"Rush's credibility would depend on when his book was written, and how much information was available at the time...I'll see what I can find out about it." - Jean X
It doesn't matter when the book was written. The fact that evidence points toward Ozone being on the mend suggests he was correct. What he made was a prediction that appears to be true. The Ozone situation was blown out of proportion by the left.
Here's another article that suggests the Ozone is on the mend.
http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/space/0...les/index.html
Have a look at this.
"Recent satellite images reveal that the ozone hole had shrunk considerably compared with the previous two years. Scientists caution that the data are insufficient to conclude that the fragile ozone layer is on the mend."
In other words, there's not sufficient evidence to say that proof is absolute but evidence would support Rush more than it would your source.
Also,
"Moreover, the hole had dwindled in size before the split because of unusually warm temperatures in the atmosphere, according to NASA ozone scientist Paul Newman."
This also supports Rush's theories concering the healing process of the environment. Rush always says that the Earth is not as fragile as the left wing environmentalists make it seem. The Nasa scientist seems to agree.
Threaded Mode
