[cogitator]

What “needed to be done” was to begin ignoring a “problem” that never existed in the first place.

I'm curious; are you saying that a) the ozone hole doesn't exist, b) that stratospheric ozone depletion isn't human-caused, or c) that limitations on the use of CFCs were not necessary to stop the increase rate of stratospheric ozone destruction?

If you are saying any of those things, you are incorrect. Before launching a tirade at me, read the following for content:

The Antarctic Ozone Hole

[Old Professer]

All the data here ends in 1995, doesn’t that sort of reinforce the notion that the attention has shifted to something newer and better?