Offroad-Express

Jezza wrote:I would think global warming is the biggest load of crap so far

Why do you say that?

During the industrial revoloution the earth produced more carbon than we do now as all power was coal fired, native forests were not clear felled they were just burn't (the stuff 1km from the coast was useless as you could not get it out) and the highest output of CFC's were made and released (because they didn't know) and the earths temperature went down. Oh and it was also the quietest period for sunspots on the sun's surface in years.

Before this great revoloution the earth was getting warmer and stormier over about 40 - 45 years and it was also the most active period for sunspots on the sun's surface in years, for the last 15 years sunspots have been more active and finaly the great ice age that killed the dinosours happened in a oxygen and carbon rich atmosphere (from fossil evidence and ice core samples).

I believe we have some impact but it is very minor and mostly due to the fact we have made the ozone hole bigger.

Steve_t647 wrote:During the industrial revoloution the earth produced more carbon than we do now as all power was coal fired, native forests were not clear felled they were just burn't (the stuff 1km from the coast was useless as you could not get it out) and the highest output of CFC's were made and released (because they didn't know) and the earths temperature went down. Oh and it was also the quietest period for sunspots on the sun's surface in years.

Data please.

when i was like 8 could wear shorts all year around and bare feet to school, no worrys.
now i,m nearly 40 i,m like cold all the time.......................

bring on global warming i say

tpft wrote:when i was like 8 could wear shorts all year around and bare feet to school, no worrys.
now i,m nearly 40 i,m like cold all the time.......................

bring on global warming i say

Try running around like an 8 year old instead of sitting around like a 40 years old.

KiwiBacon wrote:

Jezza wrote:I would think global warming is the biggest load of crap so far

Why do you say that?

The earth has been warming up ever since the last ice age, and I'm pretty sure that cars weren't around 18,000 years ago. Global warming is happening but it has very little to do with us what so ever, we are just part of the many interglacier periods.
It is the biggest scam so far, like what the old hag Helen is trying to bring in now, the carbon tax just another way to make money.

Jezza wrote:

KiwiBacon wrote:

Jezza wrote:I would think global warming is the biggest load of crap so far

Why do you say that?

The earth has been warming up ever since the last ice age, and I'm pretty sure that cars weren't around 18,000 years ago. Global warming is happening but it has very little to do with us what so ever, we are just part of the many interglacier periods.
It is the biggest scam so far, like what the old hag Helen is trying to bring in now, the carbon tax just another way to make money.

Again, data please.
I've heard a lot of claims which were akin to urban legends where no-one could bring up a reliable source.

Anyone who thinks that the millions of tons of carbon we pump into the atmosphere every day has no effect is rather naiive.
OPEC is pumping 27 million barrels of oil per day. The total is around 85 million barrels per day. That's 22 million tons of oil burnt every day.
Each ton of oil burnt creates 3 times it's weight in CO2.
http://www.worldoil.com/infocenter/Statistics_main.asp

I raised several points in this thread about the correlation of atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and temperature: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=11660&st=0&sk=t&sd=a&hilit=global+warming
which you can feel free to go back and discuss.

the persentage of co2 that makes up our atmoshere is 00.02 % aask moriarty for more info its one of his majors
sorry if you check youtube under g/warming USA global temp recorders sited in car parks , on concrete pad with aircon exaust blowing on them, on roofs withthe same thing not ideal information gathering

coxsy wrote:sorry if you check youtube under g/warming

Two problems there.
You're assuming climate scientists use that data.
You're using youtube as an information source.

why not info is info , please feel free to pay Helen $19,000 for your carbon tax

coxsy wrote:why not info is info

So an old wife once told me.....

This is the same shit, but different millennia. Look up interglacier periods and see what you find.
Yes we are burning alot of oil but how does that compare to the many 100's volcanoes world wide constantly pumping out billions of tones of co2. But at the end of the day if I did give a crap then I wouldn't go 4wding and have camp fires while drinking beer (which contains co2).

Jezza wrote:This is the same shit, but different millennia. Look up interglacier periods and see what you find.

We find less CO2 than today. If you go beyond the wives tales and find the real data it gets quite scary.

If you don't care, that's okay and perfectly understandable. But if you're going to call it a crock, you should be able to back up your argument.

KiwiBacon wrote:

Jezza wrote:This is the same shit, but different millennia. Look up interglacier periods and see what you find.

We find less CO2 than today. If you go beyond the wives tales and find the real data it gets quite scary.

If you don't care, that's okay and perfectly understandable. But if you're going to call it a crock, you should be able to back up your argument.

Saw a program a while back (cant vouch for its validity) but the coment was as the oceans warmed their ability to hold CO2 was lowered so they released it. This release somehow created a cooling effect and the CO2 was later reabsorbed. This all takes hundreds if not thousands of years. and has been happening for millenia.

If anyone can point me to the "real data on Global warming" I'd be grateful. It seems there is so much crap out there that finding the truth is near on impossible. Seems there is truth stretching going on on both sides of the argument.

On a side note I read recently about two house s owned by prominant US citisens. One was a global warming night mare the othera model of efficiency. One owned by GW Bush and the other by Al 'save the planet' Gore. Guess who is not saving the planet at home?

we seem to have drifted off topic here a little. Maybe a new thread is in order?

One common thing ive noticed is that people seem to think that the climate shouldnt change at all.They all seem to think that the climate of the world should be stable but it has never been stable..the continents move...temperatures & weather patterns are in cycles....getting hotter then colder etc....things change for man made reason & natural reasons.

How does a scientist or anyone for that matter know why a climatic thing has changed...is it natural or man-made?

Heath wrote:Saw a program a while back (cant vouch for its validity) but the coment was as the oceans warmed their ability to hold CO2 was lowered so they released it.

Yep, happens in exactly the same way that beer and coke go flat. The warmer they are the less they can hold. This is one of the big concerns, if the CO2 we're releasing traps the earths heat better (which the evidence suggests) then that also releases more CO2 from the oceans, creating a vicious cycle which has the potential to roger us seriously.
Our contribution has the potential to push the peaks of such a warming cycle up far more than they would go without us.

Heath wrote:If anyone can point me to the "real data on Global warming" I'd be grateful. It seems there is so much crap out there that finding the truth is near on impossible. Seems there is truth stretching going on on both sides of the argument.

[/quote]

All scientific papers include their reference sources, this is a good place to start for scientific technical papers.
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/technical-papers.htm

here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io-Tb7vTamY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr5O1HsTVgA

coxsy wrote:here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Io-Tb7vTamY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fr5O1HsTVgA

Please, anything but youtube.

seems to be going green is the fad at moment, very fashionable to be driving a hybrid, recycling and all that yada yada
frankly not my thing, but obvoiusly one part of the arguement agnist global warning is true.
Big bucks to be had with all of this..............

bores me to tears, except when it affects my hobbys, which are all petrol head related

tpft wrote:seems to be going green is the fad at moment, very fashionable to be driving a hybrid, recycling and all that yada yada
frankly not my thing, but obvoiusly one part of the arguement agnist global warning is true.
Big bucks to be had with all of this..............

bores me to tears, except when it affects my hobbys, which are all petrol head related

Hybrids are nothing but hype, diesel cars are far more efficient. At least recycling acheives something.

Thank you Kiwibacon,

As someone involved in the car industry, it's so refreshing to hear someone who recognises what utter crud (IN MY OPINION!) the hybrid car trend is.

Hybrids are nothing more than a brilliant marketing exercise to satisfy the un-knowledgable greenie element, they are grossly expensive and not at all environmentaly friendly to make, not environmentally friendly to dispose of, and in New Zealand driving conditions are very seldom particularly economical. If you only ever dawdle around town at 40kms, however, they can save you a bit at the pumps. Not a brilliant return for the many thousands of dollars extra you just forked out to make yourself feel good (and look good in front of the Green Party national conference.)

Okay, rant is over.

have to agree...

the other interesting thing im seeing a lot of is the comparisons in running costs betwee big and small cars...

some very interesting compareisons....

of course they are, however that is the trend, and like harleys, hummers and haircuts the fad at moment.
like i said, don,t care.
however if some yuppie wanna be green scum, wants to pass judgement on why i drive a 3 ton tank solo most the time then it could get messy

did rough comparasion to boss's v8 fairmount and my diesel navara and the came out both at 10 ltrs/100k add ruc and extra rego cost for diesel his came out on top this was last christmas so more so now at $1.85 d $2.15 petrol as he does it in more comfort
would be a starter to try hydrogen generator in my new 4wd (its 30yrs old) if went pear shpe i'm getting a spare

aroma wrote:did rough comparasion to boss's v8 fairmount and my diesel navara and the came out both at 10 ltrs/100k add ruc and extra rego cost for diesel his came out on top this was last christmas so more so now at $1.85 d $2.15 petrol as he does it in more comfort
would be a starter to try hydrogen generator in my new 4wd (its 30yrs old) if went pear shpe i'm getting a spare

10km/l from a v8 fairmont, he must drive like a nana.
I get 10km/l from my diesel rangerover, but petrol rangerovers get between 4-8 so I'm still miles ahead.

there is a great demonstration of this in the latest top gear series they get a prius and a M3 the prius drives around the track as fast as possible and the M3 follows it for a few laps and the M3 got about 3 miles per gallon better mileage

often a lot of the comparisons dont take into account the "whole life" efficencies.

A bit likethe "Air Miles" thing exporters are now starting to face.They dont take in the whole picture from cradle to grave of the vehicle of goods & how efficent they are to manufacture etc.

hey Meece, any news on your HHO unit? would be keen to see some pics etc. if you want to do a true test chuck it on the Dyno that should sort it one way or the other, I am thinking of adding one to my Jag to play with then adding to a couple of Dihatsu Max's (360cc two stroke micro cars from the early sevenites) to see how cheap I can get round town. good on you for giving it a go and to all you cannot doer's out there I think some of your logic is flawed. ie petrol is in eficient adding hydrogen improves the burn therefore efficientcy as a % should not be multiplied. If you are woried about global warming and CO2 please stop breathing now as you are adding to your problem, while I agree we as a human race are over consuming earths reasorces and not using the replenishable ones to there fullest the earth has been warming from the last Ice age, the less ice cooling the sea the less the cooling effect VS the suns heat ie the warmer it gets the more ice melts the more ice that melts the faster the temp climbs. All the data I have read one way ore the other is statistacal and statistics can show what ever you want them to with the right input criteria. please keep us posted Meece very keen to have a totu myself.

pagar wrote:all you cannot doer's out there I think some of your logic is flawed. ie petrol is in eficient adding hydrogen improves the burn therefore efficientcy as a % should not be multiplied.

Efficiencies do multiply. If you make 50% efficiency you're losing half each time. Do that twice and you've only got 1/4 left.

This guy said he's spent $5k on systems like this.
http://reviews.ebay.com/Hydrogen-Genera ... 0005261775