'Greenies' .. The "Prius Polluter" truths

[MikeG.]

The sun is expanding.....agreed. But it has been for 14 billion years, through countless ice ages. Over the hundred year time scale we are now talking about it is utterly irrelevant.

If you actually read what I said about the Prius I agreed with you that it isn't the answer. It isn't as bad as the Hummer, but it is just a sideshow.........a bit of greenwash.

The nature of science is that it is never complete, certain and un-nuanceable.......there is no such thing as "scientific fact"........that is an oxymoron. Thus the religious extremists keep calling darwinism a "theory" as if that weakens the argument........you are doing the same thing here.

And no, I am not dignifying this thread with my presence anymore.......indeed, this forum seems to attract this sort of nonsense too often for my liking, and I might just keep myself to myself for a while.

Mike

 

[Jenx]

You said that a minute ago, but then came back...

and I am glad you did... you should do... you have much of relevance to say on the subject.
and That, I sincerely mean.

Don't disappear off, man. -- debate's healthy, well it is with me anyway.. and nobody gets all huffed up or anything.. its educational to debate stuff, surely. 8)

We've gone off the original point a bit.. ( dont they always ).. but that in itself is all part of the raision d'etre..

And Ray, that was extremely valid.. a good post 8)

Don't do a runner Mike.. stick with it.
I may not agree with the camp your foot is in, but its a well-informed camp, and thats undeniable. Cool ? :wink: :lol:

I do have to ask though ... why is it 'nonsense' ? ... its a discussion about a perfectly plausible and legiitimate viewpoint that the Prius car is not what it is purposted to be.
I can't for the life of me see where that is 'nonsense'. :?:

 

[Doctor]

Is it possible to be taken seriously when you finish a sentence with, cool.
and stop calling Mike, Shirley. :lol:

 

[Argee]

Is it possible to be taken seriously when you finish a sentence with, cool.

I had the same thought when I read "I am not dignifying this thread with my presence anymore." Jeez. :roll:

Ray.

 

[Jenx]

Is it possible to be taken seriously when you finish a sentence with, cool.

Evidently, yes. :wink:
Seriously enough for a "huff" to be taken, possibly ? :wink:

I'm of the view that the "loss of being taken seriously" would be a result of an intolerance of views conflicting with ones own, rather than possible or perceived inappropriate use of a colloquialism.
But then, I've no real education.. so perhaps I wouldn't know. :wink: :lol: :lol:

 

[jlawrence]

Whilst we're on the topic of environmental BS, you are aware that all these CFL's (low energy lights) need to be disposed of as hazardous waste (for those that have them in the business premises) - apparently home owners can get away with just putting them in the rubbish.

As for global warming. I have no doubt that we (humans) are having an effect - to what extent I'm not sure.
I do have issues with the so called scientists. The whole GW debate seems to involved consensus of opinion - WTF, sorry but science isn't supposed to be based on consensus it's supposed to be fact based.

I have absolutely no faith at all in any of the so called scientific models - any model that needs human intervention to correct the input data is seriously flawed.

I do have serious doubts as to whether we can do anything about the CO2 levels etc or indeed whether we actually should attempt to - nature will balance things itself. As things stand there are too many humans living on the planet for it to be sustainable long term - nature will sort that problem for us with the next ice age. So by continuing to live the way we currently are we are aiding nature in solving what would likely be an unsolvable problem for humanity.

What really bugs me are all the idiots that say we're killing the planet - no we're not. We could well be contributing to making it uninhabitable for humans but we sure ain't killing it - the planet will remain.

 

[gatesmr2]

With the prius :?:

Surely it is one of the first of a new breed, not sure who makes it but in the USA they now have a new car running on (don't shoot me if i get this wrong) hydrogen.
I am not saying its right or wrong but as its the first, do you remember the old computers back in the 80's i can remember putting in loads of data to play what today would be considered a joke of a game.

And as for Global Warming :?
Like many i am undecided on this, i think there may indeed be a problem but not sure who or what is causing it.
Yes all the governments are making loads of money of us with taxes etc, but the same governments still launch rockets into space, run tanks and planes kicking out more CO2 than us normal people could comprehend.

I think we are at the beginning of this and like with most scientific idea's it will need time to work out, its just that it has been made into more than it actually is. I was not around when galilao was rubbished for his idea's.
Galilao discovered that the sun stood still and the planets revolved around it. It took 500 years before the Catholic Church acknowledged that he was not guilty of heresy for so stating.

Hope this does not add fuel to the fire but these are just my views and i think we need to understand more about it by this i mean facts not different groups giving us statistics which if you look at any governments ideas can be made to look anyway you would like them to look to add what used to be credence to the argument.

Martin

 

[Jenx]

And "good views" they are too

But there's no 'fire' ... 8) :lol:

 

[Maia28]

Whilst we're on the topic of environmental BS, you are aware that all these CFL's (low energy lights) need to be disposed of as hazardous waste (for those that have them in the business premises) - apparently home owners can get away with just putting them in the rubbish.

As for global warming. I have no doubt that we (humans) are having an effect - to what extent I'm not sure.
I do have issues with the so called scientists. The whole GW debate seems to involved consensus of opinion - WTF, sorry but science isn't supposed to be based on consensus it's supposed to be fact based.

I have absolutely no faith at all in any of the so called scientific models - any model that needs human intervention to correct the input data is seriously flawed.

I do have serious doubts as to whether we can do anything about the CO2 levels etc or indeed whether we actually should attempt to - nature will balance things itself. As things stand there are too many humans living on the planet for it to be sustainable long term - nature will sort that problem for us with the next ice age. So by continuing to live the way we currently are we are aiding nature in solving what would likely be an unsolvable problem for humanity.

What really bugs me are all the idiots that say we're killing the planet - no we're not. We could well be contributing to making it uninhabitable for humans but we sure ain't killing it - the planet will remain.

Pretty much agree with all of that. If you accept the climate change fantasists consensus opinion, the only logical conclusion is to remove or reduce the human population.

The models are pure bunkum IMO and do reflect anywhere like the complexity or interactions that exist in the real world and never will do. It is quite possible to make a "model" of climate change say anything that you want it to.

As for the Prius, is just another ugly car that has been hyped beyond reason. I don't even accept that it is a useful step along the way to producing environmentally lower impact vehicles.

For a good counter too the "scientific" literature I recommend Bjorn Ljumberg's Sceptical Environmentalist. Perhaps a little out of date now, but provides a very good narrative to the claims made in the literature.

Andy

 

[Digit]

The nature of science is that it is never complete, certain and un-nuanceable.......there is no such thing as "scientific fact"....

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear!
Could do with you on another forum I subscribe to Mike.
I was 'lectured' by a New Age type that the speed of light as a 'constant' was rubbish 'cos he had read of an experiment where the results were then averaged.
I patiently explained that was normal to reduce experimental errors and that no one would publish 'one shot' results.
Don't think he believed a word I said though, trouble is Mike there is a gulf in understanding in what a scientists mean and what Joe Public thinks they mean.

Roy.

 

[jlawrence]

The prius is a first step - and that's all it is.
It was the start of breaking the oil companies strangle hold on practically everything we do on the roads - I say it was the start because although there have been other attempts it was really the first hybrid that was actually usable in the real world.
I believe the hydrogen car was/is made by honda (not certain though) and I believe it's only available in California.

The MAJOR problem with global warming is that us 'normal' people can't sit and read the peer reviewed documents and make head nor tail of what they say - we rely on interpreted texts (for many people what they read in the press) which can easily be slanted in whatever direction the press want.
Since we can't even accurately predict weather patterns for next week I have no faith at all that we could predict what things will be like in 10 years time let alone 50 or 100.

One question - perhaps Mike may know the answer.
How much of the polar ice caps need to melt, to cause a big enough desalination of the oceans, to seriously affect the freezing point of the oceans enough to bring on yet another cycle (of massively lowering temperatures) driving us in to the next ice age.

 

[Jenx]

Interesting point !

Perhaps that is how 'balance' is maintained, to counteract the increase caused by the expanding sun ?

Its a thought ! 8)

 

[Digit]

How much of the polar ice caps need to melt, to cause a big enough desalination of the oceans, to seriously affect the freezing point of the oceans enough to bring on yet another cycle (of massively lowering temperatures) driving us in to the next ice age.

First you would need to establish that that would happen, if the scenario is realistic then it would be difficult to suggest a manner in which the last ice age came to an end as the amount of ice that melted at that time is FAR in excess of that which is currently available.
The evidence suggests that the ice at that time melted very quickly.

Roy.

 

[matt]

The prius is a first step - and that's all it is.
It was the start of breaking the oil companies strangle hold on practically everything we do on the roads - I say it was the start because although there have been other attempts it was really the first hybrid that was actually usable in the real world.
I believe the hydrogen car was/is made by honda (not certain though) and I believe it's only available in California.

Apparently the EV1 by GM was the start. However, as soon as the US Govt announced that they were backing (spending money on...) hydorgen, GM buried the car. They'd had over 100 on the roads being driven on a lease basis. When the leases expired they refused to renew them, took all the cars back, and crushed them - as if they'd never existed. Claims are that the EV1 was too viable as an alternative to petrol/diesel. That and the $$$ available to car makers R&D for hydrogen.

As for the CO2 argument... It's easier to do my bit (recycle, avoid unnecessary landfill etc) than to try and make sense of the science. Whilst I accept that some people are sceptical it really is very easy to tow the line regardless of whether you're convinced or not. And, to the best of my (limited) knowledge, it's doing no harm?

 

[StevieB]

For Gill and other interested parties, try the link:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez

This is a scientific database of peer reviewed published scientific papers. It is primarily science based rather than humanities based but has over 7800 hits for a search of 'climate change' and 5000 for 'global warming'. Search until your eyeballs bleed :lol:

The database is mainly used by academia who subscribe to the vast majority of the titles. Without this subscription ability you will get an abstract of each manuscript if there is one but you are unlikely to get the full article unless the journal in question has a free access policy (usually on older content). It is not exhaustive by any means, but is the primary source literature to which Mike referred and Gill requested further details on. Enjoy!

Steve.

 

[jlawrence]

Digit, I've really no idea whether it is actually feasible or not.

Here's my thoughts though:
1) ice caps melt allowing the oceans to freeze at a lower temperature, resulting in more of the suns rays being reflected rather than absorbed, leading to a lowering of the temperatures until such a point that the ice gets so thick over the winter that it simply doesn't fully melt in the summer. Perhaps as there is at times lots more ice and thus bigger cold fronts to be hit by whatever warm air there is, we could end up with one of those big storms as seen in 'day after tomorrow' bringing the ice age in faster.

2) Without the 'human' element screwing things up (and barring any natural phenomenon) the CO2 levels lower during the ice age - thus the cycle we help accelerate comes to an end.

3) Something happens to move things the other way - increasing the co2 levels to such an amount that the ice melts. If enough of the ice melts then a warming cycle begins again. The poles remain frozen and so the salination levels are balanced again - until such a time as the poles melt again.

Sounded plausible until I put it into words - now I'm not so sure

 

[jlawrence]

The ice melting at the end of the ice age might not be such a problem. The ice melting would allow the earth to warm again (by less reflection) and so the increased desalination might not be a problem.
It's a fascinating cycle - but that's all it is a cycle.
Global warming (IMHO) isn't killing the world it's just accelerating the current phase of the cycle. Of course by accelerating the cycle we are making the world less hospitable to man.

 

[Jake]

For Gill and other interested parties, try the link:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez

This is a scientific database of peer reviewed published scientific papers. It is primarily science based rather than humanities based but has over 7800 hits for a search of 'climate change' and 5000 for 'global warming'. Search until your eyeballs bleed :lol:

The database is mainly used by academia who subscribe to the vast majority of the titles. Without this subscription ability you will get an abstract of each manuscript if there is one but you are unlikely to get the full article unless the journal in question has a free access policy (usually on older content). It is not exhaustive by any means, but is the primary source literature to which Mike referred and Gill requested further details on. Enjoy!

Steve.

They won't. It's more rewarding to pontificate about how there is no evidence, how science is rubbish and scientists are worse, and its allmade up.

It's all a peculiar emotional reaction to not understanding, but then we are a strange species - as believing in gods proves beyond doubt.

 

[andycktm]

As life goes on and you get older and wizer,you kinda realise that money comes before EVERTHING
life, death ,war,health,global warming the lot

 

[Jenx]

Sad as it is, there is a lot of truth in that Andy.