Quote from MAGGOT :

And about Aerodynamics not coming into use on street cars; that is simply not true. In recent years aerodynamics have been used quite a bit to increase fuel mileage by reducing drag, and thus, reducing the work the engine has to do to propel the vehicle at a given speed.

F1 aero is all about efficient downforce, undertray pressue, yaw sensitivity etc. Road cars create lift. F1 aero is just too different to be useful.

Quote from MAGGOT :

These were scientific fact back then. Sure, today, we see it as crude and maybe even dumb; but back then it was perfectly accepted as scientific fact.

BS. That was never scientific. Read about the meaning of the word.

Quote from Shotglass :

like i said these were all born from religious beleifs rather than from observation

While you could possibly attribute being the centre of the universe/orbit as being a religious belief in some way (I still say it is a scientific 'fact' of the era, since proven false) the 'fact' of the world being flat is not based on religious belief. It is based on observation. When you are on the planet, you can not (or very very very barely on the clearest of days) tell that the Earth is, in fact, round. The 'fact' was based on observation.

Quote from J.B. :

F1 aero is all about efficient downforce, undertray pressue, yaw sensitivity etc. Road cars create lift. F1 aero is just too different to be useful.

Concepts apply to aero, whether it downforce or reducing drag. Not only that, but the general understanding increases which can benefit all areas of aero study. Aside from that, F1 is not the only form of racing which dables in Aerodynamics.

Quote :

BS. That was never scientific. Read about the meaning of the word.

"systemized knowledge derived through experimentation, observation, and study. Also, the methodology used to acquire this knowledge" Like I said, the thought that the Earth was flat was based on an observation. In Study, no one found a curvature (mountains and valleys not being included, obviously).

Don't we get a lot of our automotive technology from F1?

I'd say going fast over a longer term will get the motorsport companies boffins working on various green fuel options that will outperform petrol, then everyone will wanna change to it.

Quote from Dumpy :

There was an interesting show on the Discovery channel a week or two ago that proposed a new (to me) twist on the whole global warming issue. The premise is that the focus on reducing CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions could pose a problem if it isn't accompanied by a significant reduction in particulate matter pollution, i.e. smog - pollution you can see. The idea is that the tiny particle pollution that floats around in the sky and bonds to water vapor in clouds and such actually contributes to global cooling by provide more surface area for rays of sun to be reflected and/or refracted, obviously casuing less of the sun's warmth to reach into the lower atmosphere. So, if we drastically reduce greenhouse gas emissions without simultaneously reducing a balanced ratio of particulate matter pollution the earth will of course plunge into another ice age killing all life and making babies cry, etc, etc.

It was a very intriguing show, and while it was tricky looking past all the Danger Will Robinson! catastrophe scenarios, the ideas did appear to be backed up by actual scientific *gasp* research and testing.

Just thought I'd throw that out there in case no one had heard this take on it; I hadn't.

Quote from Madman_CZ :

Yeah i remember watching a program on global cooling last year which is caused by global dimming. If i remember correctly after the 9/11 attacks when the planes were grounded in the USA they got some interesting measurements. They found that the days were hotter and nights cooler.

http://video.google.de/videopl ... 3193&q=global+dimming

on topic:

People calling James Porteous an idiot cant seperate themselves from that level but the opposite of it. I dont know him at all but i can imagine that he has got quite good intentions and all he wants is to bring things forward instead of going backwards or worse.
Its also amazing how people refuses to accept the given facts and build up their own reality. To keep it simple, CO2 is a waste product produced by us, the mammals, basically. Its doesn't really matter which one of us, either industry or the average consumer is producing more or less of it. Therefore its absolutely absurd when people make a difference between each of every trigger that is responsible and exists around the globe and start to prioritize. The point is that you have to start somewhere to fight the pollution problem.
Everyone is in the position to change something regarding this problem. And if you dont want to doesn't necessarily means that you can just ignore it or turn the facts in a public forum like this. Of course, after the last iceage the earth is heating up again but we all accelerate this progress in such a unrealistic amount that the natural balance is completely disordered. Beisdes all that i dont even want to mention the destruction of the rainforests and any other vegetation around the globe which is "of course" not our fault as well.
From my point of view, the main problem is responsibility and the fact that we (majority) think that our enjoyments have got a higher priority then to keep this planet clean & healthy for our offsprings. Also the simplification of a circumstance like this will create even more devastatingly results and this is why i think that topics like this should't be discussed in a forum like this but you can prove me wrong.
I am conviced that as long as we and especially the upper industrial countries are unable to solve such problems we are not that far away from another stoneage. First indications are in place.
Dont get me wrong, i dont think that i and the sources i rely on are correct in every single way. There maybe also alot of wrong or overvalued statements/ results but in general, speaking about the "big picture" this beginning of a solution makes at least for me more sense then anything else.

CO2 is neither a polluting nor a waste product! Get that out of your heads! Besides: man-made CO2 is a tiny percentage of the whole CO2-production, and it's even going down because of all the paranoia... Who is the biggest CO2-producer, you may ask? Mother nature herself with all her plants and wildlife! Should we go round and shoot every animal on the planet, cut every plant? Maybe cool the oceans so they can absorb more CO2, so we don't need to worry anymore?

Yes, we may or may not accellerate global warming, but really, we neither contribute enough nor have we any control over it... Mankind is unable to see or grasp the higher order, so all he does is panic and some people make good money of it...

Uh, BBman, plants help cut CO2. They use the carbon for their photosynthesis process and 'exhaust' oxygen.

Quote from bbman :

Who is the biggest CO2-producer, you may ask? Mother nature herself with all her plants and wildlife!

.....

What? Elaborate please.

Well, I say we should abolish newspapers - they are not needed at all, agreed?

For sure not, there are things we don't really need, but they have to be there or it would leave a terrible hole, and I think motorsport is one of it - like computer games, what do u think just the existance of LfS consumes on resources (the power needed to run your PC - having a short look at LfSW I assume it is as 600 PC are on 24/7, this is ca 300000 kW/h every day)

And well, I've seen a report on TV where they have had a closer look on the ice in polar regions and they found out there were always times with higher CO2 values (up to 10 times of todays) and there were always periods where it was much hotter on earth. The most intriguing thing was that the global warming always comes short before the raise of CO2, so the warming could be a natural phenomenom that causes the CO2 raise...

Quote from thisnameistaken :

Anybody know what happens to F1 tyres after a race? Surely they don't just landfill them all?

Burn them

Quote from bbman :

Who is the biggest CO2-producer, you may ask? Mother nature herself with all her plants and wildlife! Should we go round and shoot every animal on the planet, cut every plant?

What the hell?? Plants ABSORB CO2, WE PRODUCE CO2....

Anyway my take on it is this: Whether or not CO2 is a major global warming contributor, I really don't know. But what I do know, is that breathing in what cars give out is not good, cutting down trees is not good (AS THEY ABSORB CO2 AND GIVE US OXYGEN), filling land with waste is not good, and using up the worlds oil resources is not good.

So either way, WE STILL NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. And better be safe than sorry.

P.S. I agree that the quoted guy in the first post is a prat, but he does have some points, however I DO NOT WANT MOTORSPORT BANNED as it is not a major factor.

Edit: Bloody hell this thread is fast

Quote from bbman :

CO2 is neither a polluting nor a waste product! Get that out of your heads! Besides: man-made CO2 is a tiny percentage of the whole CO2-production, and it's even going down because of all the paranoia... Who is the biggest CO2-producer, you may ask? Mother nature herself with all her plants and wildlife! Should we go round and shoot every animal on the planet, cut every plant? Maybe cool the oceans so they can absorb more CO2, so we don't need to worry anymore?

Yes, we may or may not accellerate global warming, but really, we neither contribute enough nor have we any control over it... Mankind is unable to see or grasp the higher order, so all he does is panic and some people make good money of it...

you bloody copycat I wrote that before .

Quote from Falcon140 :

I say

A world without motorsport, isn't a world at all!

Let the world go down, but at least we will be racing when it does!

Probably many people will regard this as too frivolous and would ignore it. I totally agree with your sentiment, actually.

We're now under pressure to not drive our cars (anywhere) and not fly (anywhere), and not use electricity (much) and so many other things.. we're ultimately going to be miserable. We need a thing called the "feelgood factor". We're in genuine danger of losing ALL our feelgood factors.

Earth revolves around the sun. This orbit is not perfect. It wobbles. Our average distance from the sun is variable and there is lots of scientific evidence to demonstrate it. Unless we can STOP the wobble - i.e. physically alter the path of the earth around the sun, we are stuck in the cycle of heating and cooling that started when the earth was still forming its crust.

The amount of plant-life on earth vs the amount of air-breathing creatures is a balancing act with CO2. Plants breathe in CO2 and breathe out oxygen. We breathe in oxygen and we breathe out CO2. Deforestation is a factor, and I'd have no problem whatsoever in getting busy with reforestation. Plant a tree. A growing tree breathes in 2x as much as grown tree, so the benefits would be rapidly felt.

But the most important thing is to keep a feelgood factor. If we don't have that, then we have nothing to live for. And if we have nothing to live for, we might just as well die out. That may suit the mathematical calculations - the CO2 production would fall - but the earth will still heat and the polar caps will still melt. Then they'll freeze again, just as they have so many times before.

Damn, bbman, that is such self-pwnage! Jeez, they teach you when you're 10 years old that plants inhale CO2 and exhale O2 ... or have they stopped that since I was in school?

Anyway, regardless of whether we are completely responsible for climate change (I don't think we are - Earth's weather cycles are so long no human will ever live through a complete one) or just making things more difficult for ourselves and fellow O2-breathers, all of the waste - solid, gas, liquid - we produce simply must be reduced in order to ensure a planet that's inhabitable in the future.

Perhaps motorsport can lead the way in this endeavour too - I just read of a biofuel DB9 that won a race in the UK (although growing the crops necessary for biofuel opens up a whole new can of worms regarding mass-clearings of forests to open farmland, which could just exasperate the CO2 problem). I keep reading of advances in hydrogen-powered, electric & hybrid cars (I plan to solar-power my house, so when I plug in my Tesla roadster I'm utterly guilt-free). Motorsport has always led to the greatest advances in so many areas of car design, so I'm sure factories and racing teams will be on the cutting edge of all "safe" driving tech in the future (it looks like many are). If nothing else it's going to make good economic sense - oil won't last forever and when it starts running out it's going to get horrendously expensive, so if you can't make a good alternative, noone will want to buy your cars. Eventually, inevitably, even more wars will be fought over oil (2001-2007 will look like a skirmish). It would make perfect sense to start searching, right now, for another method of propelling cars stupidly fast just for fun

Quote from Hankstar :

Damn, bbman, that is such self-pwnage! Jeez, they teach you when you're 10 years old that plants inhale CO2 and exhale O2 ... or have they stopped that since I was in school?

Anyway, regardless of whether we are completely responsible for climate change or just making things more difficult for ourselves and fellow O2-breathers, all of the waste - solid, gas, liquid - we produce simply must be reduced in order to ensure a planet that's inhabitable in the future. Perhaps motorsport can lead the way in this endeavour too - I just read of a biofuel DB9 that won a race (although growing the crops necessary for biofuel opens up a whole new can of worms regarding mass-clearings of forests to open farmland, which could just exasperate the CO2 problem). I keep reading of advances in hydrogen-powered, electric & hybrid cars (I plan to solar-power my house, so when I plug in my Tesla roadster I'm utterly guilt-free). Motorsport has always led to the greatest advances in so many areas of car design, so I'm sure factories and racing teams will be on the cutting edge of all "safe" driving tech in the future. If nothing else it's going to make good economic sense - oil won't last forever and when it starts running out it's going to get horrendously expensive. Eventually, inevitably, even more wars will be fought over it (2001-2007 will look like a skirmish). It would make perfect sense to start searching, right now, for another method of propelling cars stupidly fast just for fun

Nope, excuse me btw, you're missing his point. What bbman's post said is that energy can not be created or destroyed, it can only come to a state of equllibrium. Mother nature's word is final. Simple as.

Quote from MAGGOT :

While you could possibly attribute being the centre of the universe/orbit as being a religious belief in some way (I still say it is a scientific 'fact' of the era, since proven false) the 'fact' of the world being flat is not based on religious belief. It is based on observation. When you are on the planet, you can not (or very very very barely on the clearest of days) tell that the Earth is, in fact, round. The 'fact' was based on observation.

obviously this is fruitless but still
1) it is possible to tell the earth is not flat while at sea by looking at far away ships
2) the ideas of what the rim is like will give you an idea that this is much more a belief than an observation
3) ive made a point of requiring sufficient observations and proof for a theory to become scientific canon ... obviosuly no one has ever seen the rim of the flat earth therefore no one was ever able to provide sufficient proof that the earth is indeed flat making it in scientific terms a hypothesis but not a theory which means it needs further investigation to become scientific in the layman sense of the word (and that a tuin is male)



on the burining of fossil fuels:
1) fossil fuels are carbon taken from the atmosphere millions of years ago
2) back then the suns radiative power was significantly lower
3) back then the atmosphere needed these greenhouse gasses to maintain its temperature under lower radiation
4) by burning them we reintroduce these gasses back into the atmosphere
5) by that were messing with a self regulatory system that has been functioning well for over 4 milliard years now

all of these are undisputed scientific facts and you wont find any scientifically based reasoning for reintroducing additional co2 to the atmosphere just for the hell of it

@CSU1, most of my post was a general comment on the topic at hand. Only the first paragraph was a response to that reprehensible wrongness about CO2, hence the "anyway" (a common English-language method of changing the subject).

Anyway, I'm with Shotglass. We may not be entirely responsible for the crisis we face, but common sense (and common science) tells me that pumping billions of tonnes of extra CO2 into the atmosphere of a finely-balanced ecosystem that evolved over 4 billion years simply can't be a good thing. We've been around for less than a million years and it's only the last 150 years or so (a virtual eye-blink) that we've been filling the air with extra CO2. Perhaps we're seeing the negative effects of that right now, perhaps we won't see the worst for a long time. Either way, we create far too much waste of every kind reducing it any way we can can only be a good thing in my book.

Quote from Hankstar :

@CSU1, most of my post was a general comment on the topic at hand. Only the first paragraph was a response to that reprehensible wrongness about CO2, hence the "anyway" (a common English-language method of changing the subject).

Hey Hey Hey Keep Your knickers on! I just commented on your and the rest of youre abillity to f**cking spam like runabout pointless politicians. Get to the point, bbman just answered a question, i seconded it. Is old anyway imo.

My knickers are done up nice and tight thanks, don't know how you thought I was being defensive. Anyway, I'm not the one cursing at people and accusing them of spamming. I thought this was a topic that was open for discussion and different points of view and varying opinions, y'know, like you'd find on a forum. I stayed on topic (unlike you who keeps popping up, uninvited, to defend someone who's capable of defending himself), made my point and I spoke my opinion and if you think I give two cents about your opinion of my posts then you're mistaken.

Quote from bbman :

CO2 is neither a polluting nor a waste product! Get that out of your heads! Besides: man-made CO2 is a tiny percentage of the whole CO2-production, and it's even going down because of all the paranoia... Who is the biggest CO2-producer, you may ask? Mother nature herself with all her plants and wildlife! Should we go round and shoot every animal on the planet, cut every plant? Maybe cool the oceans so they can absorb more CO2, so we don't need to worry anymore?

Yes, we may or may not accellerate global warming, but really, we neither contribute enough nor have we any control over it... Mankind is unable to see or grasp the higher order, so all he does is panic and some people make good money of it...

You're partly right but I'm not sure where you got most of those ideas from...

Fact is that the ocean gives off more C02 a year then humans could do in a year, so saying we're the problem is just ludicrous. This whole global warming crap is making people very very rich, and secondly who the hell cares you cant stop it and its right on time to happen. I think we're overdue a change but I could be wrong really, still no single person can outright motor sport because no single person has the power to do so.

So yes try to be efficient and help the planet where you can but for the love of god don't buy into all this non-sense. Here's a small documentary explaining the whole thing, I suggest you doomed people go view it :
http://www.my3id.com/video/con ... warming-swindle-2007.html

Quote from Hankstar :

I plan to solar-power my house, so when I plug in my Tesla roadster I'm utterly guilt-free

solar panels require more energy in production than they produce in their mean lifetime

The points Shotglass is making are exactly the same ones I always make on this subject. :up:

I don't have much to add that hasn't been said already (this isn't the first global warming thread) but I'd like to point out this guide at NewScientist that I think does a very good job of explaining where many of the global warming myths came from.

Quote from Rooble :

Here's a small documentary explaining the whole thing, I suggest you doomed people go view it :
http://www.my3id.com/video/con ... warming-swindle-2007.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T ... e#Carl_Wunsch_controversy

"The film was a polemic that drew together the well-documented views of a number of respected scientists to reach the same conclusions. This is a controversial film but we feel that it is important that all sides of the debate are aired. If one of the contributors has concerns about his contribution we will look into that."

whichever way you put it this thing is a prime example of bad journalism ... channel fourx or something along those lines

For me, this thread reinforces the astonishing naivity of the 'green lodbby' beyond doubt. Wake up, grow up and realise these soi-called global-warming envirnomental issues are just another manipulation of the polotics of the community, which are so well focussed on middle class ill-informed complacency.

Quote from al heeley :

For me, this thread reinforces the astonishing naivity of the 'green lodbby' beyond doubt. Wake up, grow up and realise these soi-called global-warming envirnomental issues are just another manipulation of the polotics of the community, which are so well focussed on middle class ill-informed complacency.

Yeah, because I always make up my opinions about science by listening to politicians. You know, like in the nineties where they convinced me that closing down nuclear power plants is great for our einviroment. Oh wait, they didn't, I already knew they were full of sh*t back then.

Quote from Clownpaint :

All of you who want to reduce your carbon emissions, visit my website.

Erm, carbon emissions ?

Dunno bout that ?, kinda got sidetracked by the Erina Yamaguchi vid :eye-poppi