[Dynamical]

I see the establishment has sent in their provocateurs, agitators and propagandists for damage control. That was nice of them, instead of hauling people off for re-education

[Evergreen6]

Originally Posted by olrocker

The scientists pushing an agenda for one side funded by said side of govt or people with common sense that think for themselves without funding from anyone?

It's a symbiotic relationship because science observes things and provides data, and people who make decisions based on data then push legislation. It's different from "common sense" politics based on whims of the day, feelings, dislikes, fairytales, leadings of Ouiji boards, or Rain Sticks...

Full circle; If we started a thread about every piece of proposed legislation, the forum would be overflowing. Maybe focus on real laws. Like the places where it's still illegal to purchase alcohol in the US, or where dancing is still illegal.

[Evergreen6]

Originally Posted by MSS1LE

Actually scientists apply to the government for grants. If the government likes what the scientist is doing they approve the grant and fund the research. If the government doesn't like what the scientist is doing they don't fund the grant. Guess which grants don't get funded? I'll give you a hint...those that conclude there is no such thing as human caused global warming/climate change aren't really popular right now.

BTW, if CO2 is a pollutant which causes global warming, why did the term get changed to climate change? Another hint, if it's global warming, then prolonged cooling periods make the theory look bad. If it's called climate change, well heck, the weather is always changing. Unseasonably hot, climate change. Unseasonably cold, climate change. The only result that doesn't support climate change is if the weather is always the same, which is never going to happen.

So climate change is really just heads I win tails you lose repackaged.

Not really, but only if you insist on spinning it that way to create a biased narrative. All kinds of research gets funded from both private and public sources. One of the bigger sources of private research around "climate change" has been oil companies. Guess what kind of data and studies they're more likely to fund? But that's still ignorant of what most studies find regarding climate change, and that's the idea that humans can help influence climate. It would be a waste of money to try to keep proving something that isn't true.

Climate change is a term that has superseded "global warming" because Bob in Minnesota insists it's been a heckuva cold winter in Mahtomedi and therefore "Global Warming" ain't real. "Climate change" better reflects the intensifying of both heat and cold climates where they were less likely to exist before.

But again, speed governance as proposed legislation....to climate change. You'd think if folks wanted to talk politics they might head to a place like reddit instead.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by Evergreen6

if folks wanted to talk politics they might head to a place like reddit instead.

The very essence of the reason for the end of Camaro production is 100% political. The idea that rear seat space or visibility had anything to do with it is complete garbage because we were coming up on a standard generational redesign and it’s absolutely possible and reasonable GM would have solved those issues for the 7th gen.

Since this is a forum for 6th gen (and overall) Camaro enthusiasts, fans, owners, and dreamers, guess what…… the vast majority of people on here don’t need or want to hear nonsense about govt funded brainwashing from the same people that don’t like my V8 telling me why it rains too much or not enough.

Besides, my grandparents all lived to their late 80s and they were all born in the early 1920s. So for the first 50 years of their lives cars burned lead and had no emission controls whatsoever. They seemed to enjoy their younger days much more, when the govt stayed the hell out of their lives. Wonder why….

[ZR1-OK]

I’m old enough to remember these libtard nimrods pushing another ice age before they lost traction and switched to the next fraud of global warming.

[Ray3768]

"California Highway Patrol issued over 3,000 tickets for just that offense."

Yeah, they're not gonna like the loss of revenue if this technology is implemented. Police unions and municipalities will be pushing back against this nonsense. Have fun with that.

-Ray

[N Camarolina]

Originally Posted by Mark R

CO2 is plant food.

Indeed it is. But if you don't have enough plants on this earth to process the excess CO2 (which is the case), then the remainder sits in the atmosphere and prevents solar heat from escaping, thus raising air temps.

You guys seem to want to tell yourselves that scientists can't be trusted or don't know what they are talking about and that somehow you know more than people who've spent their entire lives trying to master a particular specialty (in this case, environmental science). It's like the equivalent of believing that you'd be safer flying in an airplane that was designed by a lawyer, doctor, or internet security specialist instead of by aeronautical and structural engineers.

[N Camarolina]

Originally Posted by Mark R

Anyone with a modicum of curiosity about this issue would start to see that the so-called climate (Cooling, then Warming, then Changing) doomsayers and solution prescribers only want to infringe on the rights, wealth, and freedoms of ordinary people, while they continue on their merry way, flying private to climate conferences and the World Economic Forum. All their "solutions" penalize the people, and enrich the powerful, which automatically makes them suspect.

Your text above demonstrates that you have bought into this propaganda, and as such I simply ask you to go first as an example to us all, and sell your Camaro and show us your Prius, as a shining example for us all to emulate. EDIT: How about junking your Camaro, then buying a Prius? I think that would really prove your environmental Bona Fides.

Glad you asked. In addition to the Camaro, I've owned a hybrid (Ford Fusion) since 2010. It's a grocery getter with a motor that revs like a sewing machine. And I drove it for 10 years as my DD. So don't tell me that I don't understand what I'd be giving up when if I can no longer have my Camaro.

I track my SS 1LE and the roar of the V8 (never mind the awesome handling) is addictive. Our appreciation for muscle cars, sports cars, a well sorted chassis, the rumble and vibration of a V8, is totally lost on most people. To the average car buyer these days, a vehicle is an appliance that gets you from point A to point B and "the thrill" if any, is all about the electronic features. I guess it makes it a lot easier to herd the masses toward EVs.

[N Camarolina]

Originally Posted by Capricio

Yes, I have, and I concluded that bringing automotive emissions to zero will accomplish nothing for climate change.

The point I was trying to make is... for all your "concern" about losing ICE, can you at least concede we don't have to enjoy having this forced down our throats? Because it *is* being forced upon us. Semantics about ICE remaining an option while it's being priced and regulated out of existance is just BS. Trying to convince people "you need this for your own good" because "You know what is better for us" won't sell well. Never has, never will.

Sorry if this got derailed into another EV thread but it's all part of the regulatory over-reach taking place.

Yep, I agree with you. It's being forced upon people, and we don't have to like it.

I think the cause of the climate problem started with the industrial revolutions in EU and US and then simply carried forward from there. Scientists started talking about this potential outcome back in the 1980s, and we understand more about the problem than ever before. And yes, it's probably more impactful to target emissions from power generating plants in all countries than it is to target automobiles. But unless we are willing to go nuclear, there aren't a lot of non-CO2 generating options that can provide the required output. So the focus of reduction is more broad and includes automobiles.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by N Camarolina

Yep, I agree with you. It's being forced upon people, and we don't have to like it.

I think the cause of the climate problem started with the industrial revolutions in EU and US and then simply carried forward from there. Scientists started talking about this potential outcome back in the 1980s, and we understand more about the problem than ever before. And yes, it's probably more impactful to target emissions from power generating plants in all countries than it is to target automobiles. But unless we are willing to go nuclear, there aren't a lot of non-CO2 generating options that can provide the required output. So the focus of reduction is more broad and includes automobiles.

Thing is is that it IS BS. The little puffs of smoke from old cars and factories aren’t crap. The earth is gonna be here another billion years from now (so long as the bad guys never press that big red button).

[N Camarolina]

Originally Posted by olrocker

The earth is gonna be here another billion years from now (so long as the bad guys never press that big red button).

Yep, it will be. The question is whether it will still be able to sustain human life by that point, and if not, what role did humans play in it's demise.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by N Camarolina

Yep, it will be. The question is whether it will still be able to sustain human life by that point, and if not, what role did humans play in it's demise.

Ok let me rephrase…..

Humans will still be here a million years from now so long as the bad guys don’t press the red button. They would still exist a billion years from now if we all still drove lead burning engines too.

[CamaroSue]

Originally Posted by olrocker

Ok let me rephrase…..

Humans will still be here a million years from now so long as the bad guys don’t press the red button. They would still exist a billion years from now if we all still drove lead burning engines too.

You are 100% correct! I think where the breakdown is with N. Camarolina is that he (she?) has not grasped that the same people pushing this man-made climate BS, are the same ones paying the "scientists" to publish the papers with the message they want out. Not unlike the nightly MSM (especially the weather channel) only allowed to tell you what they deem acceptable for you to hear.

[olrocker]

Originally Posted by CamaroSue

You are 100% correct! I think where the breakdown is with N. Camarolina is that he (she?) has not grasped that the same people pushing this man-made climate BS, are the same ones paying the "scientists" to publish the papers with the message they want out. Not unlike the nightly MSM (especially the weather channel) only allowed to tell you what they deem acceptable for you to hear.

It Should be fixed this November.