"And are you even aware that most of the things you brought up are irrelevant? That the ozone hole was wrong 20 years ago is irrelevant. That global cooling was wrong 30 years ago is irrelevant. That history is littered with abandoned hypothesis and incorrect conclusion presents no argument that we should not accept a scientific hypothesis now (should I reject Quantum Physics because Newtonian Dynamics was 'overturned?' or Oxidation because Phlogiston was debunked? Or Thermodynamics because Caloric Theory was trashed?). You judge a hypothesis based on its advocates ability t bring data to the table, and detractors ability to refute that data. You judge a hypothesis based on its predictive power. You judge a hypothesis based on its deductive validity. You judge a hypothesis on all of these things- not on the fact that the road of science is littered with dead theories (what, you mean science advances!?) or on the fact that you don't like the political implications."

But you missing the entire point, Global Cooling wasn't science- glaciers weren't mostly advancing. And this was known at the time. Some were, as currently, some are. But over the last hundred or more years on average glaciers are retreating.
But when I was going to elementary school it was presented as science, and the news said it was something to worried about- and presented as science.

And Ozone Hole? This another example of pseudo science- we were supposed to be doomed even if stopped all CFCs, because all the current production hadn't reach the high atmosphere, so even if production totally stopped it's affect would continue to make the Ozone hole bigger for something like 50 years. Oh here:
"CFCs are also removed very slowly with rates varying from a 50-year lifetime for CFC-11 to a 1700-year lifetime for CFC-115."
http://www.afeas.org/greenhouse_gases.html
Another moron:
"Man-made CFCs however, are the main cause of stratospheric ozone depletion. CFCs have a lifetime in the atmosphere of about 20 to 100 years, and consequently one free chlorine atom from a CFC molecule can do a lot of damage, destroying ozone molecules for a long time. Although emissions of CFCs around the developed world have largely ceased due to international control agreements, the damage to the stratospheric ozone layer will continue well into the 21st century."
More idiots:
"The CFCs' lifetime is more than 75 years, longer than 50 years, a very long time. But if we can introduce hydrogen, the atmospheric lifetime will be much more shorter, for example 5 to 10 years."
http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~frank/BerkeleyGroks_Yamabe.htm

It's was all crap- it wasn't science getting it wrong it was pseudo science repeated endlessly by politicans- activists and elected officals.
And you have the same thing with global warming.
And people screaming about global warming who have zero interest in science- it's not worth the time, and science boring. Yap, yap, yap.