Safe Speed Forums

Supposing the "news" we hear about man made global warming is right. If we cut consumption by wasting less and thinking about how we use fossil fuels what is the worst that can happen? Surely even if they are all wrong and it's nothing to do with CO2 emmisions then if we are using less we will save money. Sounds good to me.

The oil is going to run out sooner or later and it will be sooner rather than later if x billion Chinese and Indians all want a car/hoildays abroad/ big house. We had better start thinking about what we are going to burn next had we not? We can't just say "oh, don't worry the next generation can worry about that."

found this article about peak oil quite interesting:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/archives/peak_oil/index.htm

Regards

Andrew

_________________
It's a scam........or possibly a scamola


Homer Simpson

What utter garbage that article (and the whole site) is. Another one who believes absolutely everything that goes on is a conspiracy! He'd be a good writer for the Daily Mail.

Just as many serious scientists are sceptical about the "global warming" theory, many are also sceptical about the view that serious oil depletion is just round the corner.

In the early 70s it was widely forecast that by 2005 we would have run out of oil. We now have a higher reserves/production ratio than we did then. Obviously oil will run out eventually, but not in the next hundred years.

And if the "global warming" theory proves to be correct, we will have to dramatically cut back on using the stuff anyway, so it will remain in the ground.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Skeptical science sites generally, not skeptical of global warming.



http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Steve_Milloy
http://www.skepdic.com/refuge/junkscience.html
http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006 ... e-read-ba/ (The Bad Astronomer's own comments)
http://www.skepchick.org/skepticsguide/ ... php?t=1164

Of course some of them do attack him personally, but I never said they didn't.

actually they all attack him personally and none offer dispute his agw claims other than saying that nothing he says can be believed because he's (a) conservative, (b) paid by evil corporations or (no doubt if I read further) (c) satan.

The fact that someone may be paid by [evil] corporations is quite a compelling reason to take their conclusions with a pinch of salt in today's geopolitical climate.

I haven't read the articles, nor do I intend to, but my above observation stands.

I tend to believe that the shift in global industry is away from the west to the east........Therfore the people who own these industries want the oil /fuel to be available where most growth, (and profit) is to be had.

What with the low pay available there AND low taxes on profits AND fuel?......They're heading there in droves, and shutting down expensive European plants.

Either our Governments are running scared of the coming shortages (due to refining capacity...not of crude itself) OR they're complacent in it!....OR they're selling off our "Carbon Rights"...

what about if they depend on [evil] governments for their handouts? (and there are no handouts for those who don't agree with said [evil] governments)

It was in the news today that Britain is responsible for 15% of the worlds Co2.

Obviously not content with our humble 2% they are now counting emissions from British owned companies abroad. How stupid is this going to get. We must all start beating ourselves with sticks as pennance.

Brace yourselves for a round of even more rediculous statistics about how us Brits are ruining the world. I must remember that next time I am being asked to put my hand in my pocket for a starving kid in Africa. May as well be hung for a sheep as a lamb as they say.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Yes, another seriously twisted statistic. You can bet that they didn't subtract the emission that come from the Uk due to foreign owned companies or from tourists. And that's just the tip of the iceberg of errors. I haven't got time to unravel it now...

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

I was trying to keep it simple.. Atmospheric radiation math gets complex very quickly. The net effect is re-radiation downwards of energy that would otherwise escape into space.



Actually, you won't find many serious scientists at all who are AGW 'skeptics'. Especially where 'skeptic' means 'deny the whole lot'.

As far as oil reserves go, it isn't wise to trust Official Government Statistics. Certainly it's not a good idea to rely on the middle east, which is what we are going to do as the North sea winds down.

a quick search finds hardly any at all:

none here

none here either

I guess you're only serious if you're on the government payroll.
actually, make that, you're only serious if you're a true believer.

johnsher, why are you so convinced that AGW is such a load of smoke and mirrors? Do you genuinely believe it, or are you just worried you'll have to give up your car in the future?

because there's no real science to support it (and I am talking agw, not "climate change"), just a load of dodgy computer models which are having to be continually "refined" as their prophesies of doom are proved false over and over again.


yes I do believe it and I ride a bike to work so if anything I'm more "green" than most of those who want us to believe the world is about to end.

I believe in climate change, The Ice ages proved that. The planet is in a continuous state of change.

I do not believe it is man made. To claim that we can do anything about it is complete crap. The worst thing is that all this "save the planet" cobblers is diverting research and investment in infrastructure to cope with the changes to come.

_________________
Speed camera policy Kills

Likewise - strange we haven't had some prophets of doom raise the odds on Earth being hit by some giant meteorite and start diverting resources etc to deal with that.

when that happens again, if man is still around, they'll soon be praying for some global warming.

How about 'Serious scientists who are actually qualified to comment'. Not 'Anyone with a PhD that will sign this.'. Professors of Anthropology are not generally regarded as climate experts.



I'm not on the government payroll; my background is in the oil industry. And I like things such as driving, central heating and refridgeration.
But (Man-made) global warming is pretty basic science, and if the effect was not real we wouldn't be here to argue about it.

Now, are people pushing an anti-car, anti-industry agenda based on this? Yes. They are stupid. This does not make the basic science wrong, though.

there seem to be a number of climate scientists on those lists. Be nice if we limited the "for" spokespeople to those with similar credentials - Al Gore take note!


the premise may be "pretty basic science" - ie a greenhouse effect is keeping the planet warmer than it would otherwise be which has resulted in conditions favourable for our evolution. Trying to claim that we're solely responsible for warming the planet based on 100 years of error prone data out of 3,500,000,000 or so being fed into some highly unreliable models is nothing but a leap of faith.