As you can see my original post about global warming was right on the money without ever reading the link to begin with so not foolish at all, just right on the money…

The article in a nut shell is this and comes from United Whacked out Liberals for a Socialist World (UWLSW).

President Bush is EVIL, he is a KILLER, he is going to KILL us ALL, we are ALL DOOMED by President Bush…

Problem is the nut cases that wrote the article can’t simple write exactly what they mean, like the above, but rather have to put all kinds of BS in between so most the brain dead followers do not see that their leaders are fueled by hate, not facts, just pure hate…

 

Global warming results in weather extremes. Warmer summers, colder winters, etc. Global warming has bee a misnomer for decades and reputable scientists have wanted to change it for a long time.

-Don

 

I see that your understanding of science and the environment is right up there with your black and white simplistic "tax cuts will cure everything" understanding of economics.

"Yup, yup, I'll just keep my head buried here in the sand, 'cause if I can't see it, it ain't there, hyuk hyuk. If Bubbya says it ain't so, that's all there is to it"

 

And you'll run around believing Albert's screaming tantrums, thus panicing trying to stop it all?

 

No, its not that I stated I completely understand the science of it. Please try not to read between the lines. What I stated earlier is a few simple facts that are well known.

First, that environmental wackos for decades, at least the past 40 years have been screaming that the globe is warming and we are all doomed. However, their dooms day predictions have never panned out.

Second, for every crack pot scientist that states humans are causing the “mother earth” to warm there is another scientist stating that is not the fact, or there is no where the evidence to prove that fact, or that global warming is nothing more then a natural cycle we are going through.

In other words the scientist with credibility are telling you like it REALLY is ”We just do not know at this stage” Could it be that humans are causing global warming? It’s possible but very unlikely but until we know, and since we know for a FACT that the earths temps have barely risen in the past few hundred years there is NO need to get wacko and try to out law SUV’s BBQ’s gas powered lawn mowers etc that the extremist environmental wackos would like to see…

As far as tax cuts I have never stated it’s a cure all. I have simple stated that higher taxes make for a BAD economy and that is a FACT with no ifs ands or butts about it. The only reason for higher taxes is for more social programs of which are not needed.

Simple put, personal responsibility is as close to the “cure all” as you get. That goes for taxes and social programs and the wackos running around TRYING to make people believe that COLDER winters is an effect of global warming…

Global warming = colder winters, that’s the stupidest thing I have ever heard of, you could equate that with:

Hot water = Frost bite
Swimming in a frozen lake = heat stroke

The colder winters excuse of global warming and what it does to weather patterns is just a weak excuse for some scientist to regain some creditability that they have lost with all their other crack pot BS they have spewed for over 40 years which has NOT panned out…

 

XLT is a veritable renaissance man. An economist, a politician, an environmental scientist...

XLT,

You just don't get it. First, the pollution in cities like NY and LA is ALREADY completely unacceptable. Second, no one wants to ban SUV's and gas powered lawn mowers. What we want to see are some real increases in fuel efficiency.

As I already posted, the Ford Model A got 25 MPG in 1930. Why are we accepting worse gas mileage 75 years later?

Volkswagen built a car last year that got 240 MPG. This would be perfect for inner-city use.

Why not offer serious tax credits to get people to buy these cars instead of the land yachts they are currently driving? How about getting rid of the tax loopholes that allow people to write off their Excursion as a business expense even though all they use it for is to bring the kids to soccer?

The process of global warming causing weather extremes is hardly new and was not invented to save face. It was in the original warnings but the media preferred to use the term global warming because it made for a better sound bite.

-Don

 

Thanks, guess you and me are alike…

You don’t think they are trying to ban gas powered lawn mowers and BBQ’s? Talk to some people in California and then see where that stands…

Great, put them on the market and let those who WANT to buy them buy them. If others like me don’t want them then that should be fine as well. Nobody should have the right to FORCE me to drive something I don’t want to drive…

Correct me if I am wrong, and I could be, but I am pretty sure there are tax credits for fuel efficient, or “mother earth” friendly vehicles like electric vehicles. So the tax incentives are there. I don’t want no electric piece of crap mother earth friendly vehicle because they are a crock of chit.

First they are NOT mother earth friendly, electric vehicles, they just make people “feel” good and think they are mother earth friendly. They are just “about” as dirty as any other vehicle that gets 20+ mpg.

They have to be recharged very often and that takes electricity which is usually produced by a power plant of some sort and most likely one that burns something that produces smog, so when you get down to it they are a “little” cleaner but no where as clean as the environmental wackos would have you believe…

No, they use the term global warming for the reasons they “originally” came up with. Gases trapped in the atmosphere which in turn keeps the heat in like a glass house used for growing plants.

Problem is they wanted to be right so bad BEFORE they had any actual proof they went and spewed their false propaganda and then found out later they really didn’t know what they hell they were talking about and have been trying to back track ever since.

Thus, the stupid and illogical illusions that for some magical reason when winters are colder then normal it is because of “global warming”. Give them enough time and they just might blame the last ice age on global warming as well.

Scratch that, they can’t do that because there were no evil humans driving around HUMMERS and SUV’S killing all the children…

Now, for the record I don’t for a moment think that there is no such thing as global warming, I am sure there is and I am sure we are seeing a “little” bit of that. However I am on the side of the scientist that actual use logic and their brains to do an accurate study and try to understand just why it is so.

We know we go through cycles, just look at the past few winters with record cold spells breaking 50 – 100 year records, it’s a cycle, unless of course there are some wackos out there who want to blame some of the cold winters in the 1900’s on global warming as well…

Is there global warming? I would say I believe there is to a small point. Is it caused by humans and their inventions? There is absolutely no proof at this time that can accurately and honestly point in that direction. I say proof as in facts, not some scientist that wants people to believe they can get frost bite from hot water…

In any regards if it were true that humans were indeed causing global warming there is no reason to freak out and act out now. Doing something now will have extremely little to NO effect on the climate.

As I stated before the environmental wackos have proven themselves wrong time and time again. They started spewing this crap in the 60’s and nothing has happened yet, none of their predictions have come true. You know why? Because they didn’t have a clue what they were talking about so there is no reason to listen to them now…

 

California will eventually try to ban Solar radiation because it causes Ozone degradation. Let's stick with semi-normal states

No one should have the right to force me to have trouble breathing every time summer comes around. How would you like it if someone set up a smog belching factory next to your house? That's exactly what we have done with the cars in this country. You want to own a huge SUV? Fine. Stay the hell out of NYC, LA, and any other cities with already bad pollution problems.

The tax credits are jokes. States like Colorado are the only ones with credits large enough to make buying a hybrid cost effective.

Sometimes you are a complete moron. You live in the damned boondocks. I'm not asking you drive an electric car (besides which no one believes electric cars are ready for wide spread use). But people living in NYC? We have severe pollution problems. LA is worse. Should people be allowed to drive completely fuel inefficient cars that force children and the elderly to stay inside during the summer because the pollution is so bad? What about their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

First, get off the damned electric cars. Where the hell did I mention electric cars? Second, the Ford Excursion gets 11 MPG in the city!!! Do you really think that is acceptable? City busses get better gas mileage for heaven's sake!

_PLEASE_ do not lecture me on systems analysis. I know just as well as you do that electric cars still create pollution at the power plant. I know just as well as you do that if the power plant is clean, then the emissions are significantly lower than those of an internal combustion engine. I know just as well as you do that if the power plant is not clean, then the emissions are only slightly lower.

The funny thing is that you have also completely written off hybrid vehicle as well. You think any form of electric propulsion = bad. Have you ever thought about the advantages that electric motors have over gasoline engines? The astronomically higher torque output for one? Have you ever asked yourself why every freight train in this country is powered by electric motors?

Arguing with you is like beating my head against a brick wall until it is bloody, only less fun. I've read the reports. I doubt you've even seen them.

I wonder how you would feel if your daughter were killed in a car accident by some yutz driving a Hummer. Thankfully the insurance companies stopped insuring them because there was little chance the vehicle they hit would survive, or the vehicles occupants for that matter.

That's right. Why do today what you can put off til tomorrow? The procrastinators creed. Let's just wait until the problem is so serious that we can't do anything about it. Let's wait until the polar ice caps melt completely.

I would ask you to prove that they were wrong but you won't so I won't bother.

-Don

 

I don’t know, if we let more people like you decide what is good and bad for everybody then very few would have the right to ”Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”

What would you like to ban or curb next? What would you like to tell me I can and cannot eat? What would you like to tell me I can and cannot wear next? What would you like to tell me I can and cannot watch on TV or the movies next?

See where I am going? You want to restrict ”liberties” kind of like most liberals, who want the power to grant liberties as they see fit because they think they know what is best…

You want more fuel efficient vehicles then give the auto manufactures big tax breaks on the vehicles they produce that are more fuel efficient, give those that invest the time and capital into fuel efficient vehicles big tax breaks as well and see if you don’t see more fuel efficient vehicles, in other words give people and business more of their OWN money back and see what they do with it. You just might be amazed at what can happen.

Auto manufactures really don’t have much incentive to develop more fuel efficient vehicles today because the market is not there, not the market that will pay the huge amount of money that goes into research and development of these type of vehicles. If they were allowed to keep 100% of the profit for 10 – 20 years after development then maybe the cost passed on to the consumer would be little to none thus opening a market for those who want these vehicles because they would be in a price range that was inline with what most ordinary people can afford for a vehicle.

The other way to look at it is some families can only afford one vehicle so sometimes that means buying the big SUV so the whole family can come along and tow a boat or trailer. If you made the fuel efficient vehicle very cheap and affordable then maybe those same families that can only afford the big gas guzzler that they HAVE to drive around in town for short errands could afford a fuel efficient vehicle for the errands and use the big SUV when needed…

I have seen the electric cars and the hybrids and I wouldn’t buy one of them because they are worthless for the money they want. They can only fit two adults and that’s about it, they can’t haul anything and they can’t tow anything so there useless for family activities but very useful for normal errands. Since I can afford one vehicle for all my needs it has to be one that WILL fit all my needs…

So you see there is much more to it then just stating a vehicle has to be fuel efficient you have to look at the entire picture with logic and common sense. People have different needs and one YUGO is not going to work for all families. This is America and not a socialist or communist country where a very tiny small group can dictate the majority what they will or will not do…

The environmental wackos, the ones running around about dooms day, have been proven wrong time and time again and thus their credibility is all gone and the reason why nobody listens to them anymore and basically laughs at them.

 

The only thing I care about is being able to breathe in the summer. Again I wonder how you would feel if your daughter had asthma and could not go outside during the summer because of pollution.

The fact is, I am not telling you that you can't drive a f*&$ing SUV. What I am telling you is that you should build a more fuel efficient engine. Are you seriously trying to tell me that after 75 years we can't build a more fuel efficient engine?

Does what you eat affect my life? Not at all so I do not give a rats a$$.

This does not affect me so I could care less what you wear.

Funny but the only people trying to ban movies and video games are the right wing conservative groups.

I believe in civil liberties more than you do. That has been made clear in our debates. The difference is that I think kids and the elderly should be able to leave their house during the summer instead of having to stay inside because of ozone pollution.

WE HAVE. JUST HOW STUPID ARE YOU? THE AUTO INDUSTRY HAS RECEIVED ONE TAX BREAK AFTER ANOTHER FOR DEVELOPING FUEL EFFICIENT VEHICLES.

Instead, they take the money, invest a minimal amount of effort, turn out a half assed vehicle and then say "See, nobody wants these vehicles" when no one buys their half assed efforts.

I don't give a rats *** what New Hampshire does. You guys have more trees than brains. What I want to know is why a City like New York can't ban fuel inefficient vehicles which are causing severe pollution problems for us.

California keeps trying to require more fuel efficient vehicles but the federal government keeps stopping them. Talk about a freaking abuse of power.

An chemical companies don't have much incentive to not dump chemicals into our rivers. What stops them are laws. Cars are dumping pollutants into our atmosphere only we don't have stronger laws to stop them. The only reason cars are as clean as they are today is because of federal laws. Without them, we would still be driving smog machines.

When the first pollution laws went into effect there were crackpots like yourself running around bitching about how it would ruin cars, they would not have any power, etc. Well we got over that. We have extremely powerful engines that also meet pollution controls. Detroit can do it, they just prefer to pollute the atmosphere because it is cheaper and more profitable.

I don't care if they want an SUV. What I want are SUV's that get better gas mileage than 11 MPG!!!!! It is easy enough to do, just that no one wants to do it when polluting is cheaper.

Besides which, the only reason a lot of these people are driving around in a big SUV is because it is a tax write off for them.

Go to a Honda dealer. Drive a Civic hybrid. It is a Honda Civic with a hybrid drivetrain. It has plenty of room and great acceleration from a stop. Moreover, the car is only slightly more expensive than a regular Civic and this amount is made up in tax credits in some states.

Have you seen the new Ford Escape Hybrid or the Exporer they are working on? All badass cars.

You act as if people with boat trailers are in the majority. They are in the minority.

The only one who routinely fails to use logic and common sense is you. You are making the same arguments the morons did in the 70's when the first fuel and pollution standards were introduced. Unless we tell detroit to make more efficient, less polluting cars, they won't do it. That means grandma and grandson have to stay inside during the summer to stay alive.

Proven wrong? Where is the proof? Is the melting and breaking off of a huge section of the southern polar ice cap wrong?

-Don

 

let's get a few things straight....


why should I (when I say I, I mean any one of us in the first person):


give up my V8 pickup when government makes up the bulk of Crown Vic purchases and drives around in big *** HumVees? HumVees make sense off road and in combat, but are they truly needed for highway driving or just bombing around the base on paved roads?

Why should I give up my airconditioning when I can almost guarantee that government buildings have their temperatures set lower than my house.

Why should I give up CFC generating products when there is greater damage being doen by HCFCs used by Government contractors?


My little, itty, bitty Honda push mower makes way less polution that the big-*** riding mowers used by my municipality.



The Pentagon claiming the end of the world... hahahaha they (and other departments/levels of government) are worst offenders of environmental damage.

 

Sirket--
I don't want to start another argument but I just got a quote for insurance on a Hummer from Progressive.com about 3 minutes ago. Maube they won't insure them in NYC, but here in FL they will.

If you don't like where you live them move. No one is forcing you to live in a smog infested city. If as you are so fond of saying you have voted out the politicians who fail to pass laws to protect you then move to another jurisdiction.

What can a Model A tow and haul. I think the modern trucks haul/tow more. I do agree engines can be made more efficeint or technology can be produced to make them better. The hybrids are crap right now, but give it a few years when all of the manufactureres are in the game and the quality and power will increase. One of the reasons Ford took so long to ocme out with their version was to get it right.

I do agree with you. Califorinia prolly will try to outlaw the sun and farting eventually, it releases methane.

 

sirket,

Man you write some long post…

Here is a win-win situation that I am sure my good friend sirket could agree to. We should let auto manufactures keep 100% of the profit for 15 years on any vehicles they make 100% more efficient. In other words if the F150 today that gets, say 18mpg, can be made to get 36mpg with the same or more horse power and torque the manufacture gets to keep 100% of the profits for 15 years, or if you really want to get efficient vehicles make it 10 years, then in 10 years if they up the mpg with the same or more horsepower and torque it gets 72mpg they get to keep 100% of the profits, which means NO TAXES to any local, city, state or federal government…

What do you say sirket? You in on it? You serious about efficient vehicles?

Yes, they have a lot of freaking trees in this state. I am originally from California, Southern California and moved here in 1993 and still have all my teeth. I have not had bad well water yet, seems to be a problem in some areas and people missing teeth…

Oh and the vast majority of people buying SUV’s are NOT doing so for tax breaks…

 

sirket,

Question for you? What do you own? Do you own an F150? If so your arguments are not valid for further debate, don’t you think it’s a bid odd and liberal to be arguing about not letting others have what you have, and do what you do?

 

#1. I've never said you should give up your V8. I wish people would understand this. What I want is a more fuel efficient V8. It is certainl;y possible to do but no one is willing to spend the money because polluting is cheaper.

#2. The government should be held to the same standards as you or I, hands down. Combat is a different story.

On a percentage basis it does not. Your little itty bitty honda would probably produce far more pollution if you tried to use it to mow the lawn that your municipality is.

-Don