The proper scientific term is "global climate change" because some regions are expected to become warmer, some cooler and some will simply have more extreme weather. The only reason it is sometimes referred to as "global warming" is because the average effect on global temperatures will be warmer. The most expensive results of this gradual warming will not be the small temperature difference but the indirect effects such as sea level rise and more extreme weather.

Contrary to what some right-wing conservatives are claiming, the science behind global warming is stregthening, not becoming more uncertain.

 

Yeah, when I was a kid, we had that kind of weather, and I had to walk to school in it, uphill, both ways. And twice on Sunday!

 

I know. Some of these guys are a real piece of work.

 

I guess we'll find out but from everything I've read (excluding Motor Trend) the 5.0L will be closer to 350 hp. (It is mentioned @ 400+ hp in Mustang conversations though) In any event down compared to the EB according to Ford. Reports also indicate the 5.0l will have similiar mpg to current 5.4L, while EB is 25% better than 5.4L (according to Ford) Whats guaranteed is the 5.0L will not have the the flat tourque plateau of the EB or the match the tourque of the 6.2L (assuming more widespread availability of the 6.2L across the F150 lineup)

Two quotes from Ford that are not speculation: EB in F150 25% better than 5.4L, and also the EB will be "Premium" offering above 5.0L.

In fairness the 5.0L should be a great engine and will be cheaper to buy vs the "premium" EB.

I too very much look fwd to the info so we can make more informed decisions and retire the speculation.

 

I'm going to try to be kind here... I've been reading from this forum for over 11 years now, never seem a left wing nut bar try to spew that filth on this forum. Aren't there enough other forums where you can keep to yourselves. You called in global cooling in the 70's, numbers didn't back you up, changed it to global warming in the 80's, numbers havn't backed you up (no warming trend since 1998) so last couple years changed it to global climate change so that if anything happens you can assess blame. As we recenty found out the data is made up, not peer reviewed, and full of cr@p. ANYTHING but strengthened. I feel sorry for you. When it does warm up for short periods of time it can be directly linked to sun spot activity. Look at the peer reviewed data. Its time you take Al Gore's movie out of the DVD player and go outside and check it out.

 

just so you guys know when Ford says factory install, what they mean is the send the unit to outside installer to install the product. just like they do now. if you order dvd head rests or a rmst its not actually installed at the factory.

the other thing you should know is that i know of techs that have had to replace complete wiring harnesses in units because of the so called factory installed rmst, because they pooched the install so bad.

 

You REALLY need to educate yourself.

The global cooling scare is a hoax perpetrated by those who want you to believe the burning of fossil fuels does not cause warming. Most peer reviewed scientific papers from the 70's favored global warming over global cooling although the amount of historical climate data available in the '70's was but a tiny fraction of the data we have today so there was less certainty. But the prevailing scientific concensus was that we did not have enough data to say for sure or that the globe was warming. But it is true that there are smaller cooling trends within ANY larger warming trend. These are often taken by non-scientists to somehow dispute global warming theory. But I prefer to base my beliefs on good science, not amatuer speculation.

Here's a link if you want to further your education about the global cooling hoax:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...-cooling_N.htm

No, that's not what the facts show. The data was not changed by the recent events that were widely reported by the press and the science behind the data remains as strong as ever. Just today the New York Times published an article about your kind of skeptic:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/07/sc...html?th&emc=th


I am looking at the peer reviewed data, just as the 99% of the world's climatologists and have come to the same conclusion they have. Global warming is real and the science is sound. The only thing that is uncertain is exactly how fast the warming will occur and how far it will go. That's why even insurance companies and lending institutions are changing their business practices based upon the data.

But, like everything else these days, the conservatives have tried to use this issue for political purposes.

 

Do you really really want about 200 articles on here showing how you are wrong? You get your unbiased info from the NY Times? WOW. How about TMZ?

99% of scientests are not on your side of the argument... Not even close. Went you take out the scientests that will monetarily gain from the junk science its not even close to a majority. Like I said before. I truly feel sorry for you. You must fall for everything that comes your way!

 

What's TMZ? Is that a peer reviewed scientific journal?

I didn't say 99% of all scientists believe man-caused global climate change science is on solid footing (most scientists have not weighed in on the matter publicly). I said 99% of all climatologists believe man-caused global climate change science is on solid footing.

You see, all climatologists are scientists but not all scientists are climatologists. Once you understand that distinction you are ready to watch this so you can understand how you've been bamboozled by the tin-foil hatters (their "science" is anything but sound):

http://www.slideboom.com/presentatio...9e78-af1a-4fda

If you want further confirmation of the accuracy of that information, the material referenced is in the presentation notes.

Once you have watched that we can discuss that further (I wouldn't want you to continue to embarass yourself).

Who knows, when we are done you might even be ready to come out of your home without your tin-foil hat on! That will be a big step forward. Then we can move on to disproving that the moon landing was faked by NASA scientists in the Nevada desert.

 

I see a program on TV months ago saying that Humnas are infact slowing global warming. Seems crazy i know but they said something like 50% of current global warming causeing polution was coming from cattle! Yes thats correct Cattle. They said that if humans didnt eat cattle at the rate we did that they would breed out of control and there bum gases alone would do more damage than if humans where not here.

All i know is the UK gets more rain every year and the US get cooler every winter where we live. Summer this year was cooler than the year before also.

 

yeah, the article mentions a modification center that is near the factory plants. But the article almost makes it sound like they will actually be installed at the factory in 2011, but maybe not.

how can they screw up the install, they only install the 1-button units and don't they already come with a plug-in harness and you only have to splice about 4 wires?

 

People with a lot of money want to focus the issue away from coal and other fossil fuels. Cattle contribute less than 25% and if mega-beef/dairy farms didn't exist it would be much less than that. The theory that cattle will breed out of control if we don't eat them is ludicrous.

Duh, that must prove the climatologists are wrong then, huh?

 

Topic Derailed.

 

Ok I'm not going to change your delusional mind (too late they must have got to you early) and your certainly not going to change mine... (cause its mine, doesn't belong to left wing talking points) Lets go back to talking about F150s here. Not a Prius, not Honda Insights, Good old 2009+ F150s. And I'll leave mine running all night cause its -28C right now and maybe according to you, if I do it'll be a touch warmer come morning!

 

Go to sleep and do not wake up til January 11th. It's going to be a big day for the F-150.