Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Possibly so. I am not a 7 day, 5000 year creationist. Too hard to answer too many questions. I don't have any problem being out in nature and believing someone much more powerful and wonderful than I am created all of it. I think the study of DNA has brought a lot of skeptics into the Intelligent design camp. Dr Collins being one of the more outspoken ones. However there are universities that would not allow a professor to put forth any sort of intelligent design theories. I find that very closed minded.
Science deals only with the falsifiable. Sciencr exists to disprove its own theories if it can
Since belief systems cannot be proven false nor do believers wish to prove them false, they are not part of science
A scientific theory is the working hypothesis that attempts to explain an already observable phenomenon.
Then, this theory is put to the test--the idea being to disprove it, shake it loose, knock it down. One method is experimentation, and if the experimentation proves rather than disproves the theory, then the experimental evidence is put to "peer review" to see if the data can be replicated or supported by OTHER scientists who are attempting to knock it down.
The "theory" of evolution for instance, has withstood 150+ years of trying to disprove it. No one ever has, by scientific method.
With Global Warming it seems to me the 'theory' is in 2 parts: One, that the earth is heating up and Two, that made-made emissions are either the cause or an antagonist.
The first part is proven or disproven with historical data from the written record and from core-sampling going way back, and of course, from simple present day observation of the melting ice cap, rising ocean temperatures, carbon absorption, etc. I'm sure there are many other ways I don't even know about.
The second part is trickier, wherein the scientists have to use data from before and after the Industrial Revolution. It's tricky because even if we measure a higher rate of warming after the Industrial Revolution, we still aren't sure if this is causality or correlation.
If the rate of emissions per year and the rate of warming are more or less in sequence, increasing exponentially, then it is tempting to conclude that GW is man induced.
In other words, my understanding is that the RATE of temperature increase exceeds any "natural" rise in temperature as indicated by the historical record or the core sampling.
ANYWAY, the "theory" is still being tested vigorously, so we'll see how it develops!
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
The second part, that man-made emissions is the PRIMARY cause, is still up for grabs.
The idea that mankind contributes to the accumulation of atmospheric gases is kind of a no-brainer. C02 is a greenhouse gas, and greenhouse gases trap heat.
What the effect of that release of man-made emissions is, ultimately, might be difficult to predict by modeling.
all we really know at this point is that more energy is coming into the atmosphere (from the sun) than is going out (from the earth's escaping heat) and this imbalance has been measured.
But the cause of this imbalance? We don't know the "smoking gun" conclusively.
Some say the earth has not gotten much warmer the last ten years, but this is just cherry picking single points of data in a very noisy signal...the TREND says otherwise.
There is such little understanding of the causes of long term climate change that anyone who says all the answers are all in and the game is over is just being dishonest.
Long before man could have possibly had any impact on climate there was a warm period much greater and longer during the middle ages. We will always have climate changes, they are cyclical, recurrent, and certainly unpreventable.
After you cut through all the BS and outright lies, at least 25% of the "experts" still believe that the cause of climate change is unknown and that changes to the climate are due to natural, normal cycles of the earth.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I had no problem with CC when it was in the realm of science. When it became political and the charlatans saw an immense amount of money to be filched from the people is when I became a total skeptic. I do not believe for a second that leaders like Gore and Obama honestly believe the trash they are spewing. This is not chump change we are being robbed of. We are talking $100s of millions. Already in the pockets of the criminals like Al Gore. If he was traveling around the country pushing his agenda in a Prius, I would say he is a honest environmentalist. When He flies in to San Francisco in his Gulfstream, travels to the venue in a Limo that remains running the entire time he is giving his speech, I don't buy his commitment to the planet. Those are not theories, they are facts.
GW is definitely real, and it is a done deal. There is no serious debate any longer about the earth warming up, at least not from credible, credentialed, qualified scientists.
GW doesn't care about politics or the machinations of little men. It just keeps rolling.
Not to burden the topic, but here is the testimonial from just some of the world's most prestigious scientific organizations:
Statements from Scientific Organizations:
American Association for the Advancement of Science:
"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society"
********************
American Chemical Society
"Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem"
*************************
American Geophysical Union
"The Earth's climate is now clearly out of balance and is warming. Many components of the climate system — including the temperatures of the atmosphere, land and ocean, the extent of sea ice and mountain glaciers, the sea level, the distribution of precipitation, and the length of seasons — are now changing at rates and in patterns that are not natural and are best explained by the increased atmospheric abundances of greenhouse gases and aerosols generated by human activity during the 20th century."
*************************
American Meteorological Society
"It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide."
*****************************
American Physical Society
"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now."
*****************************
The Geological Society of America
"The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s."
The facts are the facts, and the topic is about cars and GW.
I am totally convinced that man-made emissions are contributing to GW. I can't say they are the only cause of it.
As for Al Gore and whomever else, they have raised global consciousness on this issue, and whether by completely accurate data or not, people like him will win a place in history for that effort. Beethoven might not have been a very nice person, but the music is still good.
I think the moon landing was wasted taxpayer dollars for instance. Does that make it a scam, or just spending in areas that some deem unnecessary?
That doesn't seem to be in the national interest either.
The two cherub like choirboys singing loudest in the Holier Than Thou Global Warming Cathedral are Maurice Strong and Al Gore.
This duo has done more than anyone else to advance the alarmism of man-made global warming.
With little media monitoring, both Strong and Gore are cashing in on the lucrative cottage industry known as man-made global warming.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover031307.htm
But nonetheless, back to the point.
Al Gore was, in fact, right about GW.
and by the way, Al and Obama can't "spend" any money. The people you elected spent the money, that being Congress. They sign the checkbook.
Like all the famous con men of old, they just keep rolling along, getting richer, moving their doomsday date further down the line while secretly laughing at all the masses of idiots who continue to believe and finance them.
As David Hannum said, "There is a sucker born every minute". All those in the GW cult prove the saying.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/about-polar-bears/what-scientists-say/are- -polar-bear-populations-booming
Those that find the polar bears a nuisance.
http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/magazine/dec12/polar_bears.asp
That is exactly what I want US to do about GW. NOTHING. Clean the air, rivers, lakes and ocean. Quit trying to play god. I think the idiots we have running this state and Federal government believe they could have stopped the Ice Age.
What irks me about the GW boogeyman is why the west should commit economic suicide to deal with it, while the BRICs and friends are allowed to continue with business as usual. The globalist one-worlder's dream, race to the bottom.
Could this be true??
New EIA data shows USA inadvertently meets 1997 Kyoto protocol CO2 emission reductions without ever signing on thanks to a stagnant economy. Lowest level of CO2 emissions since 1994.
In 2012, a surprising twist and without ever ratifying it, the United States became the first major industrialized nation in the world to meet the United Nation’s original Kyoto Protocol 2012 target for CO2 reductions.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/04/05/usa-meets-kyoto-protocol-without-ever-embr- acing-it/
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
That's my problem. Let's assume we want to reduce CO2 emissions because of GW. We make a HUGE amount of CO2, so it follows that we have to be VERY careful how we do it, or we could go broke and still fail. That's where today's government programs are: we ARE broke (just look at the EU), and the government programs (ethanol, huge subsidies for EVs, solar and wind) will break us AND do next to nothing to reduce CO2.
Natural gas is THE short term solution, back out coal production, meanwhile pursue nuclear power.
And we don't need a 'war on coal'. Just apply existing regulations to power emissions, and get rid of the nightmare that is mountain top removal. Low natural gas prices will do the rest.
As an EU researcher it, biofuels (as they currently exist) are a "crime against humanity". The US uses nearly HALF it's corn crop for ethanol, driving up corn prices world-wide. Europe uses both corn and wheat. And the drive for biodiesel resulted in mass destruction of rainforests in SE Asia to plant palm oil plantations. The GW impact of that may never be made up with biodiesel use, a true ecological disaster.
The 'law of unintended consequences' has no better case study than the world's missteps on GW.
The large costs are still an issue, though.
Let me know when Price-Anderson gets repealed and that bit of corporate welfare goes away.
As far as the people in the vicinity of Hanford. They live there on their own free will. That complex has been a nuclear site since I was born in 1943. Is it safe? Probably not real safe. The real question is what is safe. You walk across the street and get hit by a car you could be dead. That means that was an unsafe place to be for you at that moment. I would take my chances living near Hanford over any of the major cities in America.
Don't eat any salmon out of the Columbia or it's tributaries.
Really though, I don't know why Greenpeace and the rest spend so much time and money fighting nukes. About the time everyone gets complacent, another accident happens and swings more public opinion against nukes. Looks like we're averaging about 3 or 4 major ones a decade now since the 50s. (Wiki).
Unprecedented July Cold – Arctic Sees Shortest Summer On Record
http://iceagenow.info/2013/08/unprecedented-july-cold-arctic-sees-shortest-summe- r-record/
“Normally the high Arctic has about 90 days above freezing. This year there was less than half that,” says Steven Goddard website.
http://www.climatedepot.com/2013/08/03/unprecedented-july-cold-arctic-sees-short- est-summer-on-record-normally-the-high-arctic-has-about-90-days-above-freezing-t- his-year-there-was-less-than-half-that/
Exclusive: Frost damages nearly fifth of Brazil sugar cane crop: analyst
Wednesday Jul 31, 2013 | Reese Ewing for Reuters
SAO PAULO (Reuters) - Last week's frosts in southern Brazil damaged nearly a fifth of the unharvested cane crop in the principal growing region, an event likely to cut sugar exports from the world's largest producer, agriculture research company Datagro said Wednesday.
Severe early morning frosts on July 24 and 25 in three of Brazil's top sugar-cane states devastated large areas, Datagro President Plinio Nastari told Reuters. The cold blight comes at the peak the crushing season when more than half of Brazil's expected record 590-million-tonne crop remains unharvested.
Although Nastari was unable to say how much mill-output will drop or reduce a global sugar glut that has pushed prices to three-year lows, he said 65 million metric tons, or 18 percent of the cane standing uncut in fields was damaged by the frost.
Frost in tropical Brazil has long been a weather risk for global coffee markets. This frost, though, is the first in recent history that threatens to significantly cut sugar output and it's impact will likely extend into the next harvest too.
And while electric vehicles may be considered greener and more glamorous, hybrids have quietly entered the mainstream of the American auto market.
Today, more than 40 conventional hybrid models are available, from mass-market automakers like Toyota and Ford to luxury brands like BMW and Mercedes. Hybrids account for about 3 percent of overall industry sales, with the market-leading Toyota Prius cracking the Top 10 list of best-selling passenger cars."
A Hankering for Hybrids (NY Times)
In climate news that affects an old friend of mine in the tourism biz, Harding Icefield shrinks, Exit Glacier retreats (thesewardphoenixlog.com).
As for hybrids. They are becoming more main stream. Except the Volt. I see it is not selling as well as last year. How is the plugin Prius selling?
Anecdotal wise, it is almost 11 AM here in eastern Kansas and it is 68 degrees. Unheard of. The high today is forecast to be in the 70's.
Usually, at this time of year, we are parched, dry, everything is dried up, and it is 100 degrees plus. Not this year. Everything is as lush and green as it was back in early June. I would have said May...but it was still snowing then.
For the first time in memory, farmers are complaining about too much rain.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Not a single person showed up at the Georgetown waterfront Tuesday for a climate change agenda event put on by Organizing for Action, the shadowy nonprofit advocacy group born out of President Obama’s 2012 campaign, the NRCC wrote in its blog.
The event page for the “Climate Change Day of Action Rally” disappeared after rainy weather appeared to drive away whatever people planned to attend. The embarrassing showing follows the news that only one volunteer stayed for an OFA Obamacare event in Centreville, Va., last week to work the phones:
http://freebeacon.com/ofa-gets-zero-attendance-for-climate-change-rally/
August 13, 2013 - 12:16 PM
http://notrickszone.com/2013/08/07/noaa-confirms-model-defying-global-temperatur- e-stagnation-2012-was-among-coolest-in-21st-century/
It’s mid-afternoon in mid-August and, under full sunshine, Washington, D.C. is just 77 degrees. The average high for August 14 is 87.
Today currently ranks as tied for the 4th coolest August 14 on record dating back to 1929.
This morning’s low of 62 degrees ranks as the 11th coolest since 1929, seven degrees below normal. The last time it was this cool in August was August 31, 2009 notes CWG’s Rick Grow.
“Prior to August 2009, you’d have to go all the way back to Aug 13, 2006 to find a colder low (61) [at DCA],” Grow says. “Today, tomorrow and Friday are on track to be the coldest three consecutive August mornings since 2004, which featured lows of 62 (6th), 58 (7th), and 59 (8th).”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2013/08/14/how-unusu- al-is-this-cool-weather-in-washington-d-c/?hpid=z4
I think about 90% of our citizens know that GW is a scam. The warmers who are still pushing GW have a financial interest and want something for free. Then there is always a few misguided folks who will fall for anything.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Interior Secretary Sally Jewell today challenged her employees to take an active role in the “moral imperative” to address climate change.
“I hope there are no climate change deniers in the Department of Interior,” she said.
Fourth, when the leader of an agency talks like this, it’s not an off the cuff remark between friends, it is an admonishment at best, a threat at worst, designed to tell the employees of Interior that they best damned well toe the line in believing in Hotcoldwetdry, because dissent will not be tolerated.
http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2013/08/interior-department-head-n- o-climate-change-deniers-allowed-2690304.html