Ford Inside News banner

21 - 40 of 63 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
Oil production to gas is tiny? It takes significant energy to convert crude to gasoline. And transport it to the station. Transmission of electrical power from plant to destination is only about 5%. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=105&t=3

No such thing as too much CO2 is a fact? Then all those scientists that think otherwise are wrong I suppose. Please support this fact.

Battery recycling is done by shredding them, sorting the materials and melting them down for re-use. They aren't taken to the dump. Once they are too degraded for use in the vehicle, re-using the battery cells for use in the grid for buffering energy can provide a second life in reducing the pollution of the grid. The vehicle manufactures should be thinking ahead of how to deal with the volume of batteries in the future. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/feat...ic-vehicle-batteries-will-go-when-they-retire

This is the power mix in the USA for 2018 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427&t=3
I clearly stated that oil to gas production cost was tiny compared to battery material mining to battery production costs and then add in recycling costs.

And CO2 is not a problem. That's pretty much a fact, if you discount the many politically motivated websites or scientists. When there is 100% agreement, which is what science is about, that the amount of CO2 added by America is destroying our planet, then I will agree. Until then, I agree with the many who claim it is NOT a problem, and these many scientists explain why. And no I won't prove it. Do your own leg work. It's not important to me that you believe me, but this is quite well known. Think what you want.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
And CO2 is not a problem. That's pretty much a fact, if you discount the many politically motivated websites or scientists. When there is 100% agreement, which is what science is about, that the amount of CO2 added by America is destroying our planet, then I will agree. Until then, I agree with the many who claim it is NOT a problem, and these many scientists explain why. And no I won't prove it. Do your own leg work. It's not important to me that you believe me, but this is quite well known. Think what you want.

JFC, you're a climate change denier. Good lord. CO2 is indeed the problem and every scientist on this planet confirms it ... except for the a handful politically or financially motivated detractors. Alas ... you're either one of them, or a sucker who they convinced.

ugh ... maybe we should return to cars before I realize there are more people on here actively rooting to ruin the planet for all of us so they make a quick buck.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
JFC, you're a climate change denier. Good lord. CO2 is indeed the problem and every scientist on this planet confirms it ... except for the a handful politically or financially motivated detractors. Alas ... you're either one of them, or a sucker who they convinced.

ugh ... maybe we should return to cars before I realize there are more people on here actively rooting to ruin the planet for all of us so they make a quick buck.

Of course you would think that, because of course there is nothing in between believing one extreme to another.

You are 100% wrong in everything you just said. There are just as many scientists who believe that CO2 growth is not a problem. Stop being part of the problem, and learn something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
JFC, you're a climate change denier. Good lord. CO2 is indeed the problem and every scientist on this planet confirms it ... except for the a handful politically or financially motivated detractors. Alas ... you're either one of them, or a sucker who they convinced.

ugh ... maybe we should return to cars before I realize there are more people on here actively rooting to ruin the planet for all of us so they make a quick buck.
The scientists and pundits (Al Gore) who are making tons off of "Climate Change" are the ones pushing it. There isn't any gain to being a denier.....the oil companies are entrenched and aren't going anywhere. Just to clarify, I am a fan of EV's and will probably get one with my next vehicle, but it's not as much of an ecological choice as it is I think EV's are the next thing....like going from horse and buggy to automobiles. I absolutely consider myself a car guy and look forward to being around during this evolution. Good article here from a guy who has forgotten more about climate than Al Gore will ever know!!

https://www.thegwpf.org/patrick-moore-should-we-celebrate-carbon-dioxide/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,121 Posts
Discussion Starter #25
The ICE is way cleaner now than when it came out, just the same as electricity and EV production will become cleaner and more sustainable with technology. The fact is we are headed to an EV future, nothing can be done so may as well accept it. Besides, causing less damage to the planet is a good thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
528 Posts
Of course you would think that, because of course there is nothing in between believing one extreme to another.

You are 100% wrong in everything you just said. There are just as many scientists who believe that CO2 growth is not a problem. Stop being part of the problem, and learn something.
SMH. There aren't ton of scientists who disagree, but you don't care, you made up your mind. Your children will be proud of you.

Ciao
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
620 Posts
Of course you would think that, because of course there is nothing in between believing one extreme to another.

You are 100% wrong in everything you just said. There are just as many scientists who believe that CO2 growth is not a problem. Stop being part of the problem, and learn something.
That's just a load of stinking stupidity, Wings. Don't be that sub-moronic guy.

The vast, massive, majority of scientists point to the easily-found increase in carbon dioxide (it's a tangible, not an opinion, and the numbers are a google search away), and to the simple science of it being a greenhouse gas. Just disregarding its issues because of a tiny minority of the scientific world is...well, something several steps past "denier", and deep into some profane adjectives.

Tangibles aren't partisan, and the level is definitely waaaay up.

Like I said, don't be that guy. There will never be 100% scientific agreement on anything as long as some political asshats dangle grant money for papers that come to THEIR conclusions.

I'm not a fan of world-ending-panic approaches to this, I'd greatly prefer initiatives toward common-sense initiatives that aren't stained by political drama.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,596 Posts
The last 3 letters of a certain climate deniers profile name actually describe quite well what one must be to deny that humanity needs to be under one accord climate change wise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
That's just a load of stinking stupidity, Wings. Don't be that sub-moronic guy.

The vast, massive, majority of scientists point to the easily-found increase in carbon dioxide (it's a tangible, not an opinion, and the numbers are a google search away), and to the simple science of it being a greenhouse gas. Just disregarding its issues because of a tiny minority of the scientific world is...well, something several steps past "denier", and deep into some profane adjectives.

Tangibles aren't partisan, and the level is definitely waaaay up.

Like I said, don't be that guy. There will never be 100% scientific agreement on anything as long as some political asshats dangle grant money for papers that come to THEIR conclusions.

I'm not a fan of world-ending-panic approaches to this, I'd greatly prefer initiatives toward common-sense initiatives that aren't stained by political drama.
Zana, love you like a brother man, but do hear me out.

Watch the video below, which showcases a special guest worth listening too, at the International Conference on Climate Change. It is mentioned that there were over 31K PHD scientists who signed an agreement that there is absolutely no conclusive proof that humans have caused CO2 to increase, and yet there is so much proof that atmospheric CO2 benefits life on earth. Here is the link:


Another great discussion disproving the CO2 alarmist theory is here:



So Zana, these are not fringe extremists with a political bias, but rather well renowed climatologists with unrivaled credentials backing claims by a massive community.

So, my only point here is not to debate who has the bigger cheer leading squad, but rather for honest discussion about why each side completely discounts the other side, just as you have done or assumed. Why does it have to be the deniar or alarmist camp for some, as justiification for not listening more. What about logical thinking and reason, somewhere in between, all while methodically learning all we can as we push toward a cleaner future.......instead of going balls to the wall idiot mode, drastically changing our lifestyles based on questionable models, at an alarmist pace.

I would love to hear you thoughts on both videos, they are not that long and well worth your time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
Zana,
below is another great discussion on GCC, and if you just scrub forward to the 15:30 mark, they begin the conversation of CO2. Both men disagree with the CO2 alarmist BS that 400ppm is some tipping point that we would not survive in. He states that if you walk into a rain forrest, today, levels exceed 600ppm. The many charts you see that show CO2 at it's highest level in the last 400K years, is BS, because prior to that, which they conveniently cherry pick, levels were 10X higher than they are today, during the most prosperous periods for life Earth. That gets ignored, for obvious reasons.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,121 Posts
Discussion Starter #33
I state that many scientists discount the CO2 threat......I get laughed at......I back it up.........crickets.



Zing
Here is the thing, for any "expert" you can find that says global warming is a myth, a person can likely find just as many or more "experts" saying otherwise. Regardless of what side of the debate you stand on you can find studies and facts to fit your narrative. Would any facts presented to you change your mind? Probably not, just as any facts you present wont change anybody elses. It will continue to be a pissing contest with an us vs them mentality.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,596 Posts
Perhaps can I request that many of you stop quoting the absolute drivel posted by a certain poster many of us have blocked? The utter , and complete stupidity shown here borders on insanity.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
620 Posts
As I watch the view count jump up after my remarks, I have yet to see anyone man-up.


Waiting,
1. Working a ton this week, between day job and band.

2. I'm going to be doing a lot of compare-and-contrast on this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
Here is the thing, for any "expert" you can find that says global warming is a myth, a person can likely find just as many or more "experts" saying otherwise. Regardless of what side of the debate you stand on you can find studies and facts to fit your narrative. Would any facts presented to you change your mind? Probably not, just as any facts you present wont change anybody elses. It will continue to be a pissing contest with an us vs them mentality.
Awesome, a reply.

Ok, clearly you did not listen to the videos and I doubt you read my remarks. That's OK. But do allow me to add some clarity on my posts.

First off, not a single scientest would ever contest that global warming is happening. The charts clearly show a trend upward, and they are all wise enough to know of the cyclic nature of temp changes throughout history. The only scientific debate I see, is if humans are a major contributor to it. So in that agreement mentioned in the video which 31K PHD'd climate experts signed, they agreed on the following:

1. Absolutely zero conclusive proof that humans are causing the temp increase and CO2 levels to increase, and...
2. There is plenty of conclusive proof that increased levels of CO2 are actually good for all life.

In one of those videos, two well known experts were contesting each other, yet both agreed that the 400ppm CO2 tipping point threat level (we are currently at 350) that is driving the current hysteria, is curiously random.

These are just a few talking points backed by what appears to be a major portion of the scientific community.
So what I am trying to showcase here, is that the alarmist camp, like yourself, refuses to even discuss or debate these clear facts. Why is that? You would think that the predictions that the Earth's doom is not a certainty, would make people happy, rather than upset. Why is that?


I am about logic and reason. If you think there is none of that in those expert's opinion, but are totally OK with some radical plan to alter our lives and economies.....based on split opinions of science......then you should rethink that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
Perhaps can I request that many of you stop quoting the absolute drivel posted by a certain poster many of us have blocked? The utter , and complete stupidity shown here borders on insanity.
Perhaps can I request that you actually contribute to the thread for a change, instead of constantly reminding us all how you block me.....LOL....yet can't stop talking about me.:x
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,961 Posts
Watched the dem debate tonight. Wow, our greatest threat is CO2 risingh huh? And that we should all seek higher ground and if you don't vote for them, you are all doomed. I am not making this up, this was the message.

Yeah, no political motivation behind climate change, not in the slightest.
 
21 - 40 of 63 Posts
Top