Lots of evidence that ozone hole is historically new development
HI #17,
Did you not look at the data link above that showed there wasn't a hole in the 70s, it kept increasing and peaked in 1993, when CFCs and Mt. Pinatubo combined for a double whammy?
Check out the geophysical journals for more corroboration--you have to go to the primary sources/scientific journals if you want to get the true story, which is typically more complex than what is reported in popular media. For instance, check out the following:
GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 31, L04116, 4 PP., 2004
doi:10.1029/2003GL018844
Arctic ozone loss and climate change
(Abstract follows)
"We report the first empirical quantification of the relation between winter-spring loss of Arctic ozone and changes in stratospheric climate. Our observations show that ?15 DU additional loss of column ozone can be expected per Kelvin cooling of the Arctic lower stratosphere, an impact nearly three times larger than current model simulations suggest. We show that stratospheric climate conditions became significantly more favorable for large Arctic ozone losses over the past four decades; i.e., the maximum potential for formation of polar stratospheric clouds increased steadily by a factor of three. Severe Arctic ozone loss during the past decade occurred as a result of the combined effect of this long-term climate change and the anthropogenic increase in stratospheric halogens."
Translation: it's not just anthropogenic CFCs, its anthropogenic climate change too.
