uw@comcast.com...
> >> Evidence exists that the polar vortex is a natural phenomenon and
existed
> >> before cfc's were widely used. Has to do with the large temperature
> >> variation between the Antarctic continent and the surrounding
ocean...the
> >> land mass is supercooled during the Antarctic winter, and the increased
> >> temperature varaiation causes massive upper-level winds that disperse
the
> >> atmospheric ozone over the Antarctic.
> >
> > Exactly... the CFC's didn't cause the vortex, but the vortex
> > exacerbates the CFC problem. Glad to see you're finally
> > coming around... :)
> So you're admitting that cfc's don't cause the ozone hole. Thank you.
>
Matt, come back when you learn how to read. Of course,
CFC's don't cause the ozone hole... *God* caused the
ozone hole, to pay us back for Mormonism and 'Friends'.
__
Steve
..
#494
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:11acv6qm66l6l11@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:RHupe.2218$%j7.145@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com ...
> >> ?? thats the SAME CRAP youve been posting! ill quote and capitalize
my
> >> point that removes the whole "conclusive" thing im asking for: "They
have
> >> found that the emissions of the human-produced halocarbons, plus the
much
> >> smaller contribution from natural sources, COULD account for all of the
> >> stratospheric chlorine."
> >> "could". nothing conclusive there.
> >
> > You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i cannot provide conclusive evidence, nate"
You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
>
> ......i already told you that! :-)
>
>
>> > Why is it not all Argon
>> > down here? By your ignorance, we should all be dead
>> > now... the Oxygen layer would be several thousand feet up.
> > It's one percent of the air
> > we breathe
>
> DUH! the concentration isnt high enough to cause a problem.
DUH! Keep saying it... it's a good look for you...
You want it both ways.... Chlorine can't rise, because it's
heavier than air. Argon doesn't fall, because it's concentration
is small. Just exactly what grade in school did you complete?
>
>
> > How about if I tell you that I've been a tech
>
> id have to ask you to prove it by showing your epa certification. id be
> glad to show you mine.
I didnt' say a 'licensed' tech...
>
> > How about if I tell you that
> > the effects of this vented refrigerant can't be
> > hidden, and are cumulative?
>
> i would ONCE AGAIN ask you for conclusive evidence.
You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
I posted an article noting that CFC's had been
found in the stratosphere, along with their
breakdown products, in the right concentrations
to support the proposed mechanisms.
> > What do conservatives have, clusterf*cks?
>
> realistic goals. :-)
Like the liberation of Iraq? Like finding bin Laden?
> > No, refrigerant is vented so freely because the tech is
> > lazy... and doesn't give a damn.
>
> i cant believe that it all boils down to laziness. sure some of it does,
> but the majority knows better. ive never met another tech who believed
that
> refrigerant was hazardous to our environment. if i believed it were i
would
> take great precautions, and i know my fellow technicians would as well.
You already asserted that you follow the rules...
were you lying *then*, or are you lying *now*?
> > Yeah, I go to cheeseball HVAC techs for my
> > atmospheric science, just like you do... not.
>
> you claimed the hvac industry agrees with your idealogy. i know better.
Cite, or smoke crack.
> > kinda funny that it
> > pisses you off, saving your descendants from
> > skin cancer and all....
>
> it doesnt "**** me off". i simply hate bad information, particulary when
> its driven by ANY political agenda.
Bad information! BAD! Go to your room!
I posted stuff from scientists... can you post
stuff from scientists? You haven't, so far...
if wishes were fishes, you'd smell like the Fulton
Fish Market.
> > Then why is it there in conjunction with CFC's?
>
> show me something CONCLUSIVE that proves refrigerant cfc's are there.
until
> then ill continue to point out that youre spouting agenda driven
speculation
> and belief, but nothing factual or proven in any way.
http://www.al.noaa.gov/WWWHD/pubdocs...nt98/faq3.html
<>
Several pieces of evidence combine to establish human-produced halocarbons
as the primary source of stratospheric chlorine. First, measurements have
********shown that the chlorinated species that rise to the
stratosphere******* are primarily manufactured compounds [mainly CFCs,
carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and the hydrochlorofluorocarbon
(HCFC) substitutes for CFCs], together with small amounts of hydrochloric
acid (HCl) and methyl chloride (CH3Cl), which are partly natural in origin.
Second, researchers have measured nearly all known gases containing chlorine
in the stratosphere. They have found that the emissions of the
human-produced halocarbons, plus the much smaller contribution from natural
sources, could account for all of the stratospheric chlorine. Third, the
increase in total stratospheric chlorine measured between 1980 and 1998
corresponds to the known increases in concentrations of human-produced
halocarbons during that time.
</>
Post a link... this one *shows* that manufactured chlorinated species
*rise to the stratosphere*. It's from the NOAA... go ahead, impugn
them.
__
Steve
..
#495
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:11acv6qm66l6l11@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:RHupe.2218$%j7.145@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com ...
> >> ?? thats the SAME CRAP youve been posting! ill quote and capitalize
my
> >> point that removes the whole "conclusive" thing im asking for: "They
have
> >> found that the emissions of the human-produced halocarbons, plus the
much
> >> smaller contribution from natural sources, COULD account for all of the
> >> stratospheric chlorine."
> >> "could". nothing conclusive there.
> >
> > You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i cannot provide conclusive evidence, nate"
You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
>
> ......i already told you that! :-)
>
>
>> > Why is it not all Argon
>> > down here? By your ignorance, we should all be dead
>> > now... the Oxygen layer would be several thousand feet up.
> > It's one percent of the air
> > we breathe
>
> DUH! the concentration isnt high enough to cause a problem.
DUH! Keep saying it... it's a good look for you...
You want it both ways.... Chlorine can't rise, because it's
heavier than air. Argon doesn't fall, because it's concentration
is small. Just exactly what grade in school did you complete?
>
>
> > How about if I tell you that I've been a tech
>
> id have to ask you to prove it by showing your epa certification. id be
> glad to show you mine.
I didnt' say a 'licensed' tech...
>
> > How about if I tell you that
> > the effects of this vented refrigerant can't be
> > hidden, and are cumulative?
>
> i would ONCE AGAIN ask you for conclusive evidence.
You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
I posted an article noting that CFC's had been
found in the stratosphere, along with their
breakdown products, in the right concentrations
to support the proposed mechanisms.
> > What do conservatives have, clusterf*cks?
>
> realistic goals. :-)
Like the liberation of Iraq? Like finding bin Laden?
> > No, refrigerant is vented so freely because the tech is
> > lazy... and doesn't give a damn.
>
> i cant believe that it all boils down to laziness. sure some of it does,
> but the majority knows better. ive never met another tech who believed
that
> refrigerant was hazardous to our environment. if i believed it were i
would
> take great precautions, and i know my fellow technicians would as well.
You already asserted that you follow the rules...
were you lying *then*, or are you lying *now*?
> > Yeah, I go to cheeseball HVAC techs for my
> > atmospheric science, just like you do... not.
>
> you claimed the hvac industry agrees with your idealogy. i know better.
Cite, or smoke crack.
> > kinda funny that it
> > pisses you off, saving your descendants from
> > skin cancer and all....
>
> it doesnt "**** me off". i simply hate bad information, particulary when
> its driven by ANY political agenda.
Bad information! BAD! Go to your room!
I posted stuff from scientists... can you post
stuff from scientists? You haven't, so far...
if wishes were fishes, you'd smell like the Fulton
Fish Market.
> > Then why is it there in conjunction with CFC's?
>
> show me something CONCLUSIVE that proves refrigerant cfc's are there.
until
> then ill continue to point out that youre spouting agenda driven
speculation
> and belief, but nothing factual or proven in any way.
http://www.al.noaa.gov/WWWHD/pubdocs...nt98/faq3.html
<>
Several pieces of evidence combine to establish human-produced halocarbons
as the primary source of stratospheric chlorine. First, measurements have
********shown that the chlorinated species that rise to the
stratosphere******* are primarily manufactured compounds [mainly CFCs,
carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and the hydrochlorofluorocarbon
(HCFC) substitutes for CFCs], together with small amounts of hydrochloric
acid (HCl) and methyl chloride (CH3Cl), which are partly natural in origin.
Second, researchers have measured nearly all known gases containing chlorine
in the stratosphere. They have found that the emissions of the
human-produced halocarbons, plus the much smaller contribution from natural
sources, could account for all of the stratospheric chlorine. Third, the
increase in total stratospheric chlorine measured between 1980 and 1998
corresponds to the known increases in concentrations of human-produced
halocarbons during that time.
</>
Post a link... this one *shows* that manufactured chlorinated species
*rise to the stratosphere*. It's from the NOAA... go ahead, impugn
them.
__
Steve
..
#496
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:11acv6qm66l6l11@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:RHupe.2218$%j7.145@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com ...
> >> ?? thats the SAME CRAP youve been posting! ill quote and capitalize
my
> >> point that removes the whole "conclusive" thing im asking for: "They
have
> >> found that the emissions of the human-produced halocarbons, plus the
much
> >> smaller contribution from natural sources, COULD account for all of the
> >> stratospheric chlorine."
> >> "could". nothing conclusive there.
> >
> > You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i cannot provide conclusive evidence, nate"
You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
>
> ......i already told you that! :-)
>
>
>> > Why is it not all Argon
>> > down here? By your ignorance, we should all be dead
>> > now... the Oxygen layer would be several thousand feet up.
> > It's one percent of the air
> > we breathe
>
> DUH! the concentration isnt high enough to cause a problem.
DUH! Keep saying it... it's a good look for you...
You want it both ways.... Chlorine can't rise, because it's
heavier than air. Argon doesn't fall, because it's concentration
is small. Just exactly what grade in school did you complete?
>
>
> > How about if I tell you that I've been a tech
>
> id have to ask you to prove it by showing your epa certification. id be
> glad to show you mine.
I didnt' say a 'licensed' tech...
>
> > How about if I tell you that
> > the effects of this vented refrigerant can't be
> > hidden, and are cumulative?
>
> i would ONCE AGAIN ask you for conclusive evidence.
You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
I posted an article noting that CFC's had been
found in the stratosphere, along with their
breakdown products, in the right concentrations
to support the proposed mechanisms.
> > What do conservatives have, clusterf*cks?
>
> realistic goals. :-)
Like the liberation of Iraq? Like finding bin Laden?
> > No, refrigerant is vented so freely because the tech is
> > lazy... and doesn't give a damn.
>
> i cant believe that it all boils down to laziness. sure some of it does,
> but the majority knows better. ive never met another tech who believed
that
> refrigerant was hazardous to our environment. if i believed it were i
would
> take great precautions, and i know my fellow technicians would as well.
You already asserted that you follow the rules...
were you lying *then*, or are you lying *now*?
> > Yeah, I go to cheeseball HVAC techs for my
> > atmospheric science, just like you do... not.
>
> you claimed the hvac industry agrees with your idealogy. i know better.
Cite, or smoke crack.
> > kinda funny that it
> > pisses you off, saving your descendants from
> > skin cancer and all....
>
> it doesnt "**** me off". i simply hate bad information, particulary when
> its driven by ANY political agenda.
Bad information! BAD! Go to your room!
I posted stuff from scientists... can you post
stuff from scientists? You haven't, so far...
if wishes were fishes, you'd smell like the Fulton
Fish Market.
> > Then why is it there in conjunction with CFC's?
>
> show me something CONCLUSIVE that proves refrigerant cfc's are there.
until
> then ill continue to point out that youre spouting agenda driven
speculation
> and belief, but nothing factual or proven in any way.
http://www.al.noaa.gov/WWWHD/pubdocs...nt98/faq3.html
<>
Several pieces of evidence combine to establish human-produced halocarbons
as the primary source of stratospheric chlorine. First, measurements have
********shown that the chlorinated species that rise to the
stratosphere******* are primarily manufactured compounds [mainly CFCs,
carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and the hydrochlorofluorocarbon
(HCFC) substitutes for CFCs], together with small amounts of hydrochloric
acid (HCl) and methyl chloride (CH3Cl), which are partly natural in origin.
Second, researchers have measured nearly all known gases containing chlorine
in the stratosphere. They have found that the emissions of the
human-produced halocarbons, plus the much smaller contribution from natural
sources, could account for all of the stratospheric chlorine. Third, the
increase in total stratospheric chlorine measured between 1980 and 1998
corresponds to the known increases in concentrations of human-produced
halocarbons during that time.
</>
Post a link... this one *shows* that manufactured chlorinated species
*rise to the stratosphere*. It's from the NOAA... go ahead, impugn
them.
__
Steve
..
#497
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message
news:11acv6qm66l6l11@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:RHupe.2218$%j7.145@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com ...
> >> ?? thats the SAME CRAP youve been posting! ill quote and capitalize
my
> >> point that removes the whole "conclusive" thing im asking for: "They
have
> >> found that the emissions of the human-produced halocarbons, plus the
much
> >> smaller contribution from natural sources, COULD account for all of the
> >> stratospheric chlorine."
> >> "could". nothing conclusive there.
> >
> > You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i cannot provide conclusive evidence, nate"
You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
>
> ......i already told you that! :-)
>
>
>> > Why is it not all Argon
>> > down here? By your ignorance, we should all be dead
>> > now... the Oxygen layer would be several thousand feet up.
> > It's one percent of the air
> > we breathe
>
> DUH! the concentration isnt high enough to cause a problem.
DUH! Keep saying it... it's a good look for you...
You want it both ways.... Chlorine can't rise, because it's
heavier than air. Argon doesn't fall, because it's concentration
is small. Just exactly what grade in school did you complete?
>
>
> > How about if I tell you that I've been a tech
>
> id have to ask you to prove it by showing your epa certification. id be
> glad to show you mine.
I didnt' say a 'licensed' tech...
>
> > How about if I tell you that
> > the effects of this vented refrigerant can't be
> > hidden, and are cumulative?
>
> i would ONCE AGAIN ask you for conclusive evidence.
You won't be persuaded... we all realize this.
I posted an article noting that CFC's had been
found in the stratosphere, along with their
breakdown products, in the right concentrations
to support the proposed mechanisms.
> > What do conservatives have, clusterf*cks?
>
> realistic goals. :-)
Like the liberation of Iraq? Like finding bin Laden?
> > No, refrigerant is vented so freely because the tech is
> > lazy... and doesn't give a damn.
>
> i cant believe that it all boils down to laziness. sure some of it does,
> but the majority knows better. ive never met another tech who believed
that
> refrigerant was hazardous to our environment. if i believed it were i
would
> take great precautions, and i know my fellow technicians would as well.
You already asserted that you follow the rules...
were you lying *then*, or are you lying *now*?
> > Yeah, I go to cheeseball HVAC techs for my
> > atmospheric science, just like you do... not.
>
> you claimed the hvac industry agrees with your idealogy. i know better.
Cite, or smoke crack.
> > kinda funny that it
> > pisses you off, saving your descendants from
> > skin cancer and all....
>
> it doesnt "**** me off". i simply hate bad information, particulary when
> its driven by ANY political agenda.
Bad information! BAD! Go to your room!
I posted stuff from scientists... can you post
stuff from scientists? You haven't, so far...
if wishes were fishes, you'd smell like the Fulton
Fish Market.
> > Then why is it there in conjunction with CFC's?
>
> show me something CONCLUSIVE that proves refrigerant cfc's are there.
until
> then ill continue to point out that youre spouting agenda driven
speculation
> and belief, but nothing factual or proven in any way.
http://www.al.noaa.gov/WWWHD/pubdocs...nt98/faq3.html
<>
Several pieces of evidence combine to establish human-produced halocarbons
as the primary source of stratospheric chlorine. First, measurements have
********shown that the chlorinated species that rise to the
stratosphere******* are primarily manufactured compounds [mainly CFCs,
carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and the hydrochlorofluorocarbon
(HCFC) substitutes for CFCs], together with small amounts of hydrochloric
acid (HCl) and methyl chloride (CH3Cl), which are partly natural in origin.
Second, researchers have measured nearly all known gases containing chlorine
in the stratosphere. They have found that the emissions of the
human-produced halocarbons, plus the much smaller contribution from natural
sources, could account for all of the stratospheric chlorine. Third, the
increase in total stratospheric chlorine measured between 1980 and 1998
corresponds to the known increases in concentrations of human-produced
halocarbons during that time.
</>
Post a link... this one *shows* that manufactured chlorinated species
*rise to the stratosphere*. It's from the NOAA... go ahead, impugn
them.
__
Steve
..
#498
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:L4mdnbvJXs13ezvfRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
> You're making the assumption that I am a Bush-worshipping Dittohead.
>
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:YFhpe.636$%j7.521@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com. ..
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:EaCdnYeq9eRZyTjfRVn-tg@comcast.com...
> >> You're the kind of liberal that gives the rest of us a bad name. Rush
is
> >> a
> >> pompous ***, so I didn't even know he had agreed with it.
> >
> > ??
> >
> This
> > means that CFC's hang around for hundreds of
> > years, until they hit the upper atmosphere.
> > __
> > Steve
>
> CFC's haven't been around for hundreds of years, that's why the model is
> flawed.
Top-posting *and* bottom posting... that's a new one on me!
Matt, when you can hang with the big dogs, come back...
otherwise, just get back on the porch.
__
Steve
..
#499
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:L4mdnbvJXs13ezvfRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
> You're making the assumption that I am a Bush-worshipping Dittohead.
>
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:YFhpe.636$%j7.521@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com. ..
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:EaCdnYeq9eRZyTjfRVn-tg@comcast.com...
> >> You're the kind of liberal that gives the rest of us a bad name. Rush
is
> >> a
> >> pompous ***, so I didn't even know he had agreed with it.
> >
> > ??
> >
> This
> > means that CFC's hang around for hundreds of
> > years, until they hit the upper atmosphere.
> > __
> > Steve
>
> CFC's haven't been around for hundreds of years, that's why the model is
> flawed.
Top-posting *and* bottom posting... that's a new one on me!
Matt, when you can hang with the big dogs, come back...
otherwise, just get back on the porch.
__
Steve
..
#500
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
news:L4mdnbvJXs13ezvfRVn-1Q@comcast.com...
> You're making the assumption that I am a Bush-worshipping Dittohead.
>
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:YFhpe.636$%j7.521@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com. ..
> >
> > "Matt Macchiarolo" <matt@nospamplease.com> wrote in message
> > news:EaCdnYeq9eRZyTjfRVn-tg@comcast.com...
> >> You're the kind of liberal that gives the rest of us a bad name. Rush
is
> >> a
> >> pompous ***, so I didn't even know he had agreed with it.
> >
> > ??
> >
> This
> > means that CFC's hang around for hundreds of
> > years, until they hit the upper atmosphere.
> > __
> > Steve
>
> CFC's haven't been around for hundreds of years, that's why the model is
> flawed.
Top-posting *and* bottom posting... that's a new one on me!
Matt, when you can hang with the big dogs, come back...
otherwise, just get back on the porch.
__
Steve
..