Clarebabes

There's a debate on the BBC website and it seems the brain washing has been successful in making people think it's all down to cars.

TIA
Clare

ski

Only 0.6% comes from cars.96.5% comes from natural sources.

There is no such thing as global warming.Its all BS for people to pay more tax.The earth just goes through natural cycles,and nothing we can do about it.

Pete

hedgehog

Yip, was just posting the same figure as ski. On a global basis about 0.6% of CO2 comes from transport sources. I don't have a figure for the UK alone but as it is "global" warming they are ranting on about I suppose the global figure is a better measure.

Man produces something just over 3% of all the CO2 produced world wide each year, though when there is a big volcano or similar this can be reduced even further in percentage terms. The warming effect of CO2 is not linear, i.e. double the amount of CO2 does not double the amount of warming, and in truth water vapour is far and away the most significant greenhouse gas, you need only go outside on a cloudy night in January to prove that. Interestingly water vapour does not feature in any of the current climate models and today's announcement of doom is based upon a computer model.

Perhaps the most famous climate computer model was the so called "Mann hockey stick" which appeared to show no change in global temperature until recently when it shot up. Once access was gained to Mann's work it was found that feeding random numbers, rather than climate data, into his computer model produced a graph of exactly the same shape as what he claimed was a graph based on temperature records. In effect he had written a program to draw a hockey stick shape and then published that his computer model showed we were all doomed.

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

I probably fart more CO2 than my scooby

hedgehog

That might be closer to the truth than you realise. Over Xmas someone did one of those joke things where they work out the distance that Santa would have to cover etc. to deliver all the presents. They also discovered that because reindeer produce methane which is a much more potent so called "greenhouse gas" than CO2 that in fact doing the trip by reindeer powered sleigh would, if you assume that CO2 has anything at all to do with global warming an assumption which has no scientific support, produce as much global warming potential as doing it by plane.

Also note that the figure of 0.6% is for all transport, not just for the private cars so hated by those who would like control of our lives. It would be interesting to see it broken down into "private cars" and "farting lentil eating cyclists."

Red Ken was proud to announce that his Kengestion Charge had reduced traffic by 30%. When he was pushed on the effects on air pollution a "spokesperson" eventually admitted that there had been no detectable change. What does that tell us about the amount of air pollution produced by the modern car? 30% decrease in the number of cars, 0% change in air pollution.

I believe Saab actually claimed in one of their adverts that the gas coming out the exhaust of their cars was cleaner than the air being sucked in and the Kengestion Charge evidence would seem to support this.

boomer

I can't believe that the BBC can get away with regurgitating these lies on both their website and as headline news (all fecking day)

Have a read of Climate Change Truths and Green Myths for a few thoughts!

mb

Chris L

There is also some very interesting reading here about NASA's research into global warming on Mars. Not quite sure how we are responsible for that Apparantly they have linked the changes in atomospheric conditions with increased sunspot activity. Don't suppose this might be having a similar effect on us then??

Clarebabes

Thanks for the info. Can anyone write me a suitable response to these idiots? Not more than 100 words please.....

Otherwise I'll have to have a go myself..... Might not get published!

David Lock

OK - so if the transport pollution side is so much BS why is there such a fuss?? Genuine question - I can't see who would gain aside from makers of 'cat converters for exhausts...........

Chris L

Most of the cities that I've been to that suffer the worst pollution (Moscow, Jakarta, Cairo etc) seem to have several things in common: huge numbers of old (very old) knackered cars and a massive use of diesel. Places such as London and Paris, despite the huge numbers of cars, don't seem to suffer anywhere near as badly.

The fuss is basically a lot of scare mongering, related to taxation. There are great improvements we could make to our working environment, by using more efficient, less polluting fuels, but I simply don't buy the global warming myth that the governments continue to push.

I've always been cynical about this. To give you an example: Most of the original research into the benefits of catalytic convertors on cars was done by Johnson Matthey. The main metal used in the catalytic process is platinum. JM just happen to own or invest in most of the platinum mines in the world. Conflict of interest maybe?? Now also remember that the main gas produced by CCs is carbon dioxide. Isn't that the gas we're meant to be cutting?

So CCs use one of the rarest metals on earth and produce the one gas we're trying to reduce..

Another good example is the Congestion Charge in London and the exemptions given to certain vehicles such as the Toyota Prius. The Prius is a very clever car and works well in towns, where it can use its electric motor. All well and good, but look at the figures for combined consumption on longer trips and it really is quite poor. Largely because it is a heavy car. Also consider that the batteries are only meant to last for between 5 and 7 years and Toyota admit it will cost £2500 to replace them. So who is going to buy a 5 year old Prius?

So you are going to find a lot of these cars being scrapped or neglected when they are quite young. Not exactly the most environmentally friendly thing to be doing. We really do need to start looking beyond the headlines and start asking our governments some more searching questions, rather than just blindly accepting what they tell us.

hedgehog

I posted this in another thread but it also applies here so I hope you will forgive me for posting it twice. It is an open letter to the Canadian PM. Despite the claims of the greens that all scientists believe in man made global warming the list of 60 leading scientists, from all over the world, who signed it makes interesting reading as does the body of the letter:



An open letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper:



Dear Prime Minister:



As accredited experts in climate and related scientific disciplines, we are writing to propose that balanced, comprehensive public-consultation sessions be held so as to examine the scientific foundation of the federal government's climate-change plans. This would be entirely consistent with your recent commitment to conduct a review of the Kyoto Protocol. Although many of us made the same suggestion to then-prime ministers Martin and Chrétien, neither responded, and, to date, no formal, independent climate-science review has been conducted in Canada. Much of the billions of dollars earmarked for implementation of the protocol in Canada will be squandered without a proper assessment of recent developments in climate science.



Observational evidence does not support today's computer climate models, so there is little reason to trust model predictions of the future. Yet this is precisely what the United Nations did in creating and promoting Kyoto and still does in the alarmist forecasts on which Canada's climate policies are based. Even if the climate models were realistic, the environmental impact of Canada delaying implementation of Kyoto or other greenhouse-gas reduction schemes, pending completion of consultations, would be insignificant. Directing your government to convene balanced, open hearings as soon as possible would be a most prudent and responsible course of action.



While the confident pronouncements of scientifically unqualified environmental groups may provide for sensational headlines, they are no basis for mature policy formulation. The study of global climate change is, as you have said, an "emerging science," one that is perhaps the most complex ever tackled. It may be many years yet before we properly understand the Earth's climate system. Nevertheless, significant advances have been made since the protocol was created, many of which are taking us away from a concern about increasing greenhouse gases. If, back in the mid-1990s, we knew what we know today about climate, Kyoto would almost certainly not exist, because we would have concluded it was not necessary.



We appreciate the difficulty any government has formulating sensible science-based policy when the loudest voices always seem to be pushing in the opposite direction. However, by convening open, unbiased consultations, Canadians will be permitted to hear from experts on both sides of the debate in the climate-science community. When the public comes to understand that there is no "consensus" among climate scientists about the relative importance of the various causes of global climate change, the government will be in a far better position to develop plans that reflect reality and so benefit both the environment and the economy.



"Climate change is real" is a meaningless phrase used repeatedly by activists to convince the public that a climate catastrophe is looming and humanity is the cause. Neither of these fears is justified. Global climate changes all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural "noise." The new Canadian government's commitment to reducing air, land and water pollution is commendable, but allocating funds to "stopping climate change" would be irrational. We need to continue intensive research into the real causes of climate change and help our most vulnerable citizens adapt to whatever nature throws at us next.



We believe the Canadian public and government decision-makers need and deserve to hear the whole story concerning this very complex issue. It was only 30 years ago that many of today's global-warming alarmists were telling us that the world was in the midst of a global-cooling catastrophe. But the science continued to evolve, and still does, even though so many choose to ignore it when it does not fit with predetermined political agendas.



We hope that you will examine our proposal carefully and we stand willing and able to furnish you with more information on this crucially important topic.



CC: The Honourable Rona Ambrose, Minister of the Environment, and the Honourable Gary Lunn, Minister of Natural Resources

- - -



Sincerely,



Dr. Ian D. Clark, professor, isotope hydrogeology and paleoclimatology, Dept. of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa



Dr. Tad Murty, former senior research scientist, Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans, former director of Australia's National Tidal Facility and professor of earth sciences, Flinders University, Adelaide; currently adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa



Dr. R. Timothy Patterson, professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences (paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa



Dr. Fred Michel, director, Institute of Environmental Science and associate professor, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Carleton University, Ottawa



Dr. Madhav Khandekar, former research scientist, Environment Canada. Member of editorial board of Climate Research and Natural Hazards



Dr. Paul Copper, FRSC, professor emeritus, Dept. of Earth Sciences, Laurentian University, Sudbury, Ont.



Dr. Ross McKitrick, associate professor, Dept. of Economics, University of Guelph, Ont.



Dr. Tim Ball, former professor of climatology, University of Winnipeg; environmental consultant



Dr. Andreas Prokocon, adjunct professor of earth sciences, University of Ottawa; consultant in statistics and geology



Mr. David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and past chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa



Dr. Christopher Essex, professor of applied mathematics and associate director of the Program in Theoretical Physics, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.



Dr. Gordon E. Swaters, professor of applied mathematics, Dept. of Mathematical Sciences, and member, Geophysical Fluid Dynamics Research Group, University of Alberta



Dr. L. Graham Smith, associate professor, Dept. of Geography, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.



Dr. G. Cornelis van Kooten, professor and Canada Research Chair in environmental studies and climate change, Dept. of Economics, University of Victoria



Dr. Petr Chylek, adjunct professor, Dept. of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax



Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, climate consultant, former meteorology advisor to the World Meteorological Organization. Previously research scientist in climatology at University of Exeter, U.K.



Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and professor emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta



Dr. David E. Wojick, P.Eng., energy consultant, Star Tannery, Va., and Sioux Lookout, Ont.



Rob Scagel, M.Sc., forest microclimate specialist, principal consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.



Dr. Douglas Leahey, meteorologist and air-quality consultant, Calgary



Paavo Siitam, M.Sc., agronomist, chemist, Cobourg, Ont.



Dr. Chris de Freitas, climate scientist, associate professor, The University of Auckland, N.Z.



Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan professor of meteorology, Dept. of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences, Massachusetts Institute of Technology



Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, emeritus professor of physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, N.J.



Mr. George Taylor, Dept. of Meteorology, Oregon State University; Oregon State climatologist; past president, American Association of State Climatologists



Dr. Ian Plimer, professor of geology, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Adelaide; emeritus professor of earth sciences, University of Melbourne, Australia



Dr. R.M. Carter, professor, Marine Geophysical Laboratory, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia



Mr. William Kininmonth, Australasian Climate Research, former Head National Climate Centre, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology, Scientific and Technical Review



Dr. Hendrik Tennekes, former director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute



Dr. Gerrit J. van der Lingen, geologist/paleoclimatologist, Climate Change Consultant, Geoscience Research and Investigations, New Zealand



Dr. Patrick J. Michaels, professor of environmental sciences, University of Virginia



Dr. Nils-Axel Mörner, emeritus professor of paleogeophysics & geodynamics, Stockholm University, Stockholm, Sweden



Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, Calif.



Dr. Roy W. Spencer, principal research scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama, Huntsville



Dr. Al Pekarek, associate professor of geology, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences Dept., St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud, Minn.



Dr. Marcel Leroux, professor emeritus of climatology, University of Lyon, France; former director of Laboratory of Climatology, Risks and Environment, CNRS



Dr. Paul Reiter, professor, Institut Pasteur, Unit of Insects and Infectious Diseases, Paris, France. Expert reviewer, IPCC Working group II, chapter 8 (human health)



Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, physicist and chairman, Scientific Council of Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland



Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, reader, Dept. of Geography, University of Hull, U.K.; editor, Energy & Environment



Dr. Hans H.J. Labohm, former advisor to the executive board, Clingendael Institute (The Netherlands Institute of International Relations) and an economist who has focused on climate change



Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, senior scientist emeritus, University of Kansas, past director and state geologist, Kansas Geological Survey



Dr. Asmunn Moene, past head of the Forecasting Centre, Meteorological Institute, Norway



Dr. August H. Auer, past professor of atmospheric science, University of Wyoming; previously chief meteorologist, Meteorological Service (MetService) of New Zealand



Dr. Vincent Gray, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of The Greenhouse Delusion: A Critique of 'Climate Change 2001,' Wellington, N.Z.



Dr. Howard Hayden, emeritus professor of physics, University of Connecticut



Dr Benny Peiser, professor of social anthropology, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, U.K.



Dr. Jack Barrett, chemist and spectroscopist, formerly with Imperial College London, U.K.



Dr. William J.R. Alexander, professor emeritus, Dept. of Civil and Biosystems Engineering, University of Pretoria, South Africa. Member, United Nations Scientific and Technical Committee on Natural Disasters, 1994-2000



Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences, University of Virginia; former director, U.S. Weather Satellite Service



Dr. Harry N.A. Priem, emeritus professor of planetary geology and isotope geophysics, Utrecht University; former director of the Netherlands Institute for Isotope Geosciences; past president of the Royal Netherlands Geological & Mining Society



Dr. Robert H. Essenhigh, E.G. Bailey professor of energy conversion, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University



Dr. Sallie Baliunas, astrophysicist and climate researcher, Boston, Mass.



Douglas Hoyt, senior scientist at Raytheon (retired) and co-author of the book The Role of the Sun in Climate Change; previously with NCAR, NOAA, and the World Radiation Center, Davos, Switzerland



Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, independent energy advisor and scientific climate and carbon modeller, official IPCC reviewer, Bavaria, Germany



Dr. Boris Winterhalter, senior marine researcher (retired), Geological Survey of Finland, former professor in marine geology, University of Helsinki, Finland



Dr. Wibjörn Karlén, emeritus professor, Dept. of Physical Geography and Quaternary Geology, Stockholm University, Sweden



Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, physicist/meteorologist, previously with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Calif.; atmospheric consultant.



Dr. Art Robinson, founder, Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, Cave Junction, Ore.



Dr. Arthur Rörsch, emeritus professor of molecular genetics, Leiden University, The Netherlands; past board member, Netherlands organization for applied research (TNO) in environmental, food and public health



Dr. Alister McFarquhar, Downing College, Cambridge, U.K.; international economist



Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate and atmospheric science consultant, IPCC expert reviewer, U.K.

Hoppy

Very interesting reading here, and on the links. Thanks