global warming myth

On Aug 24, 6:05*am, "Chris.B" wrote:

Nothing
is barred. Every crackpot idea becomes equally valid. From the Druids
to Scientology and every other afterlife insurance, pyramid sales
scam. No exclusions are possible by default. One cannot pick and
choose, from the vast deluded fantasy warehouse, which particular
lunacies to believe in.

Oh, that's just silly. Once you believe in *one* of these systems, all
the others are the lies and snares of the Devil, and those who follow
them are infidels.

So they will be burning each other at the stake, not just the
scientists.

John Savard

On Aug 24, 5:36*pm, Quadibloc wrote:

So they will be burning each other at the stake, not just the
scientists.

John Savard

Now, there's a plan! :-)

"Quadibloc" wrote in message
...
On Aug 24, 6:05 am, "Chris.B" wrote:

Nothing
is barred. Every crackpot idea becomes equally valid. From the Druids
to Scientology and every other afterlife insurance, pyramid sales
scam. No exclusions are possible by default. One cannot pick and
choose, from the vast deluded fantasy warehouse, which particular
lunacies to believe in.

"Oh, that's just silly. Once you believe in *one* of these systems, all
the others are the lies and snares of the Devil, and those who follow
them are infidels....."


Sorry, I don't see ChrisB's posts. He was kill-filed nearly two years ago
and I am now an athiest when it comes to believing in ChrisB's existence.
There is a dintinct difference between concern and radicalism, and ChrisB is
the latter.

On Aug 23, 3:05*am, "Chris.B" wrote:
On Aug 23, 3:11*am, wrote:



The MPG of my vehicle is not the issue here. *Shouldn't you be walking
or riding the bus?

Neither option is ideal. Shop by bicycle with proper carriers and
bags. Much greater range and/or speed than walking. Lower costs than
bus journeys without waiting to their timetable and poor/inadequate/
indifferent service. Bicycles are low noise, low impact, healthy, low
stress, go-anywhere transport. A secondhand bike has already paid its
carbon dues with honours and compound interest.

Not exactly.

Cycling raises one's energy expenditure by several hundred
kilocalories per hour. It has been surmised that each kilocalorie of
food requires the use of 7x to 10x that amount of energy in the form
of fossil fuels to grow it and get it to the table. This brings the
"MPG" of a bicycle down into the range similar to that of small cars
or scooters.

You can take short
cuts through housing, industrial and pedestrian areas where cars often
aren't allowed. No traffic jams.

Only because there aren't many bikes.

Out in the fresh air enjoying the
exercise, the birds and nature. Instead of suffering the toxins and
stresses of driving in the isolated bubble of a noisy and smelly
vehicle.

Listening to my favorite talk radio shows or CDs, while sipping coffee
in climate-controlled comfort.

Often with difficulty finding handy parking or paying
expensive parking charges at your destination.

And much more often, not.

On Aug 23, 8:04*am, wrote:
"Chris.B" wrote:
On Aug 23, 3:11 am, wrote:

The MPG of my vehicle is not the issue here. *Shouldn't you be walking
or riding the bus?

Neither option is ideal. Shop by bicycle with proper carriers and
bags. Much greater range and/or speed than walking. Lower costs than
bus journeys without waiting to their timetable and poor/inadequate/
indifferent service. Bicycles are low noise, low impact, healthy, low
stress, go-anywhere transport. A secondhand bike has already paid its
carbon dues with honours and compound interest. You can take short
cuts through housing, industrial and pedestrian areas where cars often
aren't allowed. No traffic jams. Out in the fresh air enjoying the
exercise, the birds and nature. Instead of suffering the toxins and
stresses of driving in the isolated bubble of a noisy and smelly
vehicle. Often with difficulty finding handy parking or paying
expensive parking charges at your destination.

I would be quite happy to cycle the 13 miles to work except for the fact
that cycling in rural Norfolk can be high-impact. The impact being that of
a car hitting the cyclist. So I travel to and from work in a car which
averages 67mpg (that's this mornings reading-never reset since I bought the
car.

Likely a diesel. One can generally get only about half as much diesel
as gasoline per barrel of crude.

I don't feel a hypocrite for driving a car, taking occasional air
trips and using oil and electricity for cooking, heating and lighting.
These things are necessary to participate in modern society.

Is that really necessary, if you really think the planet is in such
danger?

This doesn't
prevent me from wanting others to stop their excessive energy consumption
spoiling my grandchildrens future.

We would have to judge what is "excessive" now wouldn't we? You
_could_ ride a bike, others do. Not that you would really be saving
much, if any, fuel by doing so.

How many grandchildren do you have? Are you contributing to
overpopulation?

OwlBore , who has four kids, seems to think that overpopulation is a
problem. It is amusing that OwlBore bumper stickers were seen
plastered onto vehicles that were larger than their owners needed to
have. Unless of course they had four or five kids, and maybe a few
large dogs, and therefore "needed" a large vehicle.

Meanwhile, they want to compel others to ride public transit, or
walk. Interesting.

On Aug 23, 10:50*pm, "Cal Peters"
wrote:
"Martin Brown" wrote in message

...





On 22/08/2011 16:50, Cal Peters wrote:

"Martin Brown" wrote in message

edit

So whatever happened to the idea of good stewardship then? You want to
trash the planet in this generation simply to maximise the profits of a
few oil and coal oligarchs including many in the middle east notably in
Saudi Arabia who are actively sponsoring terrorism against us.

So long as there is a barrel of oil or a gallon of gas, someone will
want to buy it.

No, that's people in power making those decisions. *What am I supposed to do
about it? *I could stop using oil or gas and be the only one in a city doing
it. *People would just go by and laugh. *I could try to elect someone I want
to be in office, but that person would never win. *I could try and take on
the oil companies for God knows how many pollution violations before OSHA
became a reality, but I don't have the money to do so. *I don't have an
answer because the equation is impossible for an individual to solve.

One could cut back. Many of us (conservatives more so than liberals)
tend to economize anyway, and so naturally use less than some others
(mostly liberals) who talk big about conservative and saving the
planet, but who do precious little or make only token gestures to
conserve.

You may have cut back enough already. So long as the jet-setting libs
continue their hypocrisy, don't worry about cutting back any more.

edit

wrote:
On Aug 23, 8:04 am, wrote:
"Chris.B" wrote:
On Aug 23, 3:11 am, wrote:

The MPG of my vehicle is not the issue here. Shouldn't you be walking
or riding the bus?

Neither option is ideal. Shop by bicycle with proper carriers and
bags. Much greater range and/or speed than walking. Lower costs than
bus journeys without waiting to their timetable and poor/inadequate/
indifferent service. Bicycles are low noise, low impact, healthy, low
stress, go-anywhere transport. A secondhand bike has already paid its
carbon dues with honours and compound interest. You can take short
cuts through housing, industrial and pedestrian areas where cars often
aren't allowed. No traffic jams. Out in the fresh air enjoying the
exercise, the birds and nature. Instead of suffering the toxins and
stresses of driving in the isolated bubble of a noisy and smelly
vehicle. Often with difficulty finding handy parking or paying
expensive parking charges at your destination.

I would be quite happy to cycle the 13 miles to work except for the fact
that cycling in rural Norfolk can be high-impact. The impact being that of
a car hitting the cyclist. So I travel to and from work in a car which
averages 67mpg (that's this mornings reading-never reset since I bought the
car.

Likely a diesel. One can generally get only about half as much diesel
as gasoline per barrel of crude.

It is a diesel. My last petrol car only did 56 miles per gallon.
Petrol and diesel cost the same to within a couple of pence per litre.

The production figures from crude depend on the type of crude and the
market for the products. The price of my fuel goes up in winter because
Americans use more heating oil.



I don't feel a hypocrite for driving a car, taking occasional air
trips and using oil and electricity for cooking, heating and lighting.
These things are necessary to participate in modern society.

Is that really necessary, if you really think the planet is in such
danger?

One doesn't have to give up modern society and become a hermit to reduce
the carbon footprint.



This doesn't
prevent me from wanting others to stop their excessive energy consumption
spoiling my grandchildrens future.

We would have to judge what is "excessive" now wouldn't we? You
_could_ ride a bike, others do. Not that you would really be saving
much, if any, fuel by doing so.

I do ride a bike but not to work. I'm not prepared to ride to work along
the most dangerous B road in Norfolk with lots of blind bends and high
hedges or double the journey by taking an alternative route. Even if your
ridiculous statement about energy were true I grow a lot of my own food so
the extra calories would not use more fuel.


How many grandchildren do you have? Are you contributing to
overpopulation.

I have 5 grandchildren but the contribution to overpopulation is due to my
children not me.

OwlBore , who has four kids, seems to think that overpopulation is a
problem. It is amusing that OwlBore bumper stickers were seen
plastered onto vehicles that were larger than their owners needed to
have. Unless of course they had four or five kids, and maybe a few
large dogs, and therefore "needed" a large vehicle.

Meanwhile, they want to compel others to ride public transit, or
walk. Interesting.

I don't want to compel you to ride public transport or walk. However as a
conservative you should try to save money by being sensible about your
spending. Gas guzzling cars are for the stupid. Particularly with only one
person in them.

On Aug 27, 4:50*pm, wrote:
wrote:
On Aug 23, 8:04 am, wrote:
"Chris.B" wrote:
On Aug 23, 3:11 am, wrote:

The MPG of my vehicle is not the issue here. *Shouldn't you be walking
or riding the bus?

Neither option is ideal. Shop by bicycle with proper carriers and
bags. Much greater range and/or speed than walking. Lower costs than
bus journeys without waiting to their timetable and poor/inadequate/
indifferent service. Bicycles are low noise, low impact, healthy, low
stress, go-anywhere transport. A secondhand bike has already paid its
carbon dues with honours and compound interest. You can take short
cuts through housing, industrial and pedestrian areas where cars often
aren't allowed. No traffic jams. Out in the fresh air enjoying the
exercise, the birds and nature. Instead of suffering the toxins and
stresses of driving in the isolated bubble of a noisy and smelly
vehicle. Often with difficulty finding handy parking or paying
expensive parking charges at your destination.

I would be quite happy to cycle the 13 miles to work except for the fact
that cycling in rural Norfolk can be high-impact. The impact being that of
a car hitting the cyclist. So I travel to and from work in a car which
averages 67mpg (that's this mornings reading-never reset since I bought the
car.

Likely a diesel. *One can generally get only about half as much diesel
as gasoline per barrel of crude.

It is a diesel. My last petrol car only did 56 miles per gallon.
Petrol and diesel cost the same to within a couple of pence per litre.

The production figures from crude depend on the type of crude and the
market for the products. The price of my fuel goes up in winter because
Americans use more heating oil.

Brits use more heating oil in the winter as well. That might have
even more effect on the price you pay.

I don't feel a hypocrite for driving a car, taking occasional air
trips and using oil and electricity for cooking, heating and lighting.
These things are necessary to participate in modern society.

Is that really necessary, if you really think the planet is in such
danger?

One doesn't have to give up modern society and become a hermit to reduce
the carbon footprint.

Modern society burns fossil fuel on your behalf, whenever you partake
of its benefits.

This doesn't
prevent me from wanting others to stop their excessive energy consumption
spoiling my grandchildrens future.

We would have to judge what is "excessive" now wouldn't we? *You
_could_ ride a bike, others do. Not that you would really be saving
much, if any, fuel by doing so.

I do ride a bike but not to work. I'm not prepared to ride to work along
the most dangerous B road in Norfolk with lots of blind bends and high
hedges or double the journey by taking an alternative route. Even if your
ridiculous statement about energy were true

Actually, my statement is true, and hardly ridiculous.

I grow a lot of my own food so
the extra calories would not use more fuel.

Currently, the UK has to import food, presumably there is not enough
land to grow enough food for everyone. Certainly anyone who is
consuming additional calories in order to ride a bike for an hour or
more a day is making the shortage worse. You might have access to
some land for a garden, but that is certainly not the case for most in
the UK. Nor did you try to make the claim that you grow all of your
food, just "a lot" of it. Your statement is open to
interpretation.

How many grandchildren do you have? *Are you contributing to
overpopulation.

I have 5 grandchildren but the contribution to overpopulation is due to my
children not me.

If the world as a whole were as densely populated as the UK, there
would be about 35 billion people, maybe more.

So how many kids?

OwlBore , who has four kids, seems to think that overpopulation is a
problem. *It is amusing that OwlBore bumper stickers were seen
plastered onto vehicles that were larger than their owners needed to
have. *Unless of course they had four or five kids, and maybe a few
large dogs, and therefore "needed" a large vehicle.

Meanwhile, they want to compel others to ride public transit, or
walk. *Interesting.

I don't want to compel you to ride public transport or walk.

Yet you would not be above voting for candidates who would.

However as a
conservative you should try to save money by being sensible about your
spending.

I certainly am sensible about spending.

Gas guzzling cars are for the stupid. Particularly with only one
person in them.

And yet you probably use more fuel driving solo than the average world
citizen. See how easy it is to be a hypocrite!