Safe Speed Forums

You're right to highlight the AGW factor.

Do you have a source for the 3% figure? If true it should be quite damning.

Not to hand sorry, I think TurboBloke posted it a number of times on PH and he usually backed up his posts with references. I'll take a look after work if needs be.

_________________
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.

Upton Sinclair

Probably governments... As it is they who are responsible for most of the funding for climate research.

"Climate Change" has to be the greatest potential bonanza for taxation and control of society since the invention of politics, after all who's going to argue about paying a bit more tax or accepting a few more limitations upon our freedom if it's "saving the planet".

As governments put orders of magnitude more finance into climate "research" than the hated oil companies it's not difficult to surmise that "he who pays the piper calls the tune" works for both sides of the argument... And one side's piper is being paid a lot more than the other's.

_________________
"Politicians are the same the world over... We build bridges where there aren't any rivers." - Nikita Kruschev

The same people that are off with the "taxes" being applied for the "benefit of road safety" or the restrictions of individual freedoms on the basis of "preventing terrorism".

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

Yes, and was described by former Czech President Vaclav Klaus as another totalitarian ideology.

See here

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

A brief search reveals.....



From here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,123013,00.html
Which links to the source here: http://www.junkscience.com/



From here: http://cdiac.esd.ornl.gov/pns/faq.html - Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center

Mike.

_________________
www.misspelled-signs.com - A tribute to illiterate signwriters.

'Scepticism' over climate claims


Looks like they are starting to panic.....

Is the tide turing on global warming hysteria?

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Which is not the same thing as "man is causing all the problems". Yes, we do need to look at doing as much as possible to survive natural climate change.

Nature doesn't partake in knee-jerk reactions. As far as I'm aware, all or most scientists agree it's too late to stop what's happening, man-made or otherwise, so we may as well accept that the trend will continue, and make the most of what time we have left.

I intend to go out with a smile on my face and an empty wallet.

Cheerful chappie aint I? (Spell check wanted to call me a cheerful crappie)

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

I've been thinking about this usual red herring about the 'oil lobby' et al sponsoring anti climate change research. This thread has made me think that actually the oil lobby's vested interest is nothing compared to the 'greens' and the government who would tax and control us.

Now lets get something very very clear.

IF climate change (man made or otherwise) was as serious a threat to humanity as is made out then things would be done and done now. Do you really think that if governments had proof that the world was going to fry in 50 years and that we could stop it we wouldn't see draconian laws???

Do you think we'd be 'engaging' with China or 'having a national debate'

Bollocks.

I's complete rubbish.

Al Gore is wrong...Made Made Climate Change is a very Convenient Untruth. A devise to push through all sorts from nuclear power*, to psuedo Communist ideals.

The public are now waking up to it.

The problem with our green fundamentalists is that they over egged it. They went too far with all the 'end of days' stuff.

the far left failed, CND failed and now this will fail.




* I'm far from anti nuclear but was making the point that allsorts are now jumping onto the climate band wagon (albeit a bio fuel powered one)

I've been looking at "green", not endorsed by the Green Party I notice, solutions to reducing carbon footprints around the house. I have found that I could use*:
1) Solar panels on the roof to heat water all year round which will reduce my gas bill.
2) Ground (geo-thermal) heating which will heat the house in the winter and cool the house in the summer and will reduce my gas bill.
3) A composting bin which will even take meat and compost it ready for a garden compost heap which will save me money when the local council brings in the chip and bin system.
4) Wind generators which could be use to power small areas of the house but aren't entirely practical due to the fact you need a considerably large one, approx 10 ft diameter, to get any worthwhile electricity from them.
5) Rain water catchment systems. Used to flush toilets, fill washing machines or dishwashers. Won't save me much money but will reduce the load on the incompetent water authorities in times of drought each year.

One thing I have not noticed is that any of this information is recommended by the government or given any airtime on news reports into climate change. We only seem to ever get images of massive floods, massive droughts or the news clip favourite, ice falling from a glacier.

If the government were serious about reducing our carbon footprint then the grants that they currently give out each month would be significantly more substantial. I would also expect them to promote these methods via an information leaflet and to insist that they are incorporated in any new builds when it is easiest to implement. Imagine building an estate where all the gardens and roads are plumbed into ground heating systems.

As most people seem to be aware, the government is only interested in jumping on this bandwagon because it can get more tax and can restrict the freedoms of the individuals via taxation.

* I would like to install some of these systems in the house where I live however, the house I live in is rented and if it was I do not have the money for the initial outlay so the only way I can see this working nationally is for the government to heavily subsidise it in the same way they subsidise nuclear power and public transport; assuming they are serious of course.

_________________
Prepare to be Judged

As is proved by this report.

The more ludicrous the claims are the more people will be turning their back on climate change hysteria.

Recently I have heard....

#The River Thames WILL dry up (they are 'avin a larf)

#1 billion displaced people because of food shortages and expansion of deserts.

#Mass extinction of species

#Water levels up 3 meters

#Massive loss of life through the spread of disease

#Uk gets Mediterranean climate (bring it on!)

All in the next hundred years .....................hell they can't get the weather right for the next two weeks!

They are just taking the piss now. They actually claim that “X” percent reduction in carbon will result in “Y” reduction in temperatures. All this and they have not actually decided 100% that carbon has ANY influence on temperatures.

With reports like this in the media a lot of people will now know that they are in the majority (contrary to the hype). Lets hope it will open up the debate to a fairer level of reporting.....then pigs may just fly.

Oh..and by the way they also predicted a severe winter of 06/07 and a blistering summer in 07 equal to or better than that of 2003........

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Sorry, but no.

We, as a race, are reactive - not proactive. The worlds population is sucking the lifeblood from our world but does anyone, (especially in politics) dare to say there are too many people? China have a policy but they prefer less girls and more boys, so I understand, so whether it's actually about sheer numbers is a moot point.

As individuals, sure, we care about the world we leave behind for our children. But I see NIMBY at work here.

I'm convinced that 'they' know the world is going to get worse but so long as 'they' have their own health, wealth and security, they prefer to keep their collective heads in the sand.

It's comparable to a smoker who knows it's a bad habit but hey - that's tomorrow, live for today. The people who see it happening and genuinely care are not in a position of real power. That's why we're in the mess we are today.

Oppenheimer invented the A-bomb, but not for its destructive power towards mankind - that was politicians doing what they do best and they're still doing the same. Only the tools have changed...

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

As a further example...

San Francisco is a disaster waiting to happen but do we see politicians, or people for that matter, doing anything about it? If or When the big one happens, as scientists have predicted is due any time now, the potential death and destruction stands to make 9/11 look small by comparison - but who's doing anything about it?

I'm sure others can come up with further examples of this apathy but I think I make a valid point, sadly

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

Thats what I mean.

If we really were really on the precipice of armageddon as is suggested then we would be reacting.

Its all complete rubbish

Oh sorry bud. I missunderstood you


I've a feeling I'm going to be able to knit a jumper at the end of this thread

As a generalisation, I don't think we need to look at the bigger picture, merely extrapolate the smaller one. Very few of us leave the world in the same state that we entered it? One single so-called civilized human leaves a trail of mess which pollutes our world for the longest time. I am as complicit in this as the rest of us here so none of us should be too proud about how wonderful we are for doing our bit when in actual fact we are all doing more harm than good every single day, whether we admit it or not.

As I see it, all we can do is minimise the damage we personally do. I cycle, where others would drive; I don't buy products with excessive packaging, preferring instead to use my local grocers and butcher instead of supermarkets. It keeps the small guy in business, there's less packaging and I find it's cheaper. I could go on but the bottom line is for all my efforts I'm still more of a parasite to our world than someone living in the third world. There's only so much you can do and the rest is up to higher command.

Three years ago a friend of mine, who is passionate about being as green as possible in this country, decided to change the way he powers his home. He forked-out £7500 to install solar panels on his roof. He had a £500 grant from a government initiative called Clearskies. Depending on how the price of electricity goes up, he worked out that he will not recover his outlay for approximately 15 years.

To his credit, the environment mattered more to him and he was also in a position to afford it but how many of us can do that and where's the incentive? He tells me the installation price has halved now but it's still not much of an incentive when you're on a tight budget.

_________________
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of Safe Speed.
You will be branded a threat to society by going over a speed limit where it is safe to do so, and suffer the consequences of your actions in a way criminals do not, more so than someone who is a real threat to our society.

yeah been pondering the same for a while, the whole enviromental thing is just another subtle tool of totalitarian control.

Regarding the %'s mentioned above, i did read somewhere 60% of mans co2 output is directly attributable to warfare?

Heard on the radio today that 56% of people aren't buying into the big global warming scare story, which struck me as high.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

Recently ITV news went into global warming overdrive. On the spot reporting of the ice cap melting, interviews with anybody and everybody that promotes man made climate change theory. Features on how to go "green". A whole week of bollocks.

At the end of it they did an on-line survey. Then 60% of people who voted refused did not believe mankind was responsible for climate change.....

Just goes to show how out of touch the media actualy are.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Things I agree with.

Taking care of our 'local environment' smog, locall emmissions, chemical spils etc.

Cutting out waste - better fuel economy, better insulation etc etc

Energy security - better energy mix more nuclear, more renewables (if viable)

All these things make perfect and logical sense to me as a professional and in my personal life.

What I absolutely and fundamentally object to is the big Global warming lie.

I don't need a Bogey Man!!

Spot on, Jonsher. I would just add the following:

The "greens" stand to gain the publicity, recognition and staus they crave. Suddenly, they are the "experts" rather than the "loonies". As you hint, the far Left, bereft of their original "cause", have jumped on the green/AGW bandwagon as it provides a very convenient stick with which to beat the rich; the west in general and the USA in particular; capitalists/capitalism; car owners; and anyone else they don't like. The targets are the same, only the slogans on the banners are different. Patrick Moore ( a founder member of Greenpeace) has much to say on this.
They also seem very keen on reducing the human population (or "popullution" as the more extreme of them like to say); oddly, they don't appear to be setting an example by topping themselves in droves - I wonder why not?

_________________
Save a cow - eat a vegetarian