I was an engineer at NASA Goddard working on this problem with TOMS (Total Ozone Measuring Satellite). My boss missed out on a Nobel Prize because the project had set an exclusion on any data that read zero, thinking it could not get that low. The Brits proved it could from ground readings. We went back and checked the data. We should have spotted the problem a year earlier. The Brits got the Nobel.
@Dr Gilbz The stories about interpolation, data cleaning etc are apocryphal. Whether you think that makes them useful cautionary tales for grad students or harmful misinformation about American cowboys generally depends strongly on whether you work for BAS or NASA! The reason that NASA didn't report on the hole in the ozone measured by their satellites in late 1983 is that their algorithms used previously produced reference profiles which didn't drop below 200 DU, so when the low concentrations were retrieved they were outside of the training data so the hole could not be immediately characterised. It wasn't because they "hadn't noticed it" or thought it was junk data. When the hole was observed by the satellites, the data were not released but instead immediately flagged and an investigation began. So NASA didn't "beat BAS" because it was initially impossible to fully and rigorously interpret the data without ground truth of the kind subsequently published by BAS. NASA did end up linearly extrapolating based on data taken between 200 - 250 DU and got answers that were pretty close to the BAS numbers (which they hadn't yet seen). They submitted these numbers to a conference prior to the publication of Farman et al. and without having been successfully contacted by BAS to "recheck their data" etc. Quite a few folks from NASA have gone on the record to explain this, but unfortunately tales surrounding unsupervised quality control algorithms persist! The story about why NASA didn't beat BAS to the punch is still a good one though. It's about the often total reliance of satellite methods on in-situ calibration and ground truth, rather than issues of algorithm supervision and QC. doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2469-5_13 doi.org/10.1016/j.crte.2018.04.006 www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2017/12/what-did-nasa-know-and-when-did-they-know-it/#ITEM-20924-2
Pretty sure there are new findings about ozone which do not bode well. Can't remember where I saw it or what the mechanism was, but I certainly remember something has been recently reported.
At that time, I was young enough to not be amazed by the fact a real action have been taken internationaly to cut the damage on the ozone layer. Nowadays, I see how big this was. And I understand that there was not the same monetary pressure put on governements and not the same disinformation done by those who make tons of money from petrol.
Thanks for sharing. Climate change is undeniably a thornier and more insidious problem (it's not quite so simple as swapping one kind of refrigerant for another), but it's still an excellent example of what we can achieve if we put our minds to it.
If you were a teenager in the 80’s in the southern hemisphere you possibly spent a large portion of your summers eating KFC under a hole in the ozone caused by CFCs. None of this was particularly good for your longevity. Good memories though.
... I wonder! From my research, seems like there was definitely resistance to the idea, and the classic "it'll be fine, what're you moaning about" type rhetoric, but dunno about outright denial...
It's so funny how at 2:07 you asked if we were sitting comfortably, because I was getting comfortable in my seat at that exact time! lol Stories like this one, where clear, swift changes have produced positive results, give me so much hope. Hope and an example we can point to to show that science works and this kind of change is possible. I have been watching your channel for months (long time viewer, first time caller!) and this video came out on the very same day as I was accepted into a Master's in Cryospheric and Atmospheric Science, so I will take the good news as a good omen! Thank you for your videos and what you do, love the combination of entertainment and education. :)
saving the ozone is good/important, will it save the artic ice? I'd be very surprised. Check back in a couple of years (esp after El Nino) I do believe my southern ossilation will trump your ozone layer
It won't avert complete ice loss ofc. "save" is relative to the alternative - it's more accurate to say delays the the first sea-ice free Arctic summer.
Elimination of ozone, believe would be a -1C scale cooling effect 😎 Arctic mammals have splendid fur More equatorial animals would not appreciate the skin cancer. All get cataracts so will change predator prey relations
Thank goodness we have the ozone success story to say ‘ see science works ‘ The crazy / depressing thing about the moment we live in compared to the 80’s is that in the post truth era. Facts are no negotiable depending on ideology. Which is plain mental. Imho. It started with The Bush era and the WMD saga. There were so many rewritten facts, and gaslighting on a massive scale it led the way for The Trump Qanon explosion and Putins own puppet master Serkov doing similar in Russia. And this is where we are now. Believing in science fact becomes a political choice based on the ideology you adhere to. Crazy. You wanna know my solution #DemocraticConfederalism As a antidote to neo liberal capitalism
Definitely, and it's an era of short memories where too many people cannot grasp that reality exists outside of civilisation. Have you seen that silly meme being spread around where it lists acid rain and ozone depletion as mere frauds to raise taxes "like they're doing with climate change now". We humans came so far due to our curiousity and fascination, but you wouldn't believe it at all when confronted with idiots like that.
![[Part 4] หนุ่มน้อยรักคุณย่ายิ่งกว่าใคร ไม่ว่าใครก็รังแกดูถูกท่านไม่ได้!! #โลกการละคร](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/sLsBxw99FR0/mqdefault.jpg)
![🔴 ฟุตบอลแชมป์กีฬา 7HD แชมเปียน คัพ 2024 [รอบรองชนะเลิศ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zPm8ClLVhoE/mqdefault.jpg)
I make these videos with the help of my awesome patreon supporters - you can join them by signing up on Patreon here: www.patreon.com/Dr_Gilbz.
I was an engineer at NASA Goddard working on this problem with TOMS (Total Ozone Measuring Satellite). My boss missed out on a Nobel Prize because the project had set an exclusion on any data that read zero, thinking it could not get that low. The Brits proved it could from ground readings. We went back and checked the data. We should have spotted the problem a year earlier. The Brits got the Nobel.
That's it! Exactly the story that's in the video. Amazing to hear it from someone who actually worked at NASA at the time... thanks for sharing :)
@Dr Gilbz The stories about interpolation, data cleaning etc are apocryphal. Whether you think that makes them useful cautionary tales for grad students or harmful misinformation about American cowboys generally depends strongly on whether you work for BAS or NASA!
The reason that NASA didn't report on the hole in the ozone measured by their satellites in late 1983 is that their algorithms used previously produced reference profiles which didn't drop below 200 DU, so when the low concentrations were retrieved they were outside of the training data so the hole could not be immediately characterised. It wasn't because they "hadn't noticed it" or thought it was junk data. When the hole was observed by the satellites, the data were not released but instead immediately flagged and an investigation began. So NASA didn't "beat BAS" because it was initially impossible to fully and rigorously interpret the data without ground truth of the kind subsequently published by BAS. NASA did end up linearly extrapolating based on data taken between 200 - 250 DU and got answers that were pretty close to the BAS numbers (which they hadn't yet seen). They submitted these numbers to a conference prior to the publication of Farman et al. and without having been successfully contacted by BAS to "recheck their data" etc.
Quite a few folks from NASA have gone on the record to explain this, but unfortunately tales surrounding unsupervised quality control algorithms persist! The story about why NASA didn't beat BAS to the punch is still a good one though. It's about the often total reliance of satellite methods on in-situ calibration and ground truth, rather than issues of algorithm supervision and QC.
doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2469-5_13
doi.org/10.1016/j.crte.2018.04.006
www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2017/12/what-did-nasa-know-and-when-did-they-know-it/#ITEM-20924-2
Pretty sure there are new findings about ozone which do not bode well. Can't remember where I saw it or what the mechanism was, but I certainly remember something has been recently reported.
At that time, I was young enough to not be amazed by the fact a real action have been taken internationaly to cut the damage on the ozone layer.
Nowadays, I see how big this was. And I understand that there was not the same monetary pressure put on governements and not the same disinformation done by those who make tons of money from petrol.
Thanks for sharing. Climate change is undeniably a thornier and more insidious problem (it's not quite so simple as swapping one kind of refrigerant for another), but it's still an excellent example of what we can achieve if we put our minds to it.
Thankyou Dr 💚✌️
If you were a teenager in the 80’s in the southern hemisphere you possibly spent a large portion of your summers eating KFC under a hole in the ozone caused by CFCs. None of this was particularly good for your longevity.
Good memories though.
Become a big fan of ozone layer 👏
Quite complex interaction with climate.
Suits me if make more on theme 🍻
YAY we did a thing WOOOOOOOOOOP GO GO HUMANS KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK . JUST GOATA BELEVE IN THE POWER OF FRENDSHIP
Yaaai thanks for the good news Doc :) I wonder if there were ozone hole deniers back in the 80s?
... I wonder! From my research, seems like there was definitely resistance to the idea, and the classic "it'll be fine, what're you moaning about" type rhetoric, but dunno about outright denial...
Funny, actually there are some Ozone deniers today.. The mind boggles.
It's so funny how at 2:07 you asked if we were sitting comfortably, because I was getting comfortable in my seat at that exact time! lol
Stories like this one, where clear, swift changes have produced positive results, give me so much hope. Hope and an example we can point to to show that science works and this kind of change is possible.
I have been watching your channel for months (long time viewer, first time caller!) and this video came out on the very same day as I was accepted into a Master's in Cryospheric and Atmospheric Science, so I will take the good news as a good omen!
Thank you for your videos and what you do, love the combination of entertainment and education. :)
Wow, congrats Lucas! That's amazing news. We need more folks like you. I hope this won't be your one and only comment ;) welcome to the gang!
saving the ozone is good/important, will it save the artic ice? I'd be very surprised. Check back in a couple of years (esp after El Nino) I do believe my southern ossilation will trump your ozone layer
It won't avert complete ice loss ofc. "save" is relative to the alternative - it's more accurate to say delays the the first sea-ice free Arctic summer.
@@DrGilbz absolutely wonderful, so not until next year or the next or ....? we'll see. Have a wonderful until whenever(what else is there to do?)
Elimination of ozone, believe would be a -1C scale cooling effect 😎
Arctic mammals have splendid fur
More equatorial animals would not appreciate the skin cancer. All get cataracts so will change predator prey relations
Thank goodness we have the ozone success story to say ‘ see science works ‘
The crazy / depressing thing about the moment we live in compared to the 80’s is that in the post truth era. Facts are no negotiable depending on ideology. Which is plain mental.
Imho. It started with The Bush era and the WMD saga. There were so many rewritten facts, and gaslighting on a massive scale it led the way for The Trump Qanon explosion and Putins own puppet master Serkov doing similar in Russia.
And this is where we are now. Believing in science fact becomes a political choice based on the ideology you adhere to.
Crazy.
You wanna know my solution #DemocraticConfederalism
As a antidote to neo liberal capitalism
Yes it's good to have some good news to point to for sure! Shows it's possible...
Definitely, and it's an era of short memories where too many people cannot grasp that reality exists outside of civilisation.
Have you seen that silly meme being spread around where it lists acid rain and ozone depletion as mere frauds to raise taxes "like they're doing with climate change now".
We humans came so far due to our curiousity and fascination, but you wouldn't believe it at all when confronted with idiots like that.
Brilliant video. Thanks.
You would win that bet..
Praise the flying spaghetti monster. R'amen
You lost the bet!
I see you have subscribed to climate science denial channels. I hope you learned something here.
Maybe u have not read recent news about arctic. It's shrinking rapidly!