How to fix Human Caused Global Warming.

[haveatit]

No, the point is there is no MEASURABLE human input to global warming.

Period.

Read what the title of the thread says. The point here is how to fix human caused global warming. Now if you want to go into what is measurable in human caused global warming, go to my thread, "Golbal warming. Kiss your ass goodbye." In the thread I posted a number of graphs that show all sorts of measurements. Go there and have at it.

 

[haveatit]

It was your stupid post #112.

Do your realize how stupid the claim was?

I posted a link to a website there. You can either agree or disagree with it.

 

[haveatit]

Dumbass what was mileage of cares in fifties sixties and seventies.......on avg,,,,,if your complaint is it hasnt improved maybe the govt should get out of the business of mpg mandates eh........rube

How have cars changed since the time frame you mentioned, jerkoff. They got smaller, lighter and more aerodynamic. What does any of that have to do with the efficiency of the engines in them.

 

[Manonthestreet]

How have cars changed since the time frame you mentioned, jerkoff. They got smaller, lighter and more aerodynamic. What does any of that have to do with the efficiency of the engines in them.

If your claim is govt regulations have done nothing perhaps we don't need them to rescue us. .....

 

[westwall]

Read what the title of the thread says. The point here is how to fix human caused global warming. Now if you want to go into what is measurable in human caused global warming, go to my thread, "Golbal warming. Kiss your ass goodbye." In the thread I posted a number of graphs that show all sorts of measurements. Go there and have at it.

I don't care what your lying thread title says. There is no measurable human influence.

Period.

 

[haveatit]

So you think a carbureted fuel system is as efficient as direct port electronic fuel injection? Lol

There isn't a whole hell of a lot of difference between the two. And what if the sun produces a large enough EMP that fries integrated circuits. Or some terrorist cell manages to set off a nuke about 100 miles above the Earth's surface.
Such as over the eastern seaboard. Basically killing all the cars along the east coast. (As well as many other things) I would bet you would be trying like hell to convert your car engine to a carburetor fueled engine.

 

[haveatit]

He's not very bright.

You suck.

 

[haveatit]

Several people are LAUGHING at your incredible ignorance.

Yeah. The inane laughter of the insane.

 

[haveatit]

I meant we have to do some widescale experiments that will determine if we can actually reduce the 'warming' enough to mitigate the effects of greenhouse gases.

Well we know what is causing it. All we need to do is reverse what is causing it.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Yeah. The inane laughter of the insane.

View attachment 654366

Your desperate deflection is just one more reason to laugh at you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I posted a link to a website there. You can either agree or disagree with it.

Yes, I'm still laughing about your stupid link.
Have you realized the problem yet?

Do you actually believe engines back then were more efficient than engines in 2003?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

You suck.

Idiot says what?

 

[haveatit]

I can understand and fully sympathize with someone worried about everyone's carbon footprint. But when you declare that there is something distinct about the carbon footprint of immigrants I know you for someone possessing an insupportable bias.

Fuck the illegals. There is a reason why they use the word "ILLEGAL" That isn't a bias. It is a fact. Many claim to be coming here seeking a better life. What does that mean? Seeking to increase their carbon footprint! You think my "bias" is unsupportable? I have a VAST number of ways I could support it. In doing so, you might call me a racist. Be that as it may, what I actually am is a proofcist. I can provide far more proof that you could begin to imagine. Too bad it wouldn't be allowed. You seem to be all scientific and stuff. Don't you find it rather hypocritical so support the kind of exacting proof that science provides yet totally rejecting the exacting proof I could offer on that topic?

 

[haveatit]

Yes, I'm still laughing about your stupid link.
Have you realized the problem yet?

Do you actually believe engines back then were more efficient than engines in 2003?

Well, maybe you did manage to side track me. Did you read the title of this thread? It is about how to fix human caused global warming. Quibbling about the efficiency between cars now and what they were in the 1980's isn't going to cut it. So let it go.

 

[haveatit]

If your claim is govt regulations have done nothing perhaps we don't need them to rescue us. .....

Any regulations are bullshit. Now if they would have passed a regulation that immediately banned the sales of cars with internal combustion engines 20 years ago, that would have been a regulation that would have actually did something.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Quibbling about the efficiency between cars now and what they were in the 1980's isn't going to cut it.

That's not what your link claimed.
It claimed a 1908 Model T was more fuel efficient than
a 2003 Ford Explorer SUV.

Do you believe that is an accurate claim?

 

[westwall]

Well we know what is causing it. All we need to do is reverse what is causing it.

No, we don't know. We just had a snow flurry. Today! Not rare, but uncommon. According to you brainless retards we should change mankind because of it.

Grow up.

 

[westwall]

That's not what your link claimed.
It claimed a 1908 Model T was more fuel efficient than
a 2003 Ford Explorer SUV.

View attachment 654378

Do you believe that is an accurate claim?

Yeah, the idiot probably does.

 

[haveatit]

That's not what your link claimed.
It claimed a 1908 Model T was more fuel efficient than
a 2003 Ford Explorer SUV.

View attachment 654378

Do you believe that is an accurate claim?

25 MPG vs 16 MPG. Seems pretty clear cut to me. Also, didn't like the last website? Try this one.

news.umich.edu › fuel-efficiency-of-vehicles-onFuel efficiency of vehicles on the road: Little progress ...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

25 MPG vs 16 MPG. Seems pretty clear cut to me.

Of course, because you're an idiot.