We ARE sure that human beings evolved in climate with a lot less CO2 in the atmosphere, and we are sure that in recent decades we have been doing our level best to increase CO2 levels far beyond what we were "designed"/evolved for.

What will this do ultimately? No one knows exactly, but most scientists (i.e., not politicos) agree that we are having our effect on the global climate.

Just because you don't want something to be true doesn't mean you should contort your reasoning and logic to convince yourself it isn't true.

IMO it only makes sense to limit our impact instead of maximizing it.

MORE FROM LESS, not more MORE FROM MORE.

SMALLER LIGHTER Camaro, not BIGGER HEAVIER!!!!

 

What the "Goracle" is failing to take into account is that the polar ice caps on MARS are getting smaller. Is that because of all the Hummers on Mars? oh...wait. The Earth has gone through at least 2 ice ages in the last 50,000 years. And THAWED OUT. Man had nothing to do with it. And I don't think man has anything to do with any preceived temperature rising going on now. And I'm not even convinced that they ARE rising. The Ice mass of off the South pole have actually INCREASED. This is all a power play for the Goracle. And liberal Hollywierd even gave this moonbat an Oscar.

 

This is pretty much what I believe the reason is that people don't want to even think that global warming might be a possibility. No one wants it to be true, because no one wants to be at fault.

 

oh that, and the fact that there is NO hard evidence that what the global alarmists are saying is true. There isn't even any hard facts that the Earth is actually getting warmer, let alone that man has anything to do with it.

 

as a non american i feel as if i have a unique and nutrual perspsective of the country. just using common sense, this is what i can see about the issue of global warming (man made or not). obviously i am not Rep or Dem but both are choosing a side about global warming to help themselves.

Rep = Not mad made, why?......everything to do with humans using more oil means more profit to them and their financial backers. they stand to loose the most if global warming is man made and people start going more green.

Dem = man made, why?......they can use global warming as an issue to get back into power.

now, the reason why scientist find different results about global warming is because they are financialy funded by different sides who have certain intrests about how the results read.

using laws of statistics and probablility i created this little breakdown bellow.

US Gov (IRAQ was involved in 9/11) .....truth = they had nothing to do with it.

US Gov (IRAQ has WMD's).....truth = they never did (Gov even admitted they were wrong)

US Gov (etc, etc)...truth = they lied to the US people for there own agenda)

US Gov (gloabl warming is not man made)....truth = ?????

who are you going to believe? the GOv in power who has everything to loose if USA goes green?

in closing, educate yourself as much as possible about all current issues and try to find research that is un biased and that is not funded by one side (which is hard to do)

ps, sorry in advance for my grammar and spelling.

 

First of all, we're way the hell off track here..........

And secondly you're DEAD WRONG about everything you just posted.......but this ain't the place to discuss it.

 

yes, i am way off topic, sorry.....

second, i guess i am wrong, oh well, i tried........

 

Everyone please keep this on topic, this isn't the Lounge and we have no place for political discussion/arguments on this site. I know it is not easy when it comes to this situation but no one wants this locked nor does anyone want to lock it.

Thanks, all!

 

Agreed.

We are on the same page.

 

Holy crap I can't believe this has turned into a damned Global Warming thread.

Is the earth warming? By some measurements yes, by others no. Is it going to cause catastrophic consequences? Everybody but Al Gore says no...sea levels to reise no more than 20 inches according to the IPCC report, which interestingly has gone from being the bible of the fanatics to now being criticized as under the thumb of the oil companies.

The opportunity costs for actually trying to fix global warming are staggering. Trillions upon trillions of dollars sucked out of the economies of the world to save a relative few number of lives, vs. spending 1/10th of that on AIDS or healthcare in empoverished nations....

Set all that aside though....the point is that indeed there does appear to be a major marxist element to this..in that by crippliing the first world economies you reach some egalitarian goal in the end, even if it means you don't really help the environment at all (because EU nations are already failing to meet their Kyoto targets, even while they are driving jobs to Asia due to the carbon caps).

What's all this have to do with GM? If congress is about to pass carbon caps or a cap & trade credit system, GM's going to have to get a lot more fuel efficient quickly, or the cap & trade just means all that is left of GM gets slowly bled to Toyota and Honda.

Mark my words: Any kind of carbon cap or credit system imposed in the US will be the END of the Domestic car companies.

Irony: The proposed ban on incandecent light bulbs. The irony is that each compact flourescent contains mercury...so replacing 4 billion bulbs with CF's means you have quite the environmental disaster on your hands in terms of breakage and disposal. Also, it takes a lot more energy to make a CF bulb, and 100% of them are made in Asia, where most electricity that runs the factories that make the CF bulbs comes from very dirty coal fired plants...more of which will be needed to meet the global demand for CF bulbs if the incandecent is banned. Net result will be MORE carbon in the atmosphere, but I guess if we all feel good about it that is all that matters.

Global warming has to be the greatest hoax in the last 100 years.

Everybody go read State of Fear by Chricton....good fiction but chocked full of actual, factual research on global temperatures, etc.

 

Actually the NASA scientist that claims he was muzzled was also allowed to do over 1,400 interviews on global warming where he said just that.

This is a cheap shot and a gross generalization. Not everyone who disbelieves global warming is basing it on their feelings about "Algore" and in Scott's defense, nothing he's said has been based in hatred.

ROFL!!! You're hilarious!!! So you know what the Camaro weighs, right? And you knew the answer all along, right? And GM is full of idiots because they didn't listen to your wisdom, right? Should we all start begging for your wisdom, then?

And with such a brilliant move you'd be ignoring alternative fuels for the sake of a standard that is almost 40 years old........if there's anything that *7* pages of posts should make VERY clear, it's that this issue is not as cut and dry as a CAFE number. And as I recall, that is precisely the root of Lutz's comments and concerns......oh, wait, he's an idiot........

 

Hey Chris - awesome post!! Just FYI, Michael Crichton has been giving some awesome speeches about the global warming myth - and if I remember correctly, his research for State of Fear was what prompted him to do it. Here's the link if anyone's interested:

http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/index.html

 

There has to be ways of improving fuel mileage and still retaining RWD platforms. I don't see how moving drive wheels to the front can yield such drastic efficiency improvements.

GM's Displacement on Demand is a nice step in the right direction. Perhaps what we need to see are other ways of improving mileage, such as driver's education on how to drive efficiently and do preventative maintenance! Fuel mileage can be increased by simply being smoother with your acceleration and braking practices... Anticipate the stoplight and coast, keep the revs below 2000 when accelerating... These techniques have boosted my Grand Cherokee's winter city gas mileage from 12 MPG to about 15 MPG. That's a 25% improvement.

 

Crichton's novel was terrific! I recommend it as a good read, but also as a compendium of facts regarding "global warming", or "climate change". The latter being a moronic label, since the global climate is ALWAYS changing.

 

Y2K problem anyone? Although that one was more realistic.

Car manufactures have no reason to not get as good of MPG as they can.
People will natually buy more MPG based cars when gas goes up in price.
aka. in the end the problem will solve itself as prices continue to rise.

I'm just waiting on GM (Or anyone for that matter) to produce a series hybrid. It's kinda ticking me off they don't have one out yet. I need something used and proved to buy when i get into a full time career in 2 years. I honestly don't see a reason one is not out, and it would be a very nice plus to offset some more performance oriented cars, or could even be used in them.