magley64 Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 The science in the 70s said that we were starting on an inevitable path to another ice age. I also remember reading articles during the oil crisis that had copies from the 1910 newspapers with scientists stating that there were only a couple more years left of fossil fuel.Stating and coming to unfounded conclusions has been the way of scientists for as long as the profession has existed. Keep on smoking that pipe. in 1970 they were missing the climate data we now have for the past 40 years...At that time, the big environmental hazard was the widespread use of CFCs.We banned the use of CFCs and saved our ozone layer.Had we lost the ozone layer, (barring all of the co2 we've dumped into the atmosphere) we would have been looking at another ice age. Just because science is fluid doesn't mean it's wrong. in fact, the very reason it's fluid is the reason I find it so reliable. Constantly adapting to new data. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted May 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Yes scientists make mistakes and correct them over time. Religion does not. http://time.com/13161/pope-francis-willing-to-evaluate-civil-unions-but-no-embrace-of-gay-marriage/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 in 1970 they were missing the climate data we now have for the past 40 years...At that time, the big environmental hazard was the widespread use of CFCs.We banned the use of CFCs and saved our ozone layer.Had we lost the ozone layer, (barring all of the co2 we've dumped into the atmosphere) we would have been looking at another ice age. Just because science is fluid doesn't mean it's wrong. in fact, the very reason it's fluid is the reason I find it so reliable. Constantly adapting to new data. In the 70s it was common knowledge that the Earth was cooling, because that's what people were told to believe. The scientists that were pushing the ice age theory basically just moved on. And not because of CFCs or ozone. There was a cooling trend that started the ice age theory. Then there was a warming trend that gave rise to Global Warming. These changes have been going on for billions of years. Oops, I mean the sky is falling so please donate cash and vote for me http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/earth/cause-ice-age.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Punk Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 The notion of climate change is for real and has history to back it up. Scientific proof of it and theories exist to show these changes over the earth’s lifecycle. Even though I haven't lived it I trust the conclusions that it exists. Manmade global warming is a hoax and will be corrected over time to keep its believers hooked on that religion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turnone Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 http://time.com/13161/pope-francis-willing-to-evaluate-civil-unions-but-no-embrace-of-gay-marriage/Religion changes only when needed to save it's ass. Forgive my blanket statement about never changing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turnone Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Whether it's all man made or not is just silly to not try and make positive changes to reduce the possibility. It may turn out wrong but not much harm and likely more good than harm to shift to other technology sources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAC Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 That Frank. What a tease. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Whether it's all man made or not is just silly to not try and make positive changes to reduce the possibility. It may turn out wrong but not much harm and likely more good than harm to shift to other technology sources. So here is where I agree with you...I am all for clean water and air and dealing with hazardous material in a responsible way. But a big component of man made Global Warming is fear mongering that is used to channel dollars and sway votes. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 The notion of climate change is for real and has history to back it up. Scientific proof of it and theories exist to show these changes over the earth’s lifecycle. Even though I haven't lived it I trust the conclusions that it exists. Manmade global warming is a hoax and will be corrected over time to keep its believers hooked on that religion. so where are your peer reviewed studies to back up those assertions? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LINK Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Again confirmed, my existance is meaningless, I have read every post in this thread. Threads like this interest me, yet I have no confidence in my knowledge, nor do I any longer research this depressing shit, so I try and keep my comments/opinions to myself. So with that boring, who gives a shit statement being made, carry on, some good discussion, humor, stupidity ( which I can relate), and facts being shared. Sorry. I have nothing to add, but I will continue reading... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 so where are your peer reviewed studies to back up those assertions? Your complete faith and trust in all things concerning the science community is amusing at times. You do realize there are things that man cannot explain, and that undoubtedly drives man insane that they cannot figure it out beyond reasonable doubt? You also hopefully realize that the majority of people are naive about many things, and with the technology of making anything seem real and believable these days, it is no wonder why so many are so easily spoon fed bullshit. This planet is so complex, this universe and beyond is so complex, and all of it is very volatile to changes not easily explained or "proven 100%". For every action there is a reaction, problem lies in that we are not always sure what the ultimate cause for the action is or was. There are more hypothesis and theories then anything else, and that is the stalemate. Earth existed before man, and earth has recycled itself time and time again, we are inevitably about to go through a doomsday phase I fear.......man cannot stop it. There are just too many damn people on this planet, and Earth is going to be reducing those numbers sooner than later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 So back to the impending Ice Age and Global warming. Scientist observe a trend, develop a theory, and then attempt to find eveidence to support it. That's pretty much what science is. I find the process highy interesting. In the case of the new Ice Age, the trend reversed itself, holes in the theory were exposed, and scientists abandoned it. Again that is part of the scientific process. When votes, politics, and Washington investors become involved, is when I become a skeptic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 (edited) Your complete faith and trust in all things concerning the science community is amusing at times. You do realize there are things that man cannot explain, and that undoubtedly drives man insane that they cannot figure it out beyond reasonable doubt? You also hopefully realize that the majority of people are naive about many things, and with the technology of making anything seem real and believable these days, it is no wonder why so many are so easily spoon fed bullshit. This planet is so complex, this universe and beyond is so complex, and all of it is very volatile to changes not easily explained or "proven 100%". For every action there is a reaction, problem lies in that we are not always sure what the ultimate cause for the action is or was. There are more hypothesis and theories then anything else, and that is the stalemate. Earth existed before man, and earth has recycled itself time and time again, we are inevitably about to go through a doomsday phase I fear.......man cannot stop it. There are just too many damn people on this planet, and Earth is going to be reducing those numbers sooner than later. Yes, the universe is complex... Given, very very very complex, and inconceivably huge, and nuanced. Science is our best tool currently to understanding it, and through science we have unlocked many many mysteries of the universe.Are there more to unlock? of course.Will we ever understand everything? Probably notThankfully there are people who dedicate their lives and their careers into understanding small portions of it, so that collectively we understand much much more than we ever have. What is your alternative? "fuck it, it's too complicated"Thankfully there are these patient and diligent individuals toiling away in obscurity, dragging our collective understanding up the mountain of knowledge using the ropes and hooks of science... Maybe there is nothing we can do to avoid our own extinction, but if there are steps we can take to delay it rather than to speed it up, why not?Why not allow a few more generations of human beings enjoy the "supremely agreeable, but generally under-appreciated state known as existence"? (in the words of Bill Bryson). Edited May 13, 2014 by magley64 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Yes, the universe is complex... Given, very very very complex, and inconceivably huge, and nuanced. Science is our best tool currently to understanding it, and through science we have unlocked many many mysteries of the universe.Are there more to unlock? of course.Will we ever understand everything? Probably notThankfully there are people who dedicate their lives and their careers into understanding small portions of it, so that collectively we understand much much more than we ever have. What is your alternative? "fuck it, it's too complicated"Thankfully there are these patient and diligent individuals toiling away in obscurity, dragging our collective understanding up the mountain of knowledge using the ropes and hooks of science... Maybe there is nothing we can do to avoid our own extinction, but if there are steps we can take to delay it rather than to speed it up, why not?Why not allow a few more generations of human beings enjoy the "supremely agreeable, but generally under-appreciated state known as existence"? (in the words of Bill Bryson). Nope I do not want anything to be ignored, had that happened over history, some wonderful inventions, medical breakthroughs and things that make our lives much easier would have never happened. I truly believe that were world leaders "truly" serious about helping the environment, the ability for combustible engines to achieve insane MPG would have not been put away with all the other X-files that they want to be hushed immediately. Less need for fossil fuels because we would be using less of them, less refining and demand for the fuels, not relying on the middle east for the bulk of our oil "fuck them anyways", and all this would lead to less overall pollution. But money and greed for a select few........and favors we owe to other countries stops all of this cold, and it is such a shame. The USA could pretty much say "sorry everyone, we will do things our way", but we know that is just not going to happen. What allies do we truly need for us to flourish, hell everyone else depends on us to save them and or keep them afloat? I believe that allot of saving our natural resources is within our grasp, but all the idiots in charge will not do it for the greater good of mankind. Man truly is a blight upon this incredible planet, and we are not worthy of even being here on the most perfect "known" planet in our galaxy. Man is capable of truly amazing things, and man is also capable of truly heinous things, unfortunately I see the scale being tipped toward heinous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 I truly believe that were world leaders "truly" serious about helping the environment, the ability for combustible engines to achieve insane MPG would have not been put away with all the other X-files that they want to be hushed immediately.Clearly you've never studied physics... Please do some reading and look into the carnot engine.. it's an IDEAL purely theoretical version of the modern internal combustion engine.It should easily put to rest your conspiracy theory regarding these "insane mpg" cars that were "hushed"The X files was a "fictional" tv show. it's a really simple conservation of energy problem... the energy of combusting fossil fuels is your maximum, and even in a perfect theoretical world you can't get all of that energy out to propel a vehicle. not even close... that's why electricity is the way to go, because you can routinely get 90% efficiency, with internal combustion we will be lucky if we ever achieve half that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 (edited) Clearly you've never studied physics... Please do some reading and look into the carnot engine.. it's an IDEAL purely theoretical version of the modern internal combustion engine.It should easily put to rest your conspiracy theory regarding these "insane mpg" cars that were "hushed"The X files was a "fictional" tv show. it's a really simple conservation of energy problem... the energy of combusting fossil fuels is your maximum, and even in a perfect theoretical world you can't get all of that energy out to propel a vehicle. not even close... that's why electricity is the way to go, because you can routinely get 90% efficiency, with internal combustion we will be lucky if we ever achieve half that. I call BS on your theory, we waste gasoline the liquid when the vapor is what is the combustible part.........and here is just a few stories which I am sure you will call BS on, but if this is true or could be true, then how could it not be a conspiracy? Not having clean burning diesels here like in Europe is also a crock of crap, but I am sure we will never adopt them like we should. http://futurecreep.wordpress.com/2012/01/16/100-miles-per-gallon-the-great-oil-conspiracy/ http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread539369/pg1 Edited May 13, 2014 by Pokey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 I call BS on your theory, we waste gasoline the liquid when the vapor is what is the combustible part.........and here is just a few stories which I am sure you will call BS on, but if this is true or could be true, then how could it not be a conspiracy? http://futurecreep.wordpress.com/2012/01/16/100-miles-per-gallon-the-great-oil-conspiracy/ http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread539369/pg1 if you refuse to do the math regarding the carnot engine, and maximum efficiency... Which puts this theory to bed immediately, then consider modern engine tuners Yes gasoline burns most efficiently when mixed with air at the proper stoichiometry, this is why we have carburetors, and fuel injectors... these devices vaporize fuel, and mix them with air at the proper stoichiometry to be burned in an engine... This magical carburetor would have "in theory" run the engine extroardinarily lean, this does produce more energy, and by all means you can tune your current car to run very lean indeed, the problem with running lean is overheating, ask any engine tuner. Lean is mean, but lean is HOT. There is a science to this 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tpoppa Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 In all serious don't EPA emissions rules lower MPG? Isn't 13.7 the optimal A/F ratio that results in best combustion, hp, and mpg. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 if you refuse to do the math regarding the carnot engine, and maximum efficiency... Which puts this theory to bed immediately, then consider modern engine tuners Yes gasoline burns most efficiently when mixed with air at the proper stoichiometry, this is why we have carburetors, and fuel injectors... these devices vaporize fuel, and mix them with air at the proper stoichiometry to be burned in an engine... This magical carburetor would have "in theory" run the engine extroardinarily lean, this does produce more energy, and by all means you can tune your current car to run very lean indeed, the problem with running lean is overheating, ask any engine tuner. Lean is mean, but lean is HOT. There is a science to this You should be a lobbyist, you were born for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAC Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 You should be a lobbyist, you were born for it.What a horrible thing to say. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 You should be a lobbyist, you were born for it.Because I understand physics? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Not only that, but if a couple of old rednecks managed to get better fuel economy and more power out of less fuel, you don't think engineers with doctorates in chemical engineering, physics, material science and the like could have replicated the results in the past 40 years? Hmmm? Use your brain man... seriously. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted May 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Suck it hippies. http://green.nascar.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted May 13, 2014 Author Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 Carburetors merely hold fuel while engine vacuum removes it. Unless you have a supercharger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted May 13, 2014 Report Share Posted May 13, 2014 (edited) Injectors don't "vaporize" fuel. They "inject" fuel. Carburetors merely hold fuel while engine vacuum removes it.Injectors use pressure and a nozzle to atomize fuel, Carburetors use a venturi to achieve the same effect.Cmon man, you know engines don't run for shit unless the fuel is atomized and well blended with air. Edited May 13, 2014 by magley64 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.