Ozone hole above Australia artificially created?

[OneSoul]

Has anyone on the forum heard about the possibility that the hole in the ozone above Australia initally had been artificially created? I attended a talk in fall 1986 during which the speaker asserted that NASA intentionally created the hole in the ozone just a few years prior. For those who remember that era, there really wasn't any talk about damage to the ozone layer before this period. Then it appeared everywhere, to be blamed on global warming and the cumulative effect of hydrocarbon use and aerosols.

The talk was given by a person who was active in environmental and rights issues, especially women's rights in a global perspective. At the time we had understood that this was generally common knowledge in Australia, having been reported in the press there. The reason stated was that NASA was attempting to lessen the atmospheric distortion for ground-based telescopes they were operating there. When the disruption of the opening grew beyond what they intended, then came the claim that it was caused by hydrocarbon use. It could well be that this condition is actually worsened by burning hydrocarbons, but her claim was that this did not cause the hole to be created - NASA's interference did.

Further to reinforce this theory, my girlfriend of a few years later had a family acquaintance who worked as a shuttle packer in FL (one of those funny, unexpected associations). She asked him during an otherwise pleasant catching-up kind of conversation about this idea of the ozone hole being created above Australia by NASA, and then getting out of hand and subsequently being blamed by the government on burning fuels. Immediately his demeanor changed to frosty cold and he asked her "How did you hear about that?" and offered nothing else in response. That was enough confirmation for us, although I've had a hard time finding anything posted or archived to offer additional support for this. Please feel free to comment if you have encountered anything on it, because it has always bugged me that I couldn't dig up other solid evidence for it, despite first hearing it from such a good source.

 

[Peam]

I attended a talk in fall 1986 during which the speaker asserted that NASA intentionally created the hole in the ozone just a few years prior...

.... Immediately his demeanor changed to frosty cold and he asked her "How did you hear about that?" and offered nothing else in response. That was enough confirmation for us, ...

It doesn't seem to take a great deal to convince you.

.... because it has always bugged me that I couldn't dig up other solid evidence for it, despite first hearing it from such a good source.

Maybe it's true, maybe it isn't, but did it ever cross your mind that the reason you can't find anything else on it is that it's bs?

BTW, what 'good source' are you refering to? You haven't revealed it. How much effort did you put in to confirm it was a good source?

 

[OneSoul]

The presenter's name is Pat Mische; she is still writing and active in various things. My reference to her isn't a ratification of everything that she does, BTW. It was she who mentioned this, and if anything it was completely incidental to her talk. Just something that she had discovered.

At that time she was associated with a publication (quarterly, I think) called Breakthrough. I contacted their office in NY a couple of years ago to get some back issues with information on this if any were available. The difficulty there was that I had attended a talk she gave years before, while the current staff were unsure if this material was ever actually in the publication. They sent some issues from the years I suggested but these didn't have any articles on the subject. Hence my continuing search.

People's responses reveal something about themselves. In the spirit of this forum, I was asking whether others might have run into some related background on this subject. Sometimes this process isn't so quick. As I mentioned I haven't found much through library and internet searches on this but have wondered if others might have, or might be aware of individuals who can offer some verification on it.

As we know TPTB spend a lot of energy ensuring that the real reasons for some things never hit the press. It could be the reason, maybe not, that's why I'm asking. We have been fed decades of "evidence" on innumerable issues that simply reinforces itself, while the fundamental premises are wrong and the evidence is presented to support an agenda. I'd like to reach back to that time before the reasoning became standardized, asking the fundamental question of how it got created.

 

[Peam]

Thanks for your added info OneSoul. Did a quick search but couldn't find anything either.

 

[Pierre]

There are some information about the ozone layer in the Cs transcripts :

Q: [Laughter] (T) Are they saying that the loss of the ozone layer is a direct result of the approaching wave? (J) They
sure did! (T) The loss is not due to the Fluorocarbons?
A: Misinterpretation, review statement thoroughly.
Q: (J) Is removal of the ozone layer part of the frequency "fixing?"
A: Close.

A: Climate is being influenced by three factors, and soon a fourth.
Q: (L) All right, I'll take the bait; give me the three factors, and also the fourth!.
A: 1) Wave approach. 2) Chlorofluorocarbon increase in atmosphere, thus affecting ozone layer. 3) Change in the
planet's axis rotation orientation. 4) Artificial tampering by 3rd and 4th density STS forces in a number of different ways.

 

[OneSoul]

Thanks for your input, guys. I looked through the notes / did a transcripts search and found just a few mentions of the ozone thing, too. My two bits of information were just a couple of clues to go on, and sometimes little clues can lead on to a bigger truth so it was worth a shot.

Perhaps through the forum we can find someone in Australia who might have access to someone who recalls this issue or possibly to some older printed materials. In the US I haven't found much at all. Come in, Australia!

 

[Ryan]

I live in Australia, but I've never heard of what you described above. And more specifically, I've never heard of an ozone "hole" above Australia, either. According to what I've read on the subject, the hole in the ozone layer is over Antarctica.

Here's a reference link:

http://www.science.org.au/nova/004/004key.htm

 

[OneSoul]

Yes, more accurately the ozone gap is over Antarctica. Sorry for that assumption. According to that first clue the telescopes were ground-based in Australia so they tried to clear the atmosphere overhead. This would be c. early-mid 1970's, possibly a little earlier. Saw something yesterday that said some large corps took out full page ads in 1975 to try and counter the idea that chlorofluorocarbons were affecting the atmosphere. They were taking heat on it by then so this would be the timeframe. Also, I think over time this hole has migrated slightly as it has changed shape - just another wrinkle.

Here is a link to the gov't's current info: http://www.aad.gov.au/default.asp?casid=2850 There is of course a lot of similar info available online.

 

[rrraven]

I have always wondered why the southern
hemisphere should get a ozone hole first.
Isn't there a lot more people and industry
in the North ,so shouldn't the hole start there?
IMO its a cointelpro to keep us ozzies out of the sun(and other cosmic influences-like
supernovas)and to make us use 15+sun
screen -I don't touch the stuff-whose long term effects have not been documented .
RRR

 

[Marie]

IMO its a cointelpro to keep us ozzies out of the sun(and other cosmic influences-like
supernovas)and to make us use 15+sun
screen -I don't touch the stuff-whose long term effects have not been documented

Sun-care chemical proves toxic in lab tests

 

[Johnno]

I've been in Europe and Australia and the sun in Australia has a lot more "bite" for a better word. It doesn't seem to take as long to get sunburnt. It seems to have become a lot worse of late which I know sounds a litttle subjective.

It would be interesting to dig up some historical UV maps to find out just how subjective my observations are!

 

[OneSoul]

Tried to post this yesterday but it wouldn't write...
Here's a bit more ...
Turns out that several observatories opened in Australia during the 1960s - 1970s. Not so unusual I suppose since new ones are continually under construction, but here are some candidates: Tidbinbilla in NSW (1965), telemetry, communication station for Apollo missions, pulsar timing; the Parkes dish, part of NASA's Deep Space Network (NSW, 1961). These are radio telescopes, and it's uncertain whether burning off some of the ozone would benefit optical viewing, radio / microwave reception, or both.

Modern measurement of the Antarctic ozone began in 1957 apparently (www.ndsc.ncep.noaa.gov/news/freq_qu/faq6.html), so the data were all pretty recent in the 1970s. Satellite collection of ozone data started in 1979 (http://www.gsfc.nasa.gov/topstory/20020926ozonehole.html). It seems that there was a natural cycle of thinning and thickening of this layer discovered, these natural fluctuations recurring with seasonal changes (cf. http://www.ciesin.columbia.edu/docs/011-466/011-466.html). The Southern Hemisphere spring brings an increase in the rate of chemical reactions in the southern atmosphere, due to the increased levels of solar radiation. And the particular winter wind patterns over Antarctica seem to exacerbate the condition. This seems to be the reason there's a greater problem over the South Pole than the North Pole.

One more thing, NASA has done burns of the atmosphere in other places, though. One example is over Florida c. 1990 (don't know the year). That one turned the atmosphere into a rainbow of unnatural colors, from contemporary reports.

It might be helpful to refine the question towards "At some point did NASA alter the ozone above the ground-based telescopes in Australia?" I'm still looking into it when I can. Thanks, all.

 

[vinny]

some kind of Ozzie equivalent to HAARP hiding in the Australian outback in the middle of nowhere?

 

[Pierre]

Turns out that several observatories opened in Australia during the 1960s - 1970s. Not so unusual I suppose since new ones are continually under construction, but here are some candidates: Tidbinbilla in NSW (1965), telemetry, communication station for Apollo missions, pulsar timing; the Parkes dish, part of NASA's Deep Space Network (NSW, 1961). These are radio telescopes, and it's uncertain whether burning off some of the ozone would benefit optical viewing, radio / microwave reception, or both.

There is also a huge Very Low Frenquency station in Exmouth (Western Australia).

http://www(dot)boeing.com/global/Australia/BAL/DIVNetworkEnabledSystems/supportSystems.html
http:(doubleslash)maps.pomocnik.com/category/radars-telescopes/

 

[OneSoul]

I've found some generally-accessible online resources related to this topic that might help uncover some new details. Have done a few searches to date:

the Astronomical Journal and the Publications of the Astronomical Society of the Pacific:
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/AJ/search.html

an index of Australian newspapers:
http://www.newspaperindex.com/en/newspapers/Australia

Rand:
http://www.rand.org/search/pubs_search.html

Some others require enrollment in a certain school or another login. This installation of Factiva requires a University of Wollongong login: http://www.library.uow.edu.au/eresources/databases/index.html

also La Trobe:
http://www.lib.latrobe.edu.au/databases/subject.php?s=News

the State Library of NSW:
http://www.sl.nsw.gov.au/databases/?subject_id=32

the University of NSW:
http://info.library.unsw.edu.au/psl/guides/astro/astrokey.html

the Communication Institute for Online Scholarship
http://www.cios.org/

I'm looking up some things on it from "time" to "time." For me at least, looking into this question has been a way to rethink some of my assumptions about the world.

Balanced energies and greater insight, all.