Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
6727 messages, Last post on Nov 05, 2009 at 2:29 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: kernick (Oct 15, 2008 9:43 am)   
|
|
|
to cut the growth in year over year consumption! Oil dips below $75 as OPEC cuts demand forecast By STEVENSON JACOBS, AP Business Writer link title |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Oct 15, 2008 6:18 am) Both extremes use the data to push their agenda. The records can be interesting but they do not necessarily signify a trend, which is what we want to get a handle on. Calling people who disagree with you a cult and using words like crap would suggest you are falling into Argument By Emotive Language (using emotionally loaded words to sway the audience's sentiments instead of their minds). Say it isn't so  "I believe that the data received by the media is directly relative to the grants received by those posting the data." Yes, but companies like Exxon will also push their agenda. I am beginning to get the feeling that both extremes are driven by fear. Some are worried about the change in the environment while the other side is more concerned with impacts to their lifestyle. "The people pushing a Global Warming agenda are in it for the money. There is no money in denying GW." I would disagree. There is a lot of money in trying to deny GW. Making changes to deal with GW could be very expensive for coal power plants, oil companies and car makers to name a few. They are going to try to protect their own self interest. Here is something to sink your teeth into. http://www.energy.ca.gov/low_carbon_fuel_standard/index.html
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 15, 2008 6:14 pm) I see it as costing ME the consumer. The coal or oil or energy providers just pass the cost onto ME the consumer. So those spending money to keep a balance in the GW/CC debate are working for the Consumer. While those that are pushing the man made GW/CC agenda are out to make money on carbon credits. I do not see Al Gore and company (is that better?) doing anything for me the consumer. I cannot see one iota of good from those that push man made Climate Change. It is a political agenda to gain control over the masses. And naturally politicians like it as it is another way to tax US. From my vantage point, Al Gore is a political hack making $100 million over the last 7 years with a scam he cooked up while on our payroll. Calling man made GW/CC a "done deal" is nothing more than a scam artist pushing an agenda for his own personal benefit. If it was a hundred years ago, Al Gore would be labeled a snake oil salesman. Sadly many scientists have so little integrity they will twist the data to say whatever the person paying the bill wants. It happens in pharmacy, agriculture, environment, energy etc etc. So what makes this CC agenda any different?
|
|
|
Replying to: kernick (Oct 15, 2008 8:44 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Sep 30, 2008 12:54 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: rightmove (Oct 15, 2008 11:18 pm) Here is their not so impressive website: http://www.gp.org/ |
|
|
|
|
http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2008-189 This is an interesting map that shows how different parts of the earth can have different CO2 concentrations. They did say: "The zonal flow of the southern hemisphere mid-latitude jet stream results in a belt of enhanced carbon dioxide girdling the globe, fed by biogenesis activity in South America, forest fires in both South America and Central Africa, and the clusters of gasification plants in South Africa and power generation in southeastern Australia." No mention of automobiles and CO2. It would be nice if they could identify additional sources or have a daily map for each day of the year. Add in other green house gases and we would certainly get a better understanding of climate change. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Oct 15, 2008 7:58 pm) As the evidence for global warming and a man made influence grows your argument or your words do not look all that logical or rational. Attacking these people is of little value and will likely backfire. Saying that scientists have little integrity is just false. I am a scientist and I have worked with a lot of scientists and engineers. They are people just like a business man or an artist. Maybe you have been watching to many science fiction movies with mad scientists in them. And just for the record, I have never falsified data. I work at a place where we can tell it like it is. Vehicles do contribute to global warming. How much and what we should do about it is another story. I suspect that China, India and the Middle Eastern countries will decide how high CO2 levels go. Maybe you should go to a conference on GW and meet the scientists. I doubt you would ever do that because then you would find there is logic to their research and that they do have a great deal of integrity. 
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 17, 2008 3:45 am)  . If you want to list a real case, where all the most "treasured" institutions let the CA taxpayer down: we need only go to the CA state process of certifiying MTBE and the ultimate and continuing fiasco. Many, many, many, scientists (among the other interested/disinterested, etc parties that Gagrice refers to) gave what is ultimately called a "neg dec," aka negative declaration. This is all in the CA state public record, (as most other states proceedings are). You can verify/discredit easily what I have been saying.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
