How we Solved the Problem with the Ozone Hole? 

same

Excrator minecraft is immortal

@@susfungus no minecraft is eternity

Me too

I am an OG minecrafter I Rember playing when there were only 3 types of wood. oak. birch. spruce.

You're underrated.

exactly

oh i've remember something about that line..

ah history of the world i guess

Not anymore there's a blanket CFC : ima bout to end this man's whole career

@@sodyplays9947 let's check back on the ozone layer: GONE

Ok I’m not claiming to be an expert but I have enough scientific knowledge to say that UV B would not wipe out all life or even all terrestrial life. Life is resilient and there are lots of ways to avoid damage from UVB

@@cimachu Okay, let's rephrase that then. Companies would rather wipe out a large chunk of life on earth, greatly increase cancer rates for everyone, and completely cripple basically all economies. Is that better?

Best around yuh

Max Chu changed it, better now? 🧐

Rashed125 lmao damn I wasn’t tryna start a debate I was just making a statement

Do keep in mind that things like melting ice caps are very easily visible. What it is lacking is a sense of urgency and proximity. Dying is very close to one's person. The artic isn't all that relatable. But realizing that a deadly problem will come your way in your lifetime and that death is certain is a very powerful message which global warming simply lacks. Saying sealrvels will rise over 100 years makes most people think "Ill be dead by then, I don't care". Which is also why I personally think that the new generation (born after 2000) is a lot more pro-green because it will affect them the most.

I don't think they're evil corporations like the climate alarmists say just lazy and irresponsible, I think we can all agree, hey let's clean up our home it's the only planet we have ok? Not if you don't do it you are evil!!!!! You a literally hitler!!!! That's how you create detractors and skeptics and how you kill your message. I don't like climate skeptics but I don't like climate alarmists either. I just focus on what NASA and the real scientists say not the angry mob.

The thing is, all the things you described were problems that already happened that needed solving. Climate change is a future problem, which for some reason, for some people, it means it doesn't matter. Yet.

So none of you noticed the new temperature records the past few years? Warmer summers the past few years? Ice caps melting? A lot less snow in the winters? Well ... I guess people want to be blind to the obvious.

@@frankvandendool882 Yeah it didn't snow at all where I live last winter.

I see my country hanging out below playing buddy buddy with Russia ;D

also, why are there ukraine, belarus russia displayed when all of them were part of the soviet union back then?

@@catmomcharlotte1954 ukraine and belarus had its own seat in un by 1985...no other soviet country had that that's probably why

Nightsky Yea who hasn’t heard of the fat hole in the ozone that was caused by hoomans? Hoomans bad

Did you pay attention in school?

Because it was the big scary of the late 90s, you could just be to young. Don't worry in the 80s and early 90s it was the world was going to freeze. And another ice age was starting. Now we have a hole in the ozone and global warming

Martinho Tavares you have to pay attention in school? - Everyone that I attended school with

Because u dont go to school.

@Kraptonite sadly, when the majority of the population has no interest in science or world affairs, it is difficult to attain an enlightened civilisation. As long as trash like "living with the Kardashians" is viable TV, you know society is fucked.

@@bigsmall246, it might have something to do with context. If the same guy ranting on your screen about climate change, is also the guy ranting about transgenderism, racism, etc, you tend to just say "okay, he's a loony toon." I for one, understand the science behind global climate change, but I cannot endorse, vote, or support any major action on it until the scientific community boots out the political hucksters tacking on a whole bunch of crap that have nothing to do with climate change.

@@jsmith42690 so it will be business as usual for you until some capable politician comes along? Actually, one such politician has already come and gone. His name is Barack Obama.

@@bigsmall246 HAHAHAHA. Burst out laughing. You had me their buddy. Obama is a dirty fucking warmonger and child killer.

@@omarabuaita3858 Obama didn't start any wars. If the US had pulled out from middle east earlier, ISIS would have appeared earlier

Yeah that irked me a lot... Interesting topic on its own though, would highly recommend anyone reading this to research it too.

No look up foundation for economic education

@@Masonpapa stfu

Capitalism! Yay!

Antivaxxers: That's where you're wrong kiddo

Well, it was small pox, there are many kinds of pox

Salute to jenner for developing the vaccine

@@chitorunya other name for smallpox: pox

What? :D

I think he is talking about COVID-19

COVER YOUR MOUTH WHEN COUGHING! 🤣🤣🤣

@@unknownuser4224 I think the keyword is "straight".

@@HistoryScope nations today dont care all that much about health and safety. Given no one is making clear policies to combat global warming and many nations like the US already left preestabled treaties that were made to combat climate change. Not to mention the mismanagement and corruption going on during this pandemic is showing that humanity no longer cares for its safety.

"Polar vortex" is the reason, it accumulates the FCKW we emit around the globe to the poles (we have verified this with weather balloons fitted with FCKW detectors).

@@xXYannuschXx hmm, let's makeup something to put the blame on AVG human being instead of billionaires and oligarchs.

@@klyplays Uh, the blame was put on companies using that stuff and it was banned; the consumers had no disadvantage.

True.

That was on purpose.glad someone noticed

Same

Same

Same

Wrong

Don't forget about the next steps: 1) CC is a problem but it is too expensive to solve 2) CC is now unsolvable so let's just party until we all die. In Germany, we are on step 1: Planning for 3C, on the way to 4C. And don't ask about the worst case scenario: You "likely" get 1.5-4.5 per doubling of CO2 (most likely value = 3C). If you get very unlucky, it gets way worse.

getting pretty indisputable? From what I've known it's been indisputable for at least 20 years now, it's just some people stick their fingers in their ears whenever they see the evidence. the fact that people simply denying cold hard evidence is what has let us not work on this issue is astounding to me

@@Lysergic_cold hard evidence like what? Like the government saying our gas burning vehicles are the problem, not the chemical that a few decades ago they said was completely safe? That’s about as cold hard of evidence as doctors in the 60s saying cigarettes are a medicine, but sure, consider yourself smarter than the people who can open their eyes and see what is actually happening.

@@libidinousbear4563 I mean you can totally run off with your assumptions and act like it's a slam-dunk argument. It doesn't affect me or anybody else capable of critical thinking. Or, you can look at independent studies completely disconnected from the governments support and framework, something you seem to be terrified of, and recognize that there is a connection between increasing CO2 levels and a rise in global tempurature, alongaide the problem of pollution in the ocean, ocean acidification and the risk of algae dying off from these sudden and drastic changes in both acidity and tempurate. But you don't care about that. Which is why I don't care at all about what you think. Ironically, you consider yourself smarter than indepentent scientists, like you claim about me. You don't care about being right, just about winning arguments. Which was apparent as soon as you started running your mouth about some made-up narrative about me. Do every single human, both present and soon-to-exist a favor, and shut up. You add nothing besides conflict. Total typing time: 3 minutes. Just to really let you know you meant nothing to me in terms of responding. Im not even sober.

So true we need more nuclear power if people dont want that we will have to wait till the invention of an efficient nuclear fusion machiene

@@Lscott-fk2sn people talk about how nuclear waste lasts for centuries and is difficult to contain, but they do not talk about how fossil fuels are creating smog today and killing thousands via lung diseases. Not to mention the economic losses from climate change when crops fail, and the costs to relocate climate refugees

bigsmall246 so true, additionally more people have died building hydroelectrics than all direct and indirect fatalities from nuclear power

Yes they would still survive. The Earth hasn't had the ozone layer throughout all of history, so early earth actually did have a baren surface just like the video explains. However, life was able to survive in the ocean because water blocks UV-b light (and most light in general) just like ozone does.

Which is why I specifically pointed towards land-based life. The sea would be fine, except the top layer, perhaps and sea animals relying on surface life

Creating electrucity it's simple, nuclear, the problem is to store it so it can be used in cars or planes (on planes seems imposible)

@@alonsop9861 nuclear and then you deplete all the natural uranium sources. what then

@@polishedmeat6399 nuclear is a time winning alternative, during that time we must figure out another source. but it is important to stop spiting greenhouse gases as soon as posible

@@alonsop9861 by the time we fully convert to nuclear and get enough resources to build all the nuclear plants i think we would already find a alternative source

Better to go nuclear than waiting for that solution you speak of, while still burning oil, gas, and coal.

True, true, but consider this: We get sooooo much money!

Most of it is solving itself already luckily. The age of oil is over, energy is now shifting from resources to technology because of economic incentives. Doing the right thing is no longer an ideology, it is becomming the sensible economic thing to do. There is going to be large disruption in energy and transportation in the 2020's. So that's already positive. It is just the question if it will be in time. Political focus and funding should shift towards co2 extraction from the atmosphere and reforestation.

Okay How about we stop destroying ourselves in the west first and hold the biggest polluters responsible? Better yet we can all switch to Nuclear power! Cheap, efficient, barely polutes...Oh...Right...Activists had a decades long fearmongering campaign since nuclear power is actually A SOLUTION

@ no it isn't. It is obsolete technology. But go ahead and invest in a couple of new nuclear plants 👍

@@baronvonlimbourgh1716Fails like Chernobyl and Fukushima scare the public into not investing in it. But that's not the whole story both of the times it was a manual error.

"Hyper-Absorption of Radiation in our Atmosphere" would probably do the trick. If anyone uses that for their title in an article i simply wish to be credited as a co-signer of the article

or throw in acceleration in there to make people think short-term "The Accelerating Hyper-Absorption of Radiation in our Atmosphere"

The bluer it gets the more ozone he just chose a different colour it confused me too at first

@@Lscott-fk2sn yeah a bit unintuitive

No, it actually "heals" itself with the help of wind and storms near the hole, multiple oxygen go up above and heated up by the sun also turn into Ozone gas, which fix the hole faster and increase amount of ozone on the layer

Read my other comments on this. But there is one thing you should be aware of. The ozone hole is a VERY different thing than just about all other environmental problems. The ozone hole protects the earth's surface from UV radiation. Without the ozone in the atmosphere UV would reach the Earth's surface. This might give you skin cancer, but that is really a very minor issue. What it would do is kill most of the plants in the world. They would be gone in less than a week. All humans would be dead in six months except those that harvested the oceans. We were really very lucky with the recovery of the ozone layer as it really would have been the end for most of us. By comparison, global warming is a very minor issue.

dude he is history scope not science scope so no

Short answer..it doesnt.

Nice.

That's of nothing had happened.