Homepage Garage Wiki Register Social Groups Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
#Camaro6
Go Back   CAMARO6 > CAMARO6.com General Forums > 2016+ Camaro: 6th Gen Camaro general forum


Bigwormgraphix


Post Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-18-2021, 07:57 PM   #85
Aragorn
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Camaro SS 1LE
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by ember1205 View Post
I agree up to the last sentence because I don't agree that it's "relatively easy" to compare the data to what we have for the last couple of hundred years.

Think about it this way: There is simply no way to put exact dates on the samples being collected and analyzed. Date ranges for that sample are estimated and could be off by tens, hundreds, thousands, even tens of thousands of years. What we're able to understand from those data points is roughly equivalent to calculating the average MPG of your car over the last 100,000 miles of driving.

The data we have right now represents a time scale roughly equivalent to looking at the "instant" MPG in the dash while you're driving. Two totally different scales.

If we actually had the same amount of data and level of detail going back hundreds of thousands of years, we could drill down and actually see things at micro levels from previous times in history and make actual direct comparisons.

I was tinkering around with some numbers and came up with this, which I find interesting.

To give an idea of how long people have existed on Earth compared to the age of the planet: If the Earth celebrated its 145th birthday today, It would have existed all but the last 27 hours without people. The detailed climate data that we have to work with represents the last 20 seconds of time.
I see what you’re saying, but with all due respect I don’t think you are giving the scientific community enough credence. For example, scientists for a while now have employed Radiometric dating, Molecular clocks and Stratigraphy to learn what happened on earth millions of years ago. We know of ancient volcanoes that have erupted and increased CO2 dramatically also. Lastly, as stated above we have 97% of the scientific community agreeing on this.
It’s OK to disagree though.
Yes, we haven’t been on this planet very long.
Aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2021, 09:42 PM   #86
I`m Batman
 
I`m Batman's Avatar
 
Drives: 2016 Camaro SS M6
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Colorado
Posts: 393
97% of scientific community used to think Earth was flat too... so... lol
I`m Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-18-2021, 11:06 PM   #87
Xaxas
 
Xaxas's Avatar
 
Drives: 2019 2SS 1LE
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Florida
Posts: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by I`m Batman View Post
97% of scientific community used to think Earth was flat too... so... lol
Yes, and that’s the point about science, it’s not about being correct but trying to explain everything around us and gather as much information as possible to do so, trying to imply that they were “wrong” before just validates the existence of science and scientists and the ability of humans to, you know, learn, or do you want to be judged by the things you said when you were 6?
__________________
Current: 2019 2SS 1LE aka "Blanc"

Previous: 2017 2LT aka "Noire"
Mods: Chevrolet Performance Suspension || K&N Cold Air Intake || Borla ATAK Mufflers + Catback system || MRR 650 ZL1 replicas with squared 285/30 Michelin Pilot Sport 4S || ZZP 4 piston brake kit + braided brake lines || BMR everything (Solid/Lockout cradle bushing are a MUST in Camaros)
Xaxas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 06:34 AM   #88
ember1205
Hot Camaro
 
ember1205's Avatar
 
Drives: '20 2SS Convertible 6MT
Join Date: May 2020
Location: CT
Posts: 3,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aragorn View Post
I see what you’re saying, but with all due respect I don’t think you are giving the scientific community enough credence. For example, scientists for a while now have employed Radiometric dating, Molecular clocks and Stratigraphy to learn what happened on earth millions of years ago. We know of ancient volcanoes that have erupted and increased CO2 dramatically also. Lastly, as stated above we have 97% of the scientific community agreeing on this.
It’s OK to disagree though.
Yes, we haven’t been on this planet very long.
While a majority of the community may be in agreement, that still doesn't make it factual. Science gets better when we challenge and question it (legitimately and reasonably, not just because we don't like the explanation) because we force a second look, another view, and additional consideration. Pieces of data that don't fit the pattern that someone wants us to believe should not simply be discarded as anomalous - they should be better incorporated into the explanation to make the understanding (and explanation) more sound and accurate.

Last year, I drove my truck a few hundred miles and saw about 14MPG averaged over that tank of fuel. Over the course of 80k miles of driving, I have averaged 16.8MPG (including that low MPG I just mentioned). Should I "throw out" that sample of data, citing that it is anomalous, and re-calculate my average MPG over the life of the truck? Or, am I better served to look further into the details and understand that it was a significant reduction in MPG because I drove 150 miles towing an empty trailer and an additional 150 miles towing that same trailer with a Camaro loaded on it? Which course results in a better, more accurate understanding?

Yes, disagreements are ok because they can improve the overall understanding if those that are not in agreement can engage with others to discuss and try to better understand. If everyone that doesn't like an explanation simply dismisses it as false and "refuses to believe", there's no advancement.
ember1205 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 07:41 AM   #89
zaimer

 
zaimer's Avatar
 
Drives: 23 ZL1 6speed
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: WI
Posts: 1,272
Alright, I'm dipping my toes back into this climate discussion...I'm getting bored and it is Friday LOL. I was just thinking - for those of us who park our cars for the winter, does that make up for the "additional" harm the our cars/engines do to the environment? I.e. does the 6.2L actually emit less pollutants (annually) than average because it is driven less? Granted, we are still burning fuel with another vehicle while the Camaro is parked, but it would be interesting to see the factual averages.
zaimer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 08:31 AM   #90
Norm Peterson
corner barstool sitter
 
Norm Peterson's Avatar
 
Drives: 08 Mustang GT, 19 WRX
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Eastern Time Zone
Posts: 6,990
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aragorn View Post
I see what you’re saying, but with all due respect I don’t think you are giving the scientific community enough credence. For example, scientists for a while now have employed Radiometric dating, Molecular clocks and Stratigraphy to learn what happened on earth millions of years ago. We know of ancient volcanoes that have erupted and increased CO2 dramatically also. Lastly, as stated above we have 97% of the scientific community agreeing on this.
Not a disagreement, just a question . . . since science wasn't around millions of years ago, how well can we know how accurate that the obvious extrapolations might be?


Norm
__________________
'08 GT coupe 5M (the occasional track toy)
'19 WRX 6M (the family sedan . . . seriously)
Norm Peterson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 08:40 AM   #91
FH212

 
FH212's Avatar
 
Drives: 2021 Camaro SS 1LE
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NM
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChevyRules View Post
Third time..... Can I please go to a car forum that has a NO POLITICS rule to talk about CARS and just about cars?

This thread proves how many of you need to unplug from the world of politics when a thread about frozen car soap is turned into a climate change political crapfest. Seriously stop politicizing every damn thing in life. Turn off CNN,OAN, Fox News, whatever. Politics has literally consumed you. Unplug.
__________________
2021 Camaro 1SS 1LE - Red Hot
2015 Camaro Z/28 - Red Hot
2001 Mecham Trans Am #3 - 7.0L LS1
FH212 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 09:24 AM   #92
ember1205
Hot Camaro
 
ember1205's Avatar
 
Drives: '20 2SS Convertible 6MT
Join Date: May 2020
Location: CT
Posts: 3,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by zaimer View Post
Alright, I'm dipping my toes back into this climate discussion...I'm getting bored and it is Friday LOL. I was just thinking - for those of us who park our cars for the winter, does that make up for the "additional" harm the our cars/engines do to the environment? I.e. does the 6.2L actually emit less pollutants (annually) than average because it is driven less? Granted, we are still burning fuel with another vehicle while the Camaro is parked, but it would be interesting to see the factual averages.
Only if it's a ZL1 that you drive around in second gear / full throttle and walk everywhere while it's 'hibernating'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Not a disagreement, just a question . . . since science wasn't around millions of years ago, how well can we know how accurate that the obvious extrapolations might be?


Norm
I can appreciate the question as I feel like it's along the same path of where my thinking goes... Science is collecting hard data (like air samples trapped in ice) and estimating data that goes with it (such as the 'approximate' age). Then, they are falsely extrapolating that data into other data (the air bubble trapped in an ice core taken from Antarctica does NOT represent the entirety of the Earth's atmosphere at that exact moment in time but this sort of assumption is being made).

Similarly, we do not know the actual specific POSITION on Earth of where that air bubble was (latitude, longitude, and elevation - how high were the seas at that moment?) because land and ice masses move. We also do not know other necessary variables like the level of sun spot activity on that day, Earth's exact distance from the sun, or even the strength / orientation of the magnetic field (recent research is suggesting that major events have occurred relative to certain species at times when the Earth's magnetic field is at a reduced level or the polarity is "in motion").

Extrapolation is fine, but we need to be continually adding data types and data points to continue to develop our understanding.
ember1205 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 09:26 AM   #93
Xaxas
 
Xaxas's Avatar
 
Drives: 2019 2SS 1LE
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Florida
Posts: 282
Quote:
Originally Posted by FH212 View Post
Science isn't politics
__________________
Current: 2019 2SS 1LE aka "Blanc"

Previous: 2017 2LT aka "Noire"
Mods: Chevrolet Performance Suspension || K&N Cold Air Intake || Borla ATAK Mufflers + Catback system || MRR 650 ZL1 replicas with squared 285/30 Michelin Pilot Sport 4S || ZZP 4 piston brake kit + braided brake lines || BMR everything (Solid/Lockout cradle bushing are a MUST in Camaros)
Xaxas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 10:11 AM   #94
Aragorn
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Camaro SS 1LE
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by I`m Batman View Post
97% of scientific community used to think Earth was flat too... so... lol
What is it really a scientific community? How long ago was that?
Aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 10:19 AM   #95
Aragorn
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Camaro SS 1LE
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by ember1205 View Post
While a majority of the community may be in agreement, that still doesn't make it factual. Science gets better when we challenge and question it (legitimately and reasonably, not just because we don't like the explanation) because we force a second look, another view, and additional consideration. Pieces of data that don't fit the pattern that someone wants us to believe should not simply be discarded as anomalous - they should be better incorporated into the explanation to make the understanding (and explanation) more sound and accurate.

Last year, I drove my truck a few hundred miles and saw about 14MPG averaged over that tank of fuel. Over the course of 80k miles of driving, I have averaged 16.8MPG (including that low MPG I just mentioned). Should I "throw out" that sample of data, citing that it is anomalous, and re-calculate my average MPG over the life of the truck? Or, am I better served to look further into the details and understand that it was a significant reduction in MPG because I drove 150 miles towing an empty trailer and an additional 150 miles towing that same trailer with a Camaro loaded on it? Which course results in a better, more accurate understanding?

Yes, disagreements are ok because they can improve the overall understanding if those that are not in agreement can engage with others to discuss and try to better understand. If everyone that doesn't like an explanation simply dismisses it as false and "refuses to believe", there's no advancement.
Correct not factual but the consensus is if I remember correctly 95% probability that we are currently driving climate change. It’s in one of my previous posts.

As to your mpg scenario yes of course the more details the better. When it comes to climate change, scientists believe they have enough to understand and determine what is going on today.
Aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 10:22 AM   #96
Aragorn
Account Suspended
 
Drives: Camaro SS 1LE
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Phoenix
Posts: 1,538
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norm Peterson View Post
Not a disagreement, just a question . . . since science wasn't around millions of years ago, how well can we know how accurate that the obvious extrapolations might be?


Norm
This is what I found, again , nasa.gov

When scientists focus on climate from before the past 100-150 years, they use records from physical, chemical and biological materials preserved within the geologic record. Organisms (such as diatoms, forams and coral) can serve as useful climate proxies. Other proxies include ice cores, tree rings, and sediment cores. Chemical proxy records include isotope ratios, elemental analyses, biomarkers and biogenic silica. Taken together, these proxies extend our knowledge of past climate back hundreds of millions of years into the past
Aragorn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 10:29 AM   #97
ember1205
Hot Camaro
 
ember1205's Avatar
 
Drives: '20 2SS Convertible 6MT
Join Date: May 2020
Location: CT
Posts: 3,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aragorn View Post
What is it really a scientific community? How long ago was that?
At the time, yes. As science itself has evolved, so has that of the 'community.' These are also largely the same collection of people that perpetuated that the sun revolved around the Earth and that the Earth was the center of the universe.

Science taught us that bloodletting cured disease, until we learned that it not only didn't but likely led to infections.

We always know what we know because of science, until something happens that shows us otherwise. Right now, we "know" about climate change and our impact on it because of science. At some point, there could be a discovery of something accepted as significantly more concrete that changes that belief.
ember1205 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-19-2021, 11:19 AM   #98
FH212

 
FH212's Avatar
 
Drives: 2021 Camaro SS 1LE
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NM
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xaxas View Post
Science isn't politics
It also is not talk about CARS. Which I come here to this forum to escape from this B.S. personally. That is what I was referring to.
__________________
2021 Camaro 1SS 1LE - Red Hot
2015 Camaro Z/28 - Red Hot
2001 Mecham Trans Am #3 - 7.0L LS1
FH212 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Post Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.