Originally posted by oracleslave
View Post
- Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
- Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Reply to: What will cars be like in 20 years time?
Collapse
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
- You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
- You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
- If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
Logging in...
Previously on "What will cars be like in 20 years time?"
Collapse
-
Originally posted by sasguru View PostSo humans are fooking up the earth? Course they are.
But there are still morons who'd rather carry on as they are and justify that POV by saying its all a hoax.
But then most people are very much to the left of the normal curve.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Spacecadet View PostThe issue I have with Global Warming is that all the funding and news paper articles are hiding some far worse enviromental issues which don't really get any attention unless they can somehow be linked to global warming.
There is still massive deforestation going on, reducing bio-diversity and causing huge soil loss, soil which when lost means it will be very difficult to regrow the forest or anything for that matter. Haiti is a prime example of this, as a country they are now ****ed
Fishing is for all intents and purposes unregulated and over industrialised, huge damage is being done to ocean eco systems and some species are being driven to extention (either directly or indirectly)
Intensive farming (linked to deforestation) upsets the natural bio-diversity, it is also a contributor to the ocean dead-zones. In the gulf of mexico an area the size of wales (the usual unit of ecological damage) is de-oxygenated each year because of fertilizer runoff from the mississipi resulting in almost all fish in the area dying. This happens in many places around the world with both natural and un-natural causes.
There are still massive amounts of pollutants being released into the land/sea and air
And the elephant in the room: The human population. The ONLY way we're ever going to make a serious enviromental impact is through depopulation on a massive scale.
But there are still morons who'd rather carry on as they are and justify that POV by saying its all a hoax.
But then most people are very much to the left of the normal curve.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by sasguru View PostYes I ought to believe some moronic statement made by some random IT geek on the web than these the vast majority of the world's scientists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change
There is still massive deforestation going on, reducing bio-diversity and causing huge soil loss, soil which when lost means it will be very difficult to regrow the forest or anything for that matter. Haiti is a prime example of this, as a country they are now ****ed
Fishing is for all intents and purposes unregulated and over industrialised, huge damage is being done to ocean eco systems and some species are being driven to extention (either directly or indirectly)
Intensive farming (linked to deforestation) upsets the natural bio-diversity, it is also a contributor to the ocean dead-zones. In the gulf of mexico an area the size of wales (the usual unit of ecological damage) is de-oxygenated each year because of fertilizer runoff from the mississipi resulting in almost all fish in the area dying. This happens in many places around the world with both natural and un-natural causes.
There are still massive amounts of pollutants being released into the land/sea and air
And the elephant in the room: The human population. The ONLY way we're ever going to make a serious enviromental impact is through depopulation on a massive scale.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by hyperD View PostIt's politically driven, it has no sound scientific basis, it's absolutely wrong. And if you believe in the faux religion of AGW, you are complicit in one of the greatest evils to fall upon mankind and progression and so be you condemned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scienti...climate_change
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Spacecadet View PostSoon to be repeated as the planet is raped for all the lithium required for the huge market in electric cars
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by threaded View PostMy favourite example of this "Green Charade" is the catalytic converter. Only the loony Greenies would come up with a method of burning more fuel, and create several of the worlds most un-natural disasters in the strip mining of rare-earth metals. If you really wanted to be "Green" you'd just burn less fuel by having more efficient engines. More efficient engines produce less pollution, duh! Example, experimental ceramic engines are running so hot that with just a normal type exhaust (well nearly, but nothing fancy, it's all in the bends) it produces water and carbon dioxide.
Leave a comment:
-
My favourite example of this "Green Charade" is the catalytic converter. Only the loony Greenies would come up with a method of burning more fuel, and create several of the worlds most un-natural disasters in the strip mining of rare-earth metals. If you really wanted to be "Green" you'd just burn less fuel by having more efficient engines. More efficient engines produce less pollution, duh! Example, experimental ceramic engines are running so hot that with just a normal type exhaust (well nearly, but nothing fancy, it's all in the bends) it produces water and carbon dioxide.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by VectraMan View PostWhat do you suggest? An electric motor is also 19th century technology.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by hyperD View PostYes, compared to what they want to do. The AGW guilt propaganda is imposed on us to make us pay more tax on fuel and on the way to do business in the UK within a global market. That's why governments immediately backed the whole AGW charade. Remember that gurning SeeYouNextTuesday tard Bliar and his incompetent cohort Broon jumping on the bandwagon before anyone had any idea what green was with his big announcement?
That alone should have got your spider senses tingling.
China have at least 200 years of coal reserves. We have coal. Most countries have fossil fuels or a market to trade. Technologies improve to extract more oil from the reservoirs that were considered not cost effective a few years ago.
Yes, to conserve fossil fuels because ultimately they are finite.
Yes to conservation and increasing efficiencies of power stations etc
Yes to investigating into alternatives, including the holy grail of fusion.
But NO to taxing all our businesses back into the stone age in a global market by dressing ourselves in sackcloth and beating ourselves with green taxes because of some misplaced guilt over bad science.
It's politically driven, it has no sound scientific basis, it's absolutely wrong. And if you believe in the faux religion of AGW, you are complicit in one of the greatest evils to fall upon mankind and progression and so be you condemned.
Far east economies are expanding, the worlds population is expanding, they have a thirst for oil that will not be sustainable unless output rises to meet demand, in the 70's a 5% drop in production triggered a 400% price rise.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbi...729_550682.htm
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by gingerjedi View PostDo you think oil will become cheaper and taxed less if AGW went away?
That alone should have got your spider senses tingling.
Originally posted by gingerjedi View PostI think we'll have donkeys pulling Volvo's no mater what, provided we don't eat all the donkeys.
Yes, to conserve fossil fuels because ultimately they are finite.
Yes to conservation and increasing efficiencies of power stations etc
Yes to investigating into alternatives, including the holy grail of fusion.
But NO to taxing all our businesses back into the stone age in a global market by dressing ourselves in sackcloth and beating ourselves with green taxes because of some misplaced guilt over bad science.
It's politically driven, it has no sound scientific basis, it's absolutely wrong. And if you believe in the faux religion of AGW, you are complicit in one of the greatest evils to fall upon mankind and progression and so be you condemned.
Leave a comment:
-
-
Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post
Leave a comment:
- Home
- News & Features
- First Timers
- IR35 / S660 / BN66
- Employee Benefit Trusts
- Agency Workers Regulations
- MSC Legislation
- Limited Companies
- Dividends
- Umbrella Company
- VAT / Flat Rate VAT
- Job News & Guides
- Money News & Guides
- Guide to Contracts
- Successful Contracting
- Contracting Overseas
- Contractor Calculators
- MVL
- Contractor Expenses
Advertisers
Contractor Services
CUK News
- Streamline Your Retirement with iSIPP: A Solution for Contractor Pensions Sep 1 09:13
- Making the most of pension lump sums: overview for contractors Sep 1 08:36
- Umbrella company tribunal cases are opening up; are your wages subject to unlawful deductions, too? Aug 31 08:38
- Contractors, relabelling 'labour' as 'services' to appear 'fully contracted out' won't dupe IR35 inspectors Aug 31 08:30
- How often does HMRC check tax returns? Aug 30 08:27
- Work-life balance as an IT contractor: 5 top tips from a tech recruiter Aug 30 08:20
- Autumn Statement 2023 tipped to prioritise mental health, in a boost for UK workplaces Aug 29 08:33
- Final reminder for contractors to respond to the umbrella consultation (closing today) Aug 29 08:09
- Top 5 most in demand cyber security contract roles Aug 25 08:38
- Changes to the right to request flexible working are incoming, but how will contractors be affected? Aug 24 08:25
Leave a comment: