Safe Speed Forums

(Before i get a pasting , this is written tongue in cheekee)

This morning like just about every other motorist in the uk, i de iced the car. I drove to work on salt treated roads waiting untill my heater had warmed up enough to thaw me out. Got to work, thawed out the works van , just in case i had to go somewhere.Stayed inside as much as possible as temperatures were about zero. Saw news about parts of Wales having blizards.At stopping time i got in car, fortunately not frozen up, but cold.Waited till heater warm, then enjoyed heat.Tonight i'm on night shift , on standby, so thermals will be needed along with a van with a decent heater.
Tonight i went out and the temp on the car display was -1.5.


So can someone please tell me why we are suffering from GLOBAL WARMING, AND if we are THANK GOD.( Otherwise it might be artic temperatures in the midlands)

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

They have changed it to "climate change" to cover all the bases.

I noticed BP are getting on the band wagon on tv with a patronising advert with some thick taxi driver saying " i am worried about the global warming fing"

I also noticed a few things saying "help PREVENT climate change"

Should be reported to advertising standards...you cannot PREVENT climate change....unless you are GOD.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Thanks Gizmo - nice to see a like minded

posted on the BP AD myself on http://www.safespeed.org.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4871

As i said - if this is global warming - at -2 , tonight i'm on standby and hope the van heater is working , and doubly hope i don't have to go out ( thats work outside in it) cos at 2- 4 in morning it'll be colder.

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

the global warming must only be in London - its a tropical 2.1 here at the moment!

Global warming in Europe would lead to the gulf stream moving and making winters much colder they reckon. If masses of CO2 are precursors to a new ice age then we're in for a few cold winters if the environmentalists have things right.......

correct. it would be good if they'd tell the idiots at the newspapers about this as they're all busily telling us that this year is the last that we'll ever see snow and how we'd better get used to warmer winters.

Yes.
If it gets warmer, it's down to us.
If it gets colder, it's down to us.
If it gets wetter, it's down to us.
If it gets drier, it's down to us.
If it gets stormier, it's down to us.
If it gets calmer, it's down to us.
If things stay the same, they'll still say it's down to us - because things would have changed if not for us.

We really can't win.

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

Yes, I think that sums it up! No matter what happens, they will have an excuse for raising taxes. Those who are stupid enough to swallow this rubbish deserve to pay through the nose, but what about the rest of us. We already have a stupidity tax called the National Lottery, we don't need any more of them!

So only stupid people believe the science behind AGW theory then?

No, that's not what I meant. I meant that only stupid people believe governments can do anything about climate change, or that man's activities are its only cause. Even if we stopped burning fossil fuel tomorrow, the climate would still change, just as it used to before we started burning fossil fuels. Carbon may be a factor, but it is not the only one and probably not the most inportant one.

Have you seen http://mars.jpl.nasa.gov/mgs/msss/camer ... index.html ??

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

Clearly that's evidence of what happens when you don't ban cars. No one has banned or taxed cars on Mars have they?

Also note the possibilty for CO2 run-away. More temp means more atmospheric CO2 (as it sublimes); means more greehouse effect means more subliming CO2. Maybe there isn't enough CO2 / greenhouse effect to start the cycle. But for whatever reason there's no temperature run away on Mars.

But there is on Venus... Perhaps they didn't ban cars either?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Personally I blame all those fireworks set off to celibrate the millenium. all were set off at midnight all launched directly away from the sun pushing us towards the sun.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I'm starting to think in that vague direction. Obviously there are people with high IQs who appear to believe it, so it can't be 'stupidity' as such.

But I'm seeing more and more science these days that makes AGW theory increasingly unlikely. I'd like to see some leading AGW proponents tested for:

* Common sense
* Ability to think outside their own field
* Freedom from vested interest
* Honesty and integrity

Frankly I think the results would be scary.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Just like with "speeding", there is a lot of misinformation put out there by Politicians and the media when it comes to "Climate Change"

There is no proof whatsoever that CO2 emissions from burning fossil fuels is making one bit of difference to the Earth' climate. We simply haven't been burning fossil fuels for long enough to tell.

I can see the sense in the argument "Burning fossil fuels MIGHT affect the Earth's climate, so let's play it safe", but even so, use of private motor vehicles only accounts for 10-13% of the total CO2 that mankind emits anyway (the rest being from Power Generation and Industry). If every car on the planet was crushed tomorrow, it wouldn't make any difference.

There is a great write up on the ABD's site on Climate Change. Definitely worth a read if you're interested in this subject:
http://www.abd.org.uk/climate_change_truths.htm

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken

evan if all cars were electic we still burn fossil fuel to make most of our power anyway, plus there's inherant inefficiency with remote generation, distribution, multiple step up/step down conversion, charging and storage compared with point of use fuel combustion so I fail to see how electric cars are truely "green".

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

OK then, mark me down as stupid.

Better than convenient denial though IMHO.

Nah. I'm not going to mark you down as stupid.

I was very much thinking about the folk who have examined the subject in a 'professional' capacity.

I can't think of any earthly reason why an 'ordinary member of the public' shouldn't believe a climate scientist on TV.

It's the climate scientist on TV who I want grilled and tested.

I personally was very happy to believe AGW until I started uncovering the junk science surrounding speed cameras. Then I heard climate scientists on TV say some VERY unscientific things. (Why, oh why would they do that?) Then I became cynical. It's certainly not a 'convenient denial'. Hopefully it's healthy scepticism.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I'd go a bit further than the scientists - how about our government - when they want us to think in a certain direction , the spin doctors go into overdrive - and the "experts" are encouraged to follow suite - but have you noted that they alwaysforget that there are two sides to the story and deny that there is another side .I think the quotation "there are no drawbacks " is the phrase

_________________
lets bring sanity back to speed limits.
Drivers are like donkeys -they respond best to a carrot, not a stick .Road safety experts are like Asses - best kept covered up ,or sat on

There may well be two (or more) sides to the argument, but we tend to use this phrase as if we're discussing which footballer was the best ever, or which pub to visit next; i.e. there is no right nor wrong answer and ultimately it doesn't matter.
With AGW it quite possibly does matter and I wonder how much longer we can continue to argue the toss, particularly if the proponents of AGW are actually right and opponents are in fact quite wrong. If its the other way around of course then we're OK.
I don't pretend to comprehend all of the science behind AGW theory, but it seems quite probable (to me) that man's activities have in some way adversely affected the earth's natural cycles. And if something can be done then I'd sooner see it done rather than continue in denial* or throw my hands up and declare that we've gone too far already.

* I believe a lot of anti-AGW talk is undoubtedly an attempt to stave off any restrictions on the use of fossil fuels.