0
There is evidence that CFC's have formed hole in the ozone. These evidence are found by scientists.
Wiki User
∙ 9y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why is the lack of direct evidence on black holes a problem for scientists?
I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.
What is the strongest evidence that cfcs are in the stratosphere?
Satellite measurements of light passing through the atmosphere
What is causing the ozone layer to get damaged?
The presence of CFCs are creating holes in the ozone layer. UV light causes CFCs to be borken down, creating chlorine atoms that are capable of breaking down ozone into oxygen in the stratosphere. The holes in the ozone layer are formed when the ozone is broken down at a faster rate than it can reform. This enables more UV radiation to reach the earth's surface and it is a greater problem in the southern hemisphere.The ozone layer is getting damaged. It is due to the harmful UV rays of the sun.
Why is the lack of direct evidence for black holes a problem for scientist?
As far as I understand, the evidence for black holes is quite firm; I don't think there is any problem.
Can rain demolish CFCs?
CFCs are neither soluble in water or reactive with it. Rain has no impact on CFCs
How did the ozone layer got holes?
Pollution. LOTS of pollution. CFCs primarily. But pollutants are now the main cause of ozone holes as CFCs have been outlawed.
Is the hole of ozone layer changing?
Yes. Countries have gradually phased out the production of CFCs. Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that were used in refrigerators and aerosols are the main destroyers of the ozone layer. Since 2000 the holes have slowed in size. Scientists hope that the holes will be completely repaired by 2050.
Why is the lack of direct evidence on black holes a problem for scientists?
I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.I am not sure it is a problem. The evidence for black holes is quite strong.
What is the strongest evidence that cfcs are in the stratosphere?
Satellite measurements of light passing through the atmosphere
What is causing the ozone layer to get damaged?
The presence of CFCs are creating holes in the ozone layer. UV light causes CFCs to be borken down, creating chlorine atoms that are capable of breaking down ozone into oxygen in the stratosphere. The holes in the ozone layer are formed when the ozone is broken down at a faster rate than it can reform. This enables more UV radiation to reach the earth's surface and it is a greater problem in the southern hemisphere.The ozone layer is getting damaged. It is due to the harmful UV rays of the sun.
If the amount of CFCs in the atmosphere decreases then what?
Ozone holes could begin to shrink in size. At least, That's what Plato told me.
Why is the lack of direct evidence for black holes a problem for scientists?
There is enough evidence for black holes - I don't see any problem there.
What is the relationship between stratospheric levels of atomic chlorine and ozone?
As chlorine increases, ozone is destroyed. Chlorine (from CFCs) is the cause of the ozone holes.
Was the earth formed by black holes scattered throughout the galaxy?
No. Earth was formed by the accretion of material in the protoplanetary disk around the newly formed sun. Black holes were not involved.
How did Sir Stephen Hawking's collect his evidence about the black holes?
He did not collect evidence. He simply proposed a "what if" then solved the equations of general relativity and quantum mechanics to find out what would happen in such a situation. The results of that analysis are his theories of microscopic black holes that evaporate and eventually explode.His theories have no effect at all on black holes that formed from stars, they don't evaporate.Note: this is exactly what Einstein did when he developed the theories of relativity. He had no evidence, he just proposed a "what if" then determined what would happen in that situation. It took others years to collect the evidence to show those predictions (strange as they were) to be correct.
Why is the lack of direct evidence for black holes a problem for scientist?
As far as I understand, the evidence for black holes is quite firm; I don't think there is any problem.
Can rain demolish CFCs?
CFCs are neither soluble in water or reactive with it. Rain has no impact on CFCs
