The link between CFCs and the Antarctic ozone hole is extremely well established. Why would anyone want to despute it?
Because they don’t trust the people involved.
Some guy you don’t know throws some data/information/charts at you that you really don’t understand.
Science is already seen as untrustworthy because some try to tell you that you are an idiot for believing what you believe.
Let’s try to discuss this.
Why is science seen as so untrustworthy?
What role does the media play in explaining the scientist’s science to the layperson’s understanding level?
How has the media fulfilled its duties as the layperson’s window into
understanding what those incomprehensible smart guy scientists are doing, learning?
How much plain jealous resentment might laypeople hold towards smart people?
How much might that effect who they trust?
Are people influenced by image over content?
These are just starter questions. . .