Great News for V8s and ICE Vehicles in General

[Zig]

I do not debate climate science. This is not related to the Earths natural rhythm in its orbit. We know Earth wobbles and its relationship to climate. This is not that. If you wish to educate yourself on climate science and its relationship to greenhouse gas emissions cause by the burning of fossil fuels I would suggest climate.nasa.gov

NASA-Funded Studies Explain How Climate Is Changing Earth’s Rotation
https://www.nasa.gov/science-resear...lain-how-climate-is-changing-earths-rotation/

Three Gorges Dam shifted Earth’s axis, slightly slowed rotation: NASA scientists

https://www.thenews.com.pk/latest/1...axis-slightly-slowed-rotation-nasa-scientists

Oops, Scientists May Have Miscalculated Our Global Warming Timeline
Clues have emerged that reveal a much hotter history than we thought.

“…Well, a paper from the University Western Australia Oceans Institute has some bad news: the world might’ve blown past that threshold four years ago..”

https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/environment/a69644938/climate-change-sea-sponge-timeline/

Sponsored

 

[DarkMatterGrey]

Al Gore, with his apocalyptic predictions of IMMINENT DOOM did the movement no favors.

For those that didn't know, this is the real Al Gore...

https://www.kleinerperkins.com/people/advisors/al-gore/

Not only made big monies on big investments in alternative energies, but also made money on books and movies to peddle his message. Seems this was about green (money, not energy). Always follow the money.

In the meantime, I'll enjoy my 480 horse power mustang out here in southwest, where previous generations had to rely on their ole trusty 1 hp mustangs with tailpipe emissions that are over 20x the green house gas (methane) that CO2 is.

 

[exm]

For those that didn't know, this is the real Al Gore...

https://www.kleinerperkins.com/people/advisors/al-gore/

Not only made big monies on big investments in alternative energies, but also made money on books and movies to peddle his message. Seems this was about green (money, not energy). Always follow the money.

In the meantime, I'll enjoy my 480 horse power mustang out here in southwest, where previous generations had to rely on their ole trusty 1 hp mustangs with tailpipe emissions that are over 20x the green house gas (methane) that CO2 is.

The same Al Gore who takes private jets all over the globe, just like all the other climate warriors? At least Greta is taking a boat although Greta gave up on the climate hoax and moved on to the next best thing for the leftist, which is Gaza.

Just let me drive my soon-to-own V8 and my SUV. I'm doing plenty myself to work on a better planet by recycling, making my house energy efficient and am generally supportive of hybrids and all modern development of clean energy and product. But let *ME* decide, and don't force it down my throat by politicians who only want power and control. Because that's what it's all about: the government telling you what to do, when to do and how to do things. Global Warming aka Climate Change is a perfect vehicle for that, although Covid briefly stole the show.

 

[DarkMatterGrey]

The same Al Gore who takes private jets all over the globe, just like all the other climate warriors? At least Greta is taking a boat although Greta gave up on the climate hoax and moved on to the next best thing for the leftist, which is Gaza.

Just let me drive my soon-to-own V8 and my SUV. I'm doing plenty myself to work on a better planet by recycling, making my house energy efficient and am generally supportive of hybrids and all modern development of clean energy and product. But let *ME* decide, and don't force it down my throat by politicians who only want power and control. Because that's what it's all about: the government telling you what to do, when to do and how to do things. Global Warming aka Climate Change is a perfect vehicle for that, although Covid briefly stole the show.

So agree.

My wife drives 1 mile to work and mostly makes local runs (Costco, Target, WalMart, etc. the usual suburban haunts). She would have definitely benefited from an EV. We even put a solar array on our house about 12 years ago to be good neighbors.

But, about 2 years ago I thought it would be our last time to by an ICE car given where the USA seemed to be heading. So I got my wife a 2023 Dodge Durango V8 Hemi (14 mpg on 89 Octane). And I got an early 2024 (built in late 2023) Mustang GT (18 mpg on 93) somewhat out of fear that ICE engines were coming to a fast end.

Force something upon me, I will let my money do the talking.

 

[DarkMatterGrey]

I agree with a lot of what you're saying, I think it's important to move forward, and keep innovating in meaningful ways so you're not caught flat footed by foreign competition. I personally believe Ford has the right way of doing that with this new universal EV platform.

Some like a 90k lightning doesn't really move the needle, but these upcoming 25-35k EVs seem like they'll have major appeal. If they're able to pull this off, and they're good vehicles, I believe it'll be a catalyst moment for Ford EVs, it just makes a lot more sense than trying to sell these huge, expensive EVs when most of the people I meet who want EVs tend to be younger, and can't afford those sorts of vehicles.

Yep, agree.

My next vehicle is one of those EV robo-taxis to come pick me up at the bar when I've had too much fun. More of a "cheaper than a DUI" utility vehicle.

I'd also keep my ICE cars for the sheer enjoyment of driving, Mustang for on-road, Jeep for off-road, wife's SUV for road trips.

 

[Gregs24]

This is a huge win for red blooded Americans and a loss for the group that tells you that a man can have a baby. Regulators, fire up the coal rollers.

Looking forward to comparing 2027 MY emissions test submissions in comparison to 2026 and prior.

What a complete load of rubbish. Emissions will not change, nobody will make their cars worse for emissions!

Red blooded Americans Yeah right

 

[DarkMatterGrey]

Reread post #85. @Stanzi is spot on. Nothing is going to change. There may be some new variants but not because of this. Development takes time. And as all the manufacturers know, “this too shall pass”.

I thought a bunch of the change is for future regulation, pending higher MPG CAFE Standards, removing the provision about individual states (California CARB specifically) driving products/solutions for all states. If there's a relaxation in existing standards, I wouldn't expect much core change, but maybe in some of the peripherals meant to extract the last minuscule percent MPG savings, such as thinner (engine, driveline) oils, auto start stop, MDS/shutting down cylinders, etc.

 

[Gregs24]

Natives appear to be getting restless. We should probably pick a less controversial topic, like morning coffee vs. morning tea.



We will not find 'common ground' beyond what's been previously posted, and in the interest of brevity
Most of the evidence I can find suggest the earth is warming, but if I am reading the global temp chart correctly, both 1925-1945 and 1979-1991 were more steep spikes in temperature than now.

I do not agree on the cause being clear, or _necessarily_ the cause being humans by themselves without more research and data. To clarify, I am not ruling that out.
https://climatechangetracker.org/global-warming/rate-of-change
WW2 is an obvious spike and high level, only towards the end of Vietnam do you see similar increase rates - about the time of rolling thunder and linebacker. The latter was 150k tons of ordnance. Maybe there's more to it.

What I am saying, and I strongly suspect you may take this personally, it is not intended as an insult, but you are putting way too much faith in the humanity that make up the scientific community and frankly should not be. I posted previously WRT climate gate.
One side uses climate gate to illustrate that the climate change agenda is a hoax, the other side proclaims that the scandal did not involve any manipulation of data, only manipulation of politicians and the public. That's lying, and I refer you back to John Gotti's simple, yet eloquent reason to not trust a liar. It's not the only instance, but it's probably the most infamous.
But lest we not forget, quite a lot of what we were told about Covid 19 turned out to be false and if you questioned the data, you were ridiculed, de-platformed, shadow banned all in the name of covid hysteria.

The scientific community has a veracity problem and just like when a police officer is busted lying under oath in court, we should question everything that "scientist" has touched, researched, reported on, commented on and opined about. Cops can easily lose their job for this, as any further testimony can be impeached by the defense so it renders that officer relatively useless as a witness. But scientists, much like baseball umpires, (US) football referees, weather forecasters - there's no tangible punishment for being wrong, or in the case of scientists- there's no tangible punishment for lying, and lobbying for legislation, regulations and policy based on data that has been embellished, exaggerated or made up. The climate change political lobby has done the scientific community no favors in this regard. Someone is feeding the political clowns data and it's bad. Hollywood also isn't doing the climate change lobby any favors because people see and hear the hyperbolic predictions of impending doom, the date & time of doom comes and goes and everyone moves on with life.

Sooner or later, people wake up to being hoodwinked, the climate lobby, backed by (at least some) climate "scientists" have only themselves to blame. They've cried wolf over and over and over and here we are. Who should we believe? Definitely not the climate scientific community, their political lobby, Al Gore, John Kerry and Greta Thunberg.

At least you agree the earth is warming and from the graph you posted that the rate of change is indeed very significant as we know - the rest of the evidence is there if you look for it but of course if you don't look you will not find it. As a medical professional and scientist I know exactly where and how to look for evidence and how to weed out opinion and bias.

Funny how 'repeatedly crying wolf' is in fact repeatedly providing evidence. Scientists always look back at predictions and establish validity and here is one such paper looking at climate modelling from the 1970's to early 2000's and how it compares to what actually happened.

Evaluating the Performance of Past Climate Model Projections - Hausfather - 2020 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

There are many papers like this and they confirm that the modelling has been very good based on verification statistics. Not surprisingly this sort of modelling verification is used elsewhere, weather forecasting would be a very good example where forecasts have improved hugely since the 1970's because of improved models and feedback verification. It is critical with all of this that you avoid dumbed down opinion pieces and media and get to the primary sources of data. You don't want to read what Fred said about John's work, you want to hear it from John himself.

On the subject of whether the CO2 is a result of human activity again this is all available for you to read - example:

Climate change: evidence and causes | Royal Society
Scientists have examined greenhouse gases in the context of the past. Analysis of air trapped inside ice that has been accumulating over time in Antarctica shows that the CO2 concentration began to increase significantly in the 19th century [Figure B3], after staying in the range of 260 to 280 ppm for the previous 10,000 years. Ice core records extending back 800,000 years show that during that time, CO2 concentrations remained within the range of 170 to 300 ppm throughout many “ice age” cycles - learn about the ice ages - and no concentration above 300 ppm is seen in ice core records until the past 200 years.

Measurements of the forms (isotopes) of carbon in the modern atmosphere show a clear fingerprint of the addition of “old” carbon (depleted in natural radioactive 14C) coming from the combustion of fossil fuels (as opposed to “newer” carbon coming from living systems). In addition, it is known that human activities (excluding land use changes) currently emit an estimated 10 billion tonnes of carbon each year, mostly by burning fossil fuels, which is more than enough to explain the observed increase in concentration. These and other lines of evidence point conclusively to the fact that the elevated CO2 concentration in our atmosphere is the result of human activities.

 

[Gregs24]

I thought a bunch of the change is for future regulation, pending higher MPG CAFE Standards, removing the provision about individual states (California CARB specifically) driving products/solutions for all states. If there's a relaxation in existing standards, I wouldn't expect much core change, but maybe in some of the peripherals meant to extract the last minuscule percent MPG savings, such as thinner (engine, driveline) oils, auto start stop, etc.

There is no way car makers will make cars producing worse emissions than now no matter what the current US government does simply because the rest of the world is going the opposite way and US politics change far too often for car makers to change course. Ford will be planning their 2030 cars at the moment so anything in the next 2 or 3 years has already missed the boat.

 

[Gregs24]

I do not debate climate science. This is not related to the Earths natural rhythm in its orbit. We know Earth wobbles and its relationship to climate. This is not that. If you wish to educate yourself on climate science and its relationship to greenhouse gas emissions cause by the burning of fossil fuels I would suggest climate.nasa.gov

The best thing you can do is ignore him - he is just a troll

 

[Gregs24]

For those that didn't know, this is the real Al Gore...

https://www.kleinerperkins.com/people/advisors/al-gore/

Not only made big monies on big investments in alternative energies, but also made money on books and movies to peddle his message. Seems this was about green (money, not energy). Always follow the money.

In the meantime, I'll enjoy my 480 horse power mustang out here in southwest, where previous generations had to rely on their ole trusty 1 hp mustangs with tailpipe emissions that are over 20x the green house gas (methane) that CO2 is.

Al Gore means nothing outside the US but it is still warming everywhere else.

Don't confuse US politics (or even use US politics) to argue on a global issue

Oh a huge amount more Methane flames off from oil drilling than ever came out of Dobbins arse! Of course the other valid point is that Dobbins Methane came from what Dobbin ate last week which grew in Dobbins field over the last few weeks by carbon capture so is in effect just a cycling of that Carbon, unlike the stuff coming out of the ground with the oil that has been locked up for millions of years until we release it

See above about how we know where the carbon has come from.

 

[Zig]

At least you agree the earth is warming and from the graph you posted that the rate of change is indeed very significant as we know - the rest of the evidence is there if you look for it but of course if you don't look you will not find it. As a medical professional and scientist I know exactly where and how to look for evidence and how to weed out opinion and bias.

Funny how 'repeatedly crying wolf' is in fact repeatedly providing evidence. Scientists always look back at predictions and establish validity and here is one such paper looking at climate modelling from the 1970's to early 2000's and how it compares to what actually happened.

Evaluating the Performance of Past Climate Model Projections - Hausfather - 2020 - Geophysical Research Letters - Wiley Online Library

There are many papers like this and they confirm that the modelling has been very good based on verification statistics. Not surprisingly this sort of modelling verification is used elsewhere, weather forecasting would be a very good example where forecasts have improved hugely since the 1970's because of improved models and feedback verification. It is critical with all of this that you avoid dumbed down opinion pieces and media and get to the primary sources of data. You don't want to read what Fred said about John's work, you want to hear it from John himself.

On the subject of whether the CO2 is a result of human activity again this is all available for you to read - example:

Climate change: evidence and causes | Royal Society
Scientists have examined greenhouse gases in the context of the past. Analysis of air trapped inside ice that has been accumulating over time in Antarctica shows that the CO2 concentration began to increase significantly in the 19th century [Figure B3], after staying in the range of 260 to 280 ppm for the previous 10,000 years. Ice core records extending back 800,000 years show that during that time, CO2 concentrations remained within the range of 170 to 300 ppm throughout many “ice age” cycles - learn about the ice ages - and no concentration above 300 ppm is seen in ice core records until the past 200 years.

Measurements of the forms (isotopes) of carbon in the modern atmosphere show a clear fingerprint of the addition of “old” carbon (depleted in natural radioactive 14C) coming from the combustion of fossil fuels (as opposed to “newer” carbon coming from living systems). In addition, it is known that human activities (excluding land use changes) currently emit an estimated 10 billion tonnes of carbon each year, mostly by burning fossil fuels, which is more than enough to explain the observed increase in concentration. These and other lines of evidence point conclusively to the fact that the elevated CO2 concentration in our atmosphere is the result of human activities.

just for fun:

Volcanoes Spew 3X More CO2 Than Thought & 19,000 New Undersea Volcanoes Found: Is Human-Driven Climate Narrative Crumbling?
“Folks, hold onto your hats—two groundbreaking studies dropped this past month, and they’re shaking up everything we thought we knew about carbon dioxide (CO2) in Earth’s atmosphere. The first, from The University of Manchester, reveals that volcanic CO2 emissions could be three times higher than previously estimated. The second, from the School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST), uncovers a staggering 19,325 previously unknown undersea volcanoes. Together, these findings throw a massive wrench into the narrative that human activity is the sole driver of rising atmospheric CO2. Let’s dive in.” …

https://iowaclimate.org/2025/05/19/...-is-human-driven-climate-narrative-crumbling/

 

[Zig]

The best thing you can do is ignore him - he is just a troll

Name calling again?

 

[Bikeman315]

Name calling again?

Just think of it as an English term of endearment.

 

[Bikeman315]

Here is someone who could care less what we do. And,right now, they have more power in the marketplace worldwide than we do.
https://www.autoweek.com/news/a6964...22d79b1&utm_term=Daily Drive Sending Audience

Sponsored