It's all lies...
New car sales plunge 20% in September
- Thread starter Chippy_Tea
- Start date
Help Support The Homebrew Forum:
- Status
ACBEV
Old Member
I just bought a new car... BMW M3 in full GT race spec. Does about 5 MPG (1 litre per mile). I won't be using it for commuting though.
Hoppyland
Senior Member
Oh no! I don't have a pair of flame-proof pyjamasOh **** you have mentioned science in a post to Gunge best get your flame proof pyjamas on now.
. Guess I'll just have to run & hide somewhere.......But, then, I've got a problem. Because I actually am a scientist. OK, I'm a biologist, so only just!
But, I have to come clean and declare an interest here. My daughter is a physicist, who has worked on the Greenland ice sheet and is presently living in Tasmania investigating the dynamics of the Antarctic ice cap and developing models of how glaciers flow and break up. Maybe I'm biased, but I reckon that people like her know a wee bit more about their own speciality than someone pulling random, unsubstantiated pseudo-facts from dubious internet sites. But, of course, I could be wrong.......
I'm actually a scientist, too. One of those who disagree with the 'consensus'. And remember, the consensus is always wrong.
Last edited:
Hoppyland
Senior Member
Well, I've never heard that "the concensus is always wrong". Would you care to explain? Mind you, I reckon that I very frequently disagree with the the "concensus" - depending upon what is actually meant by that. As far as I'm concerned "concensus" is defined as majority opinion. Therefore, that includes all opinions, however well informed or otherwise, and it's therefore obvious that these need not be driven by evidence or logic.
For my own part, I try to evaluate, as best as I can, what evidence I can glean of the world around me. Obviously, virtually all information is second/third hand at best - and mostly filtered through the totally biased system of the media reporting it (often, I feel, not even realising how biased they are in favour of their own culture!). It is impossible to form any world view purely as a "scientist", because none of these reported circumstances and their purported causes are "testable". But I believe that, by taking on board the best evidence from informed sources , then I maximise my chances of being correct (at least some of the time!) about what's happening around me.
Einstein, Galileo, Newton, Copernicus... just a few off the top of my head who went against the consensus. The latter himself duly noted that consensus is the first refuge of scoundrels. And so it will be with the CO2-driven climate change crapola, unless it is proven instead of remaining merely a theory. They've had enough time to do that but will never succeed... it is crapola.
I saw something the other day showing how ever since the 80s there are regular publications always saying we have 10 years left to fix climate change before its to late and its still 10 years now.
This is their chosen tactic - climate change is always in 'the future'. They're wrong on that count too... it is here and now and in a constant state of flux, as it always has been. Their starting point for claiming rapid change is the industrial revolution which handily coincides with the end of the Little Ice Age. From that point there was only one way temperatures could go; up. But the sole driver of global climate - the sun - will have the last say as solar activity, the cause of the Maunder Minimum and the ensuing drop in temperatures then, now enters a long slumber once again. When the effects of that begin to filter through and the consequences are there for all to see, expect the climate change clamour to ratchet up a notch in their race against time to dupe everyone. They're scared of having to get a real job instead of fighting over grants to perpetuate this crapola which has so far provided a cushy number and 'working' holidays to perform 'research' in parts of the world most of us can only dream of seeing. As for governments, they have their own reasons for promoting this garbage but rest assured those reasons ain't anything to do with 'climate' - that's just a convenient vehicle by which to deliver them.
“The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wise people so full of doubts.”
Read more at http://www.prosebeforehos.com/quote...-fools-fanatics-wise-men/#0E1GDXeealtteOdZ.99
Read more at http://www.prosebeforehos.com/quote...-fools-fanatics-wise-men/#R56F4UiB47EGESl8.99
I assume the price of smokeless coal is about to rocket as they are discussing banning the burning of real coal, as a coal fire user I am not amused, I have tried smokeless coal but on an open fire it is hopeless.
Oneiroi
Well-Known Member
I know, I know...I shouldn't take the bait, but Katla at highest estimate, emits 24 kilotons a day or 8.8 million tonnes per year. Humanity produces about 80 million tonnes per day, so about 9 times more in a day than Katla in an entire year....
I suppose you never specified which 100 years of humanity though
What about millions of years ago when earth was covered in dinosaurs,massive forests and many ,many active volcanoes...did that cause climate change?
If the reported change is true it will lead to the demise of humanity...so why do "intelligent" nations continue?
Or is it that "advanced" nations are trying to suppress developing nations by demanding they cut their output as it's causing global warming?
I too believe there's a lot more to it.
What about when it all started..anyone who opposed it or talked it down wasn't liked very much. Didn't something go on with Johnny Ball along the lines of his work dried up..?
If the reported change is true it will lead to the demise of humanity...so why do "intelligent" nations continue?
Or is it that "advanced" nations are trying to suppress developing nations by demanding they cut their output as it's causing global warming?
I too believe there's a lot more to it.
What about when it all started..anyone who opposed it or talked it down wasn't liked very much. Didn't something go on with Johnny Ball along the lines of his work dried up..?
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2015
- Messages
- 10,330
- Reaction score
- 9,444
There was an article on the BBC today saying that if you buy a car now it's likely to be your last car, and also the end of the combustion engine. They said in 10 years it would be driverless electric cars that we just book journeys like uber.
Read something similar but that predicted it would be 30 years.
Read something similar but that predicted it would be 30 years.
Hoppyland
Senior Member
Well, I know i shouldn't take the bait..... But.......Aww - howay man! Are you really serious?? Copernicus was born in 1473 - and did indeed go against the consensus at the time of opinion of the earth being the centre of the universe. But again I'd say "what consensus"?? All he was up against was a hierarchy of religious bigots/zealots who hadn't any real clue about what was going on. Newton? In what way did Newton go against any consensus? This was a period of immense discovery - Newton's studies of light, and his insight into gravity were truly breaking new ground. But, Newton also believed that alchemy was likely to be true, and possibly wished to re-discover the "occult wisdom of the ancients". Galileo - again, as far as I can tell, up against a consensus of bigots who had no real interest in the truth. Einstein: well that's more complicated. He certainly did totally reform physics, but equally he did not like some of the ramifications of his theories, hating the perceived chaos of quantum physics - hence the quote "God does not play dice with the universe". Hardly the words of someone rejecting a consensus view.
Gee - I know I shouldn't carry on, but.......what the hell. In post #45 I asked if you could explain your statement that "the consensus is always wrong". Well, can you? You seem to me to have dodged that.
Finally, could you explain in full detail who exactly the "they" are that are wrong about climate change? Is there a James Bond villain style cabal of science-terrorists out there, determined to undermine our society by making us believe in mythical scenarios? Clearly, you think there might be. How could they organise themselves to do this?? I have to say that I find this an extremely odd attitude, particularly from someone who claims to actually be a scientist.
Oh ,well, to quote Vonnegut
So it goes!
Furthermore, what if the climate does continue changing, regardless of the cause? Does anyone truly care? Even if you did care, do you truly, honestly believe you can do something to halt it in its tracks and maintain a constant state which allows us all to thrive and prosper to our heart's content? Yes? Oh boy...
Hoppyland
Senior Member
Ah, well, I cannot disagree with you there in any regard! Personally, I don't have much emotional investment in the future: I have mature children but no grandchildren (and none likely!) that I might worry about. Unfortunately, in the minds of our wise leaders, "investment" seems solely wedded to money and its growth.
So, I have totally agree with you that, if climate change is indeed occurring, and to a disastrous extent (for humans at least), then even if it could be halted now, it is most unlikely that that will happen.
Sad.
Oh no! I've just inadvertently quoted Trump. How can I possibly absolve myself?...........
At what point will the climate-change protagonists admit / acknowledge that the game is up, or declare that 'we' have done enough to render the planetary climate stable and we can all relax?
Kenboy
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2018
- Messages
- 89
- Reaction score
- 26
Beer post?They appear to be saying a lot of people are being put off buying as they cannot decide which version to buy diesel is now considered the spawn of the devil so its a toss up between Petrol, Hybrid or electric.
Have any members bought a new car?
Did you change from Diesel to petrol, petrol to diesel or petrol/diesel to electric or hybrid?
I am changing my car (diesel) in a couple of years * i don't do a huge mileage so at the moment am thinking of going for a petrol (probably 1.0L - 3 cylinder Fiesta of the Vauxhall Corsa equivalent as they both get very good reviews) but would now consider electric as some of my concerns about running one were answered earlier on 5 live.
* It wont be new i am way too tight to stomach the depreciation in the first couple of years.
A representative from the National grid has been on 5 live and answered the usual questions asked when people discuss electric cars.
1] If we all switch will there be enough electric.
He said - we have a lot more gadgets now but they take far less electric to run them so if everyone was to switch tomorrow it would take us back to the consumption figures of the Mid nineties so no problem.
2] How are people living on terraced streets etc going to charge their cars.
He said - We do not fill our petrol/diesel cars every time we use them and unless you are doing a high daily mileage there is no need to top up an electric car every day, as electric vehicles become more popular more charging stations will become available you will be able to charge your car in the works car park or when you are doing your weekly/monthly shop etc not having a charging point outside your house will not be an issue.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-45743771
Anyway, I bought a new car in Aug. 3 years old as like you, what's the point in losing grands.
They can't expect continued growth year in year, eventually we reach "Maximum Stuff". Plus I now have two cars. One for pleasure, the other for computing. Both diesel. I'd go for electric if they were cheaper to buy that diesel and gave me more milage. My commute is 56miles each way and takes 75 mins I'd there are no traffic accidents.
- Status
Similar threads
