More hate towards Jeremy from the Guardianistas

Is it just me, or do all the UK papers bang on constantly about global warming? No-one gives a stuff about carbon dioxide emissions in Aussie papers, most people are worried about fuel economy for the cost of petrol (which is still about 50-60% of UK prices), not for the environmental effects.

I thought that if there was one country that'd be pro-global warming, it'd be the UK, considering it's hardly got a warm climate.

What the ecomentalists don't realise is that some see driving as more than a means to an end, and actually enjoy it. However, legislation and ecomentalists are slowly putting a stop to enjoyment of driving.
 
HEY ENVIRONMENT!!! TAKE THIS!!!

muffra.jpg


(My new 3" turbo-back HKS Hi Power exhaust...no cats)
 
90 fuckin kph

that's about 55 miles per hour.

what a fuckin prat

"Road transport is responsible for around 20 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the UK, and half of that comes from private cars. "

that's 10% thicko. and with what I guess is about 50% of that other 10% being commerical freight transport, I'm guessing that the other half is buses, nice diesly chuggers.

"many people drive with no regard to fuel efficiency. "

and.... if they drive without regard to fuel efficeny it's their own fault and it'll hit them in their pockets. And with him driving an "aged ford" then he's being a bastard too, cos all newer engines are more efficient than similar sized and/or similar powered engines of the past - it's called progress. I bet his car isn't even euro IV compliant too.

that guy should just fuck off to denmark. Or switzerland.

My Car. My choice. Fuck off....

I feel so much better for saying that, even though no one will take a blind bit of notice.
 
Don't you dare send a guy like that to Denmark.. :) We don't want him. Generally, the topic about global warming doesn't seem as big in Denmark, as it does in England. I can't afford to take the bus, even if our public transport systems are among the best in the world.. 17 kroner (or, i guess, 1,7 pounds) for a bus ticket is just way too much. When looking at the amount of traveling i do.. Then my scooter is definately the cheaper option - and it's a lot more fun too :) 25 km per liter ain't that bad afterall.. :)

And the last time i took the bus, a drunk bald man got on it.. And it became painfully obvious pretty quickly that he had, and i'm not joking, take a shit in his pants. God damn.. Most disgusting thing i've ever experienced.. :p
 
Blind_Io said:
One badly tuned scooter probably puts out more pollution than a brand new SUV.
Click to expand...

Somewhere I read that a cross-country flight of a Boeing 747 makes more pollution than an entire season of F1
 
I did the exact same thing. These people who write this stuff are useless :censored:
 
Thrasher said:
Blind_Io said:
One badly tuned scooter probably puts out more pollution than a brand new SUV.
Click to expand...

Somewhere I read that a cross-country flight of a Boeing 747 makes more pollution than an entire season of F1
Click to expand...

See if you can remember where you saw this, I'd love to get my hands on it and save it for the next time I get into a debate with someone.
 
the problem with that is they'll then argue we need to go about in horse drawn carriages and only fly ballons filled with our own smug flatulence.
 
Like many I own a car and claim that I couldn't manage without it, but at least I drive my aged Ford Fiasco no more than 7000 kilometres per year, and often go for so long without driving that I forget where I've parked the damned thing.
Click to expand...

First of all, a Ford Fiasco? :lol:

Second, paynus.
 
Ugh, anyone who isnt a shithead hates public transport. Maybe planes aside. The danish public transport system might be "top notch", but the only reason people use it is because of the hidioulsy insane pricings on cars and everything car related. Most of you are probably familiar with the 180% vac on cars.

I'm moving to the US. I can't stand it here.
 
I'll go against the tide here and say that there are places where public transit does well. Unfortunately, that's only in very densely populated cities such as Hong Kong or Tokyo, where running a high-frequency transit line with many stops makes sense. Otherwise, it becomes a fairly dismal concept (most North American cities can't begin to think about public transit until they increase their population density).

I'm also for the economy. If you can save fuel, why not? It's a great catalyst for improvements in powertrain technology, and we've seen that power and environmental friendliness can coexist.

However, no one can tell me to stop driving... that's where the line is.
 
Someone tell this prick that trains/subway/etc also use petrol (in conjunction with good ol'AC/DC)....... Maybe he'll walk....................off the face of this planet!
 
i'm not sure what is funnier, the article or the response.

"Pinko car hater" So he's gay because he doesn't like cars? or in other words, he's gay because he doesn't agree with you on this matter.

"Using the guardian to light fires" do you buy it to light a fire? (that is a really stupid use of 60p) or do you go scavenging on ppl's blue bins?

"eco-psycho-enviromentalists" So boffins striving to make better engines, which almost certainly equates to ditching the rather inefficient petrol engine are eco friendly nutcases?. You don't call people that disagree with you gay, you just call the crazy.

"anyone who isn't a shithead hates public transport" There seems to be an emerging pattern here. You attacked what i really like, you are very wrong and either gay, crazy or a shithead.

keep it up guys
 
ezrollers said:
i'm not sure what is funnier, the article or the response.

"Pinko car hater" So he's gay because he doesn't like cars? or in other words, he's gay because he doesn't agree with you on this matter.
Click to expand...

"Pinko" is an old slang term for COMMUNISTS. The modern environMENTAL movement has become a shell for the old communist wannabes. I call them *watermelons* -- green on the outside, red on the inside.
 
feel free to share with other petrolheads this link :thumbsup:

http://www.oism.org/oism/s32p31.htm

This is the website that completely knocks the wind out of the enviro's sails. See over 17,000 scientists declare that global warming is a lie with no scientific basis whatsoever.

The global warming hypothesis has failed every relevant experimental test. It lives on only in the dreams of anti-technologists and population reduction advocates. The United States is very close to adopting an international agreement that would ration the use of energy and of technologies that depend upon coal, oil, and natural gas and some other organic compounds.

This treaty is, in our opinion, based upon flawed ideas. Research data on climate change do not show that human use of hydrocarbons is harmful. To the contrary, there is good evidence that increased atmospheric carbon dioxide is eviromentally helpful.
 
Not only are the evironMENTALISTS arguably wrong about environmental issues, they are also wrong about exactly WHOM is doing the polluting. One of my favorite gaping holes in the argument of the Kyoto-ists is that it's clearly meant to hobble the United States (and modernized Europe to a lesser extent) but they give a giant pass to the former Communist bloc (with their horribly outdated and inefficient industrial base) as well as developing countries like India and China, who are free to pollute as much as they want. India and China are doing terrible things to the global environment (they don't modernize their equipment like the US industries do, they don't have much government oversight of the environment).

NASA did a time-lapsed satellite composite of greenhouse gas emissions, and surprise, surprise, guess where the greenhouse gasses are really coming from?

http://acd.ucar.edu/~boris/MOPITT-500-MPEG4.2.avi

Of course, the Chinese government isn't very likely to listen to the environmental protest movement, are they?
 
Seriously, even though the enviromentalists are yelling way too high, and being rediculous, there's still a need to minimize the amount of pollution made every day.. I'm not excactly scared it's been proved by testing the ice from one of the poles (dunno which) that the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere isn't nearly as high as it's been prior in time. The CO2 level was a lot higher if you go 100 or so years back... The earth's CO2 level are going up and down all the time.. No need to worry at all.
 
Am I a slight ecomentallist? You bet... do i think cars are to blame, or are even really worth worrying about that much? No fucking way! After taking loads of atmospheric environmental chemistry classes I maintain that there are way way worse things than cars...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top