" Do you believe the hole in the ozone layer was natural or man made?"

Wrong tense. Not was...is. The hole still exists and hasn't changed much since mid 1990's. Although natural fluctuations might cause it to shrink back to levels seen mid-century.

"If there is no global warming then why has the mean temperature of the planet increased about 1 deg C above the pre-industrial mean temperature and has been rising exponentially since the 1950s?"

1. There is global warming. The issue is how much is caused by man and how much by natural variations. A lot of the increase from pre-industrial times occurred before CO2 levels got high enough to cause any change. Therefore it was natural and was merely the earth returning to more normal levels following the Little Ice Age. Currently temperatures haven't reached those that applied around 1000AD or during the Roman Warm Period or the Minoan Warm Period.

2. I'm not sure if you know what 'exponential' means. Temperatures definitely haven't increased exponentially since 1950, or any other time for that matter.

Yet another thread has started on this subject
It avoids the truth at all costs
Highlighting wrong things said, and turning other things into something altogether different
All in my view no reason to ignore the science exists
Still it gives some pleasure so let's continue telling the world black is white

" Do you believe the hole in the ozone layer was natural or man made?"
That hole is made bigger at every satellite launch so the environmentalists can download even more pop music.

Opinion; As I said, the articles say that the temperature change is
natural and only has a very small human input.
They added the cloud data and it seems that what is happening has been
going on "forever".
Now I have not read the papers, only the abstracts.
No doubt we will hear expert opinion soon.
Nevertheless it does seem to be a media secret.
In view of the enormous amounts of money being spent on CO2 reduction
and renewable energy I would have thought it would by now be the centre
of considerable dispute. If anywhere near true it would have really
significant pysphiatric effects on some people.
Some will find even the idea to be totally unaceptable.
Even to the extent we should advertise Lifelines phone number.

How many of you are scientists? If one is not a scientist then how can one debate the science when one doesn't know science? Hasbeen and ttbn are two prime examples of this.

Mr Opinion good question
In Fact It is the very heart of this debate
Well aware many do not believe in the science,even our host
But if they have it right, if we who believe are victims of a con?
We must understand one side is, and never stop questioning why, and on whose behalf is that side is serving
Divided we fight but in the end we desperately need something to unite us