• Welcome to the Land Rover UK Forums

    You are currently viewing the site as a guest and some content may not be available to you.

    Registration is quick and easy and will give you full access to the site and allow you to ask questions or make comments and join in on the conversation. If you would like to register then please Register Now

Petrol Engines End of E10 and bio fuel?

For now, and I think they get a subsidy of the Govt. But grain prices are rocketing and the Govt has no money so let's see how this plays out.
 
The more I research global warming and climate change, the more I despair at the incoherent melange of "Green" policies.
In general politicians are not scientists or economists, nor are they particularly "expert" in anything much. They rely on the information that they receive from "experts" to make the decisions that impact our lives. Far too many "experts" are actually lobbyists for whatever agenda they are behind, and exert their influence on the politicians to make decisions that benefit them or their agenda. As a consequence, we end up with the kind of contradictory and often outright stupid policies that we then have to endure. Exchanging food for energy in the quest to reduce dependence on oil is madness.
Green is a great ruse to hide left wing ideology and has been utilized to push against right wing capitalism. On the surface, the green agenda sounds like a virtuous and noble one, but in fact hides a lot of harmful ideas that do damage to our lives. Obviously this is all debatable and no doubt there are good ideas as well as bad ones, but our lives are being severely impacted by these measures yet there is actually no proof that the ubiquitous predictions of doom hold any water.
I'm open to the concept that the global climate is undergoing "change", in fact it always has and always will as climate is a dynamic thing, however, I'm far from convinced that in our relatively short human existence compared with the planet's 4.5 billion years, that we are responsible for warming and threatening the Earth's future. When the main protagonists in the global warming agenda have very questionable credibility (Hansen, Mann) and the same concerns about the honesty of the IPCC exist, it makes it very difficult to take at face value any of the things that are being fed to us on a daily basis. The current warming predictions are based on computer models that do not take (and never can) full account of 'all' of the variables that affect the planet's climate. More worrying, because the models don't produce the outputs that match the observed climate, they (climate modellers) adjust and manipulate the data they input so that it does! What's more, they use and manipulate data (temperature readings) from ground based weather stations rather than the accurate and global satellite data. I could go on, but suffice to say, it is far from clear cut that there is even a problem let alone a Man made one.
As I say, I continue to research and remain open minded but the idea that there is a problem and that it is beyond question is completely false. This brings us back to the very real problem of so many governmental initiatives around the world all in the name of fighting climate change and all costing an absolute fortune making us all poorer and less free to live our lives. What is needed is a truly independent group of scientists (not pseudo "scientists" - climate modellers) who can give an honest, independent, and non politically motivated assessment of the true state of the global climate situation.
 
Cliff4WD said:
The more I research global warming and climate change, the more I despair at the incoherent melange of "Green" policies.
In general politicians are not scientists or economists, nor are they particularly "expert" in anything much. They rely on the information that they receive from "experts" to make the decisions that impact our lives. Far too many "experts" are actually lobbyists for whatever agenda they are behind, and exert their influence on the politicians to make decisions that benefit them or their agenda. As a consequence, we end up with the kind of contradictory and often outright stupid policies that we then have to endure. Exchanging food for energy in the quest to reduce dependence on oil is madness.
Green is a great ruse to hide left wing ideology and has been utilized to push against right wing capitalism. On the surface, the green agenda sounds like a virtuous and noble one, but in fact hides a lot of harmful ideas that do damage to our lives. Obviously this is all debatable and no doubt there are good ideas as well as bad ones, but our lives are being severely impacted by these measures yet there is actually no proof that the ubiquitous predictions of doom hold any water.
I'm open to the concept that the global climate is undergoing "change", in fact it always has and always will as climate is a dynamic thing, however, I'm far from convinced that in our relatively short human existence compared with the planet's 4.5 billion years, that we are responsible for warming and threatening the Earth's future. When the main protagonists in the global warming agenda have very questionable credibility (Hansen, Mann) and the same concerns about the honesty of the IPCC exist, it makes it very difficult to take at face value any of the things that are being fed to us on a daily basis. The current warming predictions are based on computer models that do not take (and never can) full account of 'all' of the variables that affect the planet's climate. More worrying, because the models don't produce the outputs that match the observed climate, they (climate modellers) adjust and manipulate the data they input so that it does! What's more, they use and manipulate data (temperature readings) from ground based weather stations rather than the accurate and global satellite data. I could go on, but suffice to say, it is far from clear cut that there is even a problem let alone a Man made one.
As I say, I continue to research and remain open minded but the idea that there is a problem and that it is beyond question is completely false. This brings us back to the very real problem of so many governmental initiatives around the world all in the name of fighting climate change and all costing an absolute fortune making us all poorer and less free to live our lives. What is needed is a truly independent group of scientists (not pseudo "scientists" - climate modellers) who can give an honest, independent, and non politically motivated assessment of the true state of the global climate situation.
Click to expand...
Couldn't have put it better myself. :thumbsup:
 
Cliff4WD said:
The more I research global warming and climate change, the more I despair at the incoherent melange of "Green" policies.
In general politicians are not scientists or economists, nor are they particularly "expert" in anything much. They rely on the information that they receive from "experts" to make the decisions that impact our lives. Far too many "experts" are actually lobbyists for whatever agenda they are behind, and exert their influence on the politicians to make decisions that benefit them or their agenda. As a consequence, we end up with the kind of contradictory and often outright stupid policies that we then have to endure. Exchanging food for energy in the quest to reduce dependence on oil is madness.
Green is a great ruse to hide left wing ideology and has been utilized to push against right wing capitalism. On the surface, the green agenda sounds like a virtuous and noble one, but in fact hides a lot of harmful ideas that do damage to our lives. Obviously this is all debatable and no doubt there are good ideas as well as bad ones, but our lives are being severely impacted by these measures yet there is actually no proof that the ubiquitous predictions of doom hold any water.
I'm open to the concept that the global climate is undergoing "change", in fact it always has and always will as climate is a dynamic thing, however, I'm far from convinced that in our relatively short human existence compared with the planet's 4.5 billion years, that we are responsible for warming and threatening the Earth's future. When the main protagonists in the global warming agenda have very questionable credibility (Hansen, Mann) and the same concerns about the honesty of the IPCC exist, it makes it very difficult to take at face value any of the things that are being fed to us on a daily basis. The current warming predictions are based on computer models that do not take (and never can) full account of 'all' of the variables that affect the planet's climate. More worrying, because the models don't produce the outputs that match the observed climate, they (climate modellers) adjust and manipulate the data they input so that it does! What's more, they use and manipulate data (temperature readings) from ground based weather stations rather than the accurate and global satellite data. I could go on, but suffice to say, it is far from clear cut that there is even a problem let alone a Man made one.
As I say, I continue to research and remain open minded but the idea that there is a problem and that it is beyond question is completely false. This brings us back to the very real problem of so many governmental initiatives around the world all in the name of fighting climate change and all costing an absolute fortune making us all poorer and less free to live our lives. What is needed is a truly independent group of scientists (not pseudo "scientists" - climate modellers) who can give an honest, independent, and non politically motivated assessment of the true state of the global climate situation.
Click to expand...

Some time I was largely, though not completely, convinced that man made global warming was a fact. As things have moved on I have become less convinced because, as with other issues these days, anyone who expresses doubts about it is excluded from the debate because man made global warming is ' incontrovertible fact'. I suppose in Putin's Russia it is an 'incontrovertible fact' that Russia has not invaded Ukraine, it's just a special operation. David
 
Cliff4WD said:
What is needed is a truly independent group of scientists (not pseudo "scientists" - climate modellers) who can give an honest, independent, and non politically motivated assessment of the true state of the global climate situation.
Click to expand...
Sadly Cliff, there are so many with vested interests here that getting a clear image of the true problem (and it's answers) is almost impossible. Everybody has seen huge rises in their energy bills and today I hear electricity companies reporting 75% increases in profits !!
We are being taken for mugs and our elected representatives are doing nothing about it.
 
Cliff4WD said:
The more I research global warming and climate change, the more I despair at the incoherent melange of "Green" policies.
In general politicians are not scientists or economists, nor are they particularly "expert" in anything much. They rely on the information that they receive from "experts" to make the decisions that impact our lives. Far too many "experts" are actually lobbyists for whatever agenda they are behind, and exert their influence on the politicians to make decisions that benefit them or their agenda. As a consequence, we end up with the kind of contradictory and often outright stupid policies that we then have to endure. Exchanging food for energy in the quest to reduce dependence on oil is madness.
Green is a great ruse to hide left wing ideology and has been utilized to push against right wing capitalism. On the surface, the green agenda sounds like a virtuous and noble one, but in fact hides a lot of harmful ideas that do damage to our lives. Obviously this is all debatable and no doubt there are good ideas as well as bad ones, but our lives are being severely impacted by these measures yet there is actually no proof that the ubiquitous predictions of doom hold any water.
I'm open to the concept that the global climate is undergoing "change", in fact it always has and always will as climate is a dynamic thing, however, I'm far from convinced that in our relatively short human existence compared with the planet's 4.5 billion years, that we are responsible for warming and threatening the Earth's future. When the main protagonists in the global warming agenda have very questionable credibility (Hansen, Mann) and the same concerns about the honesty of the IPCC exist, it makes it very difficult to take at face value any of the things that are being fed to us on a daily basis. The current warming predictions are based on computer models that do not take (and never can) full account of 'all' of the variables that affect the planet's climate. More worrying, because the models don't produce the outputs that match the observed climate, they (climate modellers) adjust and manipulate the data they input so that it does! What's more, they use and manipulate data (temperature readings) from ground based weather stations rather than the accurate and global satellite data. I could go on, but suffice to say, it is far from clear cut that there is even a problem let alone a Man made one.
As I say, I continue to research and remain open minded but the idea that there is a problem and that it is beyond question is completely false. This brings us back to the very real problem of so many governmental initiatives around the world all in the name of fighting climate change and all costing an absolute fortune making us all poorer and less free to live our lives. What is needed is a truly independent group of scientists (not pseudo "scientists" - climate modellers) who can give an honest, independent, and non politically motivated assessment of the true state of the global climate situation.
Click to expand...
Argh! "Climate change denier" stone the denier! We all know "the science is settled"
Actually I agree with you, but I musn't say it too loud or I will get stoned as well.
 
A lot of the information gathered by these so called climate change scientists,university bodies are sponsored by big oil firms , iam with cliff4WD, there is a lot more to it
 
There has been a subtle bias for at lease a decade now. It has been much easier to get research supporting man made climate change into science publications. This has lead to more scientists producing research supporting man made climate change. Its hard to see how to overcome this embedded bias. I'm not a climate change denier, but i do worry that access to unbiased research is increasingly impossible.
 
robwlondon said:
There has been a subtle bias for at lease a decade now. It has been much easier to get research supporting man made climate change into science publications. This has lead to more scientists producing research supporting man made climate change. Its hard to see how to overcome this embedded bias. I'm not a climate change denier, but i do worry that access to unbiased research is increasingly impossible.
Click to expand...

It's not just happening on the subject of climate change, it is becoming difficult to express any opinion which doubts PC 'facts' on anything. Healthy debate is not encouraged and our precious free speech appears to be rapidly diminishing. David
 
I Read a novel some time ago which addressed this subject. It was written by an author with a background in scientific research and whilst it was a work of fiction it raised several valid points including the one that was central to the plot.
Governments need the populace to live in a state of fear so they can push through unpopular policies and levy taxes.
It used to be simple, if we don't do this the Warsaw pact countries will invade and kill your babies. With the demise of the old Soviet union that became a bit redundant so what can we replace it with? Has to be something equally doom laden, preferably ill defined and so massive that the populace feel helpless to protect themselves from it
Just based on the evidence of my lifetime the climate is changing. As to the cause of that change, very much open to debate. We don't have the data to work with, we have no knowledge other than for the last couple of hundred years, apart from which, allegedly, we are coming out of a mini ice age so temperatures will rise.
Saw a programme which put forward the suggestion that climate change could cause the gulf stream to collapse, thus causing our winters to be massively colder, as in cold enough to drive across the channel when it froze for 3 months of the year.
 
Neil said:
I Read a novel some time ago which addressed this subject. It was written by an author with a background in scientific research and whilst it was a work of fiction it raised several valid points including the one that was central to the plot.
Governments need the populace to live in a state of fear so they can push through unpopular policies and levy taxes.
It used to be simple, if we don't do this the Warsaw pact countries will invade and kill your babies. With the demise of the old Soviet union that became a bit redundant so what can we replace it with? Has to be something equally doom laden, preferably ill defined and so massive that the populace feel helpless to protect themselves from it
Just based on the evidence of my lifetime the climate is changing. As to the cause of that change, very much open to debate. We don't have the data to work with, we have no knowledge other than for the last couple of hundred years, apart from which, allegedly, we are coming out of a mini ice age so temperatures will rise.
Saw a programme which put forward the suggestion that climate change could cause the gulf stream to collapse, thus causing our winters to be massively colder, as in cold enough to drive across the channel when it froze for 3 months of the year.
Click to expand...
I avoid considering any of the numerous conspiracy type ideas (although I'm really beginning to wonder these days), but I do try very hard to get a properly balanced view so that I can make up my own mind on things. On climate, I'm concerned that climate has been conflated with weather: although we all experience changing weather, we cannot know if it's permanent and due to global climate change. There is an agenda that has gained a strong foothold and now accepted by MSM, politicians, etc., as fact, however, it is not fact! The main protagonists all seem to argue the exact same points, i.e., there is a agreed consensus, anybody challenging the idea is a 'denier', etc. I get deeply suspicious when debate is shut down and anybody challenging the ideology is branded with pejorative insults or called a nutcase. They always hold up the few lunatics who do have strange and fanciful ideas to belittle and trash any meaningful debate on the subject, they also revert to legal action and threats to those who do challenge or criticize. Mann for example (the author of the famous 'Hockey Stick' graph) sues or threatens to sue anybody who challenges the truthfulness of that picture. It is clear that the data used to construct that graph was selectively chosen and manipulated (even excluding the whole medieval warming period altogether). And the many contributors to the IPCC are not 'scientists' at all but are climatologists or other self styled pseudo scientists. The few genuine scientists that speak out against the IPCC reports and other publications are physicists, data analysts and statistics experts, oceanographers, etc. etc. In actual fact, amongst those who are brave enough or independent enough of funding or employment constraints, they seem to tell a pretty consistent story about the real reasons for warming and the correlation between our planets orbit in space around our Sun, of sun spot activity, and the further correlation with earths 4.5 billion years of alternating hot and cold climate.
If we stick with the definitions (there's been some revisions made to better fit the climate change scare) for the earth's periods relating to ice ages, etc., we are actually still in the last inter-glacial period and ultimately heading towards the next ice age.
My own simple view is that in the planet's timeline of 4,500,000,000 years, where CO2 has been up and down and temps up and down, it is difficult to accept that we know, that in the incredibly short time that we have been inhabiting the earth, that we are now responsible for warming it up and that we are all going to die unless we revert to cave dwelling!
 
As well as living on a diet of nuts, seeds and berries.
Odd that there is no cave art depicting people celebrating the finding a tree full of berries, nuts or seeds
Incidentally the book is called State of Fear

State of Fear: Amazon.co.uk: Crichton, Michael: 9780739454534: Books

Buy State of Fear paperback / softback by Crichton, Michael (ISBN: 9780739454534) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.
www.amazon.co.uk
 
Never let a crisis go to waste.
I remember octopus energy offering a 100% renewable tariff which was produced using only renewable sources. Funnily enough - this has also gone up. Are they charging for wind and sunshine now?
If the Uk government was run as a company it would be bankrupt long ago.
It's not difficult to raise beef on grassland and use their waste to generate heat and power, or use the millions of acres of municipal grassland to make biobutanol. Or push through legislation that allows homeowners to install micro wind turbines or a goverment loan at 0% interest on any solar installations - but they don't.
 
Back
Top Bottom