AMDIsTheBest010
Posts: 359 +0
yes we use E85 in the minivan and it workes great. except after the first fill-up using E85 after its used ti running on petrol its acts a little strange, while its still "adapting" to the corn oil
Global Warming
- Thread starter AMDIsTheBest010
- Start date
AMDIsTheBest010
Posts: 359 +0
ohh yes i should have said corn "alcohol"
best of luck to ya with ur flex fuel truck, i know that we love using ethanol in our minivan, it runs great and performs just the same
(its cheaper too
)
best of luck to ya with ur flex fuel truck, i know that we love using ethanol in our minivan, it runs great and performs just the same
(its cheaper too
)mod-newbie
Posts: 26 +0
do flexfuel cars or trucks get better miles then gas or diesel cars or trucks?
The Great Global Warming Swindle
This is an excellent documentary to check out:
The Great Global Warming Swindle
This is an excellent documentary to check out:
The Great Global Warming Swindle
howard_hopkinso
Posts: 21,238 +17
What an interesting and thought provoking documentary. I enjoyed watching it immensely.
It`s certainly refreshing to hear another viewpoint from what the doom and gloom merchants keep telling us.
Regards Howard
It`s certainly refreshing to hear another viewpoint from what the doom and gloom merchants keep telling us.
Regards Howard
Po`Girl
Posts: 580 +3
My good friend Sarah is an Enviromental journalist.She wrote this for me,because I can`t writte.
The "Great Global Warming Swindle" put across a very convincing argument.
Directed by Martin Durkin, it showed a stream of science types, including one time editor of New Scientist Nigel Calder,
decrying this new "green religion".
Durkin is well known for producing controversial programmes. In 2000, he claimed breast implants reduced the risk of
cancer in women and rubbishing those who claimed their implants had caused them severe health problems.
His 1997 documentary "Against Nature" saw him compare environmentalists to Nazi's.
The Independent Television Commission declared the facts had been distorted by selective editing and interviewees misled.
As to the nature and purpose of the programme. Channel 4 had to issue an embarrassing apology.
That they have taken up with Durkin again is something of a surprise.
After the airing of last week's documentary, one of the proper scientist, a Carl Wunsch, Professor of Physical Oceanography
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said his interview was "grossly distorted" and the programme was
"as close to pure propaganda as anything since World War Two".
Scam uncovered maybe, but not the global warming one.
Ultimately, whether you believe in the man made global warming theory or not doesn't really matter.
Regardless of invisible carbon dioxide or sun spots millions of miles away, there are some things which are eminently clear:
our seas and rivers are polluted because we are polluting them. Thousands of species of animals are becoming extinct
because we are killing them. Our rainforests are disappearing and vast tracks of land are being left barren because we are destroying them.
Our oil is running out because we are wasting it.
Oil stock estimates range from ten years supply to 50. It is almost certain to run out during your lifetime.
There will be no more cheap energy, no more arguing over green taxes on flights to Marbella, no more nipping to the corner shop in the car.
Global warming or not, isn't all that cause for concern?
The "Great Global Warming Swindle" put across a very convincing argument.
Directed by Martin Durkin, it showed a stream of science types, including one time editor of New Scientist Nigel Calder,
decrying this new "green religion".
Durkin is well known for producing controversial programmes. In 2000, he claimed breast implants reduced the risk of
cancer in women and rubbishing those who claimed their implants had caused them severe health problems.
His 1997 documentary "Against Nature" saw him compare environmentalists to Nazi's.
The Independent Television Commission declared the facts had been distorted by selective editing and interviewees misled.
As to the nature and purpose of the programme. Channel 4 had to issue an embarrassing apology.
That they have taken up with Durkin again is something of a surprise.
After the airing of last week's documentary, one of the proper scientist, a Carl Wunsch, Professor of Physical Oceanography
at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said his interview was "grossly distorted" and the programme was
"as close to pure propaganda as anything since World War Two".
Scam uncovered maybe, but not the global warming one.
Ultimately, whether you believe in the man made global warming theory or not doesn't really matter.
Regardless of invisible carbon dioxide or sun spots millions of miles away, there are some things which are eminently clear:
our seas and rivers are polluted because we are polluting them. Thousands of species of animals are becoming extinct
because we are killing them. Our rainforests are disappearing and vast tracks of land are being left barren because we are destroying them.
Our oil is running out because we are wasting it.
Oil stock estimates range from ten years supply to 50. It is almost certain to run out during your lifetime.
There will be no more cheap energy, no more arguing over green taxes on flights to Marbella, no more nipping to the corner shop in the car.
Global warming or not, isn't all that cause for concern?
SNGX1275
Posts: 10,615 +467
The problem is everyone has an agenda. And the masses eat it up, lots of people have hands in each others pockets someway or another.
Personally I've spent 5 years of my life studying Geology, Geophysics, and Geochemistry. In those classes and being around educated people that have exposure to or are doing research in many fronts I've been in the belief that this isn't anything brought on by humans, perhaps we have some effect on it, but not enough to be blamed for most.
The above statement by Po`Girl's friend is becoming a popular one. Problem is it is trying to draw the reader/listener into the belief that because the global climate is getting warmer (like 1 degree F in the last 100 years) that pollution and use of natural resources is the cause. Its taking one bad thing, wastefulness and improper disposal of waste, chemicals, ect and trying to create a negative emotional response and to equate that to global warming.
Nobody wants everyone to start dumping Mercury into lakes, throwing trash out your car window, driving a 1970s Suburban billowing smoke, exterminating species, clearing forest land, ect.
Personally I've spent 5 years of my life studying Geology, Geophysics, and Geochemistry. In those classes and being around educated people that have exposure to or are doing research in many fronts I've been in the belief that this isn't anything brought on by humans, perhaps we have some effect on it, but not enough to be blamed for most.
The above statement by Po`Girl's friend is becoming a popular one. Problem is it is trying to draw the reader/listener into the belief that because the global climate is getting warmer (like 1 degree F in the last 100 years) that pollution and use of natural resources is the cause. Its taking one bad thing, wastefulness and improper disposal of waste, chemicals, ect and trying to create a negative emotional response and to equate that to global warming.
Nobody wants everyone to start dumping Mercury into lakes, throwing trash out your car window, driving a 1970s Suburban billowing smoke, exterminating species, clearing forest land, ect.
LinkedKube
Posts: 3,385 +55
There's a ccmpany somewhere in south Cali that is tryng to introduce batter powered cars, saw it on the discovery channel, car goes 0-60 in 5 seconds, top speed of 140, and you can get 240 mles on a single charge
beef_jerky4104
Posts: 782 +3
I think a method to fixing this problem would be better public transportation. That would reduce inflation and emmisions.
Plus people could buy more efficient cars, or the government could even replace all "bad" cars with more fuel efficient ones for free. Then use all the old cars for scrap. We could use ethy gas.
We don't use coal or other methods for energy that realeses emmisions.
We go to mars. Sorry just for humor.
Plus people could buy more efficient cars, or the government could even replace all "bad" cars with more fuel efficient ones for free. Then use all the old cars for scrap. We could use ethy gas.
We don't use coal or other methods for energy that realeses emmisions.
We go to mars
. Sorry just for humor.
T
tifc8lraz
Where's the proof that this is coming from only us :suspiciou? No one knows "for sure" if you know what I mean. You also have to remember we are recovering from an ice age after all . I don't know what I believe right now .
. I don't know what I believe right now .
Tedster
Posts: 5,746 +14
this whole global warming bit is a crock. So what if it is getting a little bit warmer?
(Just means I might be able to get beach front property cheap!!)
1. We are leaving an ice age.
2. The earth has been A LOT hotter in the past before man ever came on the scene.
3. The SUN can cause drastic changes in climate quickly. We are in an increased solar activity period.
4. It has been proven that cattle farts (methane) are more polluting than automobile exhaust.
I don't buy into this liberal social crap agenda where we must all live in huts, wear grass skirts, and grunt at each other.
(Just means I might be able to get beach front property cheap!!)
1. We are leaving an ice age.
2. The earth has been A LOT hotter in the past before man ever came on the scene.
3. The SUN can cause drastic changes in climate quickly. We are in an increased solar activity period.
4. It has been proven that cattle farts (methane) are more polluting than automobile exhaust.
I don't buy into this liberal social crap agenda where we must all live in huts, wear grass skirts, and grunt at each other.
T
tifc8lraz
Tedster...I kind of agree. I would totally, but I need to research global warming further (not by watching Al Gore's movie though ).
TangoTrolly
Posts: 56 +0
We have to do something. Global warming is real. Anyone who claims there is no proof, take a trip to Alaska or Iceland. People there will tell you how much glaciers have receded in the past 20 years. They have never seen anything like this ever.
Fuel conservation can not be voluntary. Government and global agreements have to step in and take action. Our government in the US has been unwilling to set limits, because it will affect business and indirectly the economy. Besides messing with alternate fuels like the hydrogen cell, they could take steps right now. They could mandate higher fuel mileage on cars and trucks. They can limit engine size and add significant road tax to larger engines. That will get the SUVs vans and pickup trucks off the road. I could go into a whole thing about pickup trucks and male/advertisement fantasy, but I'll leave that for another time. They could build nuclear power plants, etc.
There is a limit as to how much abuse the earth and it's resources can stand.
Fuel conservation can not be voluntary. Government and global agreements have to step in and take action. Our government in the US has been unwilling to set limits, because it will affect business and indirectly the economy. Besides messing with alternate fuels like the hydrogen cell, they could take steps right now. They could mandate higher fuel mileage on cars and trucks. They can limit engine size and add significant road tax to larger engines. That will get the SUVs vans and pickup trucks off the road. I could go into a whole thing about pickup trucks and male/advertisement fantasy, but I'll leave that for another time. They could build nuclear power plants, etc.
There is a limit as to how much abuse the earth and it's resources can stand.
T
tifc8lraz
TangoTrolly said:
Did you read tedsters post?
twite
Posts: 907 +2
The facts are, as co2 emissions increase, so does the temperature of the earth. In the last 400 thousand years (until about 1900) the highest ppmv (Co2 concentration) was about 300 at the peak of any ice age cycle. From 1900 to the present day that number has jumped to 400, the highest co2 concentration in 400 thousand years.
It's sad to see people that are in denial of this; and even worse to see people that think this has to do with politics. Once you step out of your hummer, maybe you will realize, that this is a problem.
It's sad to see people that are in denial of this; and even worse to see people that think this has to do with politics. Once you step out of your hummer, maybe you will realize, that this is a problem.
T
tifc8lraz
I never said that is wasn't real. I want to see proven, theoretic evidence that proves this. The polar ice caps have been melting since the end of the ice age....we just started looking at them in the past few years since the worrying started.
SNGX1275
Posts: 10,615 +467
It is political, everything boils down to money and politics. Coal emissions can be cut to almost 0 with coal gasification, electric cars could be made, you in theory could force people to own certain vechiles, if not huge taxes, we could go nuclear for all power. But there are consequences for all of this, and you will often find the people wanting to quit using coal for power production also not wanting nuclear power. Also the developed countries feel that because we technically have the ability to reduce environmental pollution that we should, but countries like India and China are immune to this because they aren't as "developed" as the US and Western Europe.twite said:
I think everyone agrees the climate is getting warmer, but really, we are talking like 1 degree F in the past 100 years, so it is very small. There is also a nonlinear scale on how greenhouse gases trap heat. I don't have the data in front of me, but for example 1x to 2x changes maybe 30%, but then going from 2x to 4x changes only 5%. Those are just numbers for example.
I think I had some other things to say but I forgot them.
twite
Posts: 907 +2
That isn't very small, when you look at what it has done, and what it will do. As glaciers melt, instead of the light reflecting off them, there will be no glaciers, and the heat will be absorbed into the earth. Also, water evaporation levels are increasing, cause more chaotic weather patterns. Winter, isn't winter some places, summer, isn't summer places. This is causing migratory patterns of birds to be effected, which plays a huge role in are ecosystem. Water levels are rising, pretty soon arizona is going to have a beach.
I am not going to convince someone that global warming exists. Luckily for most of the members here they wont have to worry about it in there life time. But, to just disregard is just plain ignorant.
ravisunny2
Posts: 1,053 +11
The graphics are impressive, but the source doesn't seem to be quoted.
Was Katrina passable as a freak incident ?
The enormous damage makes one wonder.
Anyway, this might be better in the jokes thread.
A few weeks ago a gentleman had this to say in critism of the Airbus 380(not quoted) :
The Airbus 380 is more economical. The reduced cost of flying will lead to more air passengers. This in turn will increase pollution.
BTW, it's funny because it was on either BBC WORLD or CNN International (those are the only two international new channels provided by our cable guy)
Was Katrina passable as a freak incident ?
The enormous damage makes one wonder.
Anyway, this might be better in the jokes thread.
A few weeks ago a gentleman had this to say in critism of the Airbus 380(not quoted) :
The Airbus 380 is more economical. The reduced cost of flying will lead to more air passengers. This in turn will increase pollution.
BTW, it's funny because it was on either BBC WORLD or CNN International (those are the only two international new channels provided by our cable guy)
SNGX1275
Posts: 10,615 +467
Its "worse" than that twite. The 1 degree is as a whole, some of the polar regions are several degrees. But that just means some other places are cooler. Also more water vapor in the atmosphere would arguably reflect more sunlight than water stuck as ice in isolated regions of the world, so I don't really buy that argument.
Nobody is disregarding it that I'm aware of. But it is stupid to think that you can take one "ideal" segment in time and freeze that climate globally forever.
Nobody is disregarding it that I'm aware of. But it is stupid to think that you can take one "ideal" segment in time and freeze that climate globally forever.
twite
Posts: 907 +2
Yeh, i realize that. Last year chicago had the warmest winter on summer, this year Tucson had one of the coldest winters on record. As a matter of fact it snowed for the first time in 25+ years.
I won't quote anyone because i don't want this thread to turn ugly.
Yeh, i agree with you, but that doesn't mean we can't help the cause. Any way you look at pollution isn't good. Whether it's because its a key factor to global warming, or because being in mexico city for 1 day is equivalent to smoking 2 packs of cigs, what we are doing to are environment isnt good.
Source was NAS, National Academy of Science.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
These credit cards feature OLEDs that light up upon payment- Uncle Al replied
-
Amazon denies reports it started a business just to spy on rivals- nitebird replied
-
PlayStation 5 Pro will be bigger, faster, and better using the same CPU
- anastrophe replied
