When making a post, please ensure it complies with this site's Main Rules at all times.
  • I don't care. Its an agenda. Tha same people pushed the Ozone layer bollox.

    Are you saying these people are truthful, honest, would never mislead the people?

    8| All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered: the point is to discover them. (Galileo)

    IF YOU STAND FOR NOTHING - YOU FALL FOR EVERYTHING.

  • The hole in the ozone layer was real, Echo. Fortunately, we discovered it was CFCs and promptly banned them. The ozone layer is now slowly but surely repairing itself.

    The Earth's ozone layer is slowly recovering, UN report finds
    The upper atmosphere ozone layer protects the Earth from harmful ultraviolet radiation, which is linked to skin cancer, eye cataracts and agricultural damage.
    www.cnbc.com

    Climate change is real and this can be readily observed around the world, including here. The only real question I still have about that is whether it really is carbon that’s causing it. I find it hard to believe given the small amount of our carbon emissions that are actually absorbed into the atmosphere. But we’ve been all over this already.

  • The hole in the ozone layer was real, Echo. Fortunately, we discovered it was CFCs and promptly banned them. The ozone layer is now slowly but surely repairing itself.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/09/the…ort-finds-.html

    Climate change is real and this can be readily observed around the world, including here. The only real question I still have about that is whether it really is carbon that’s causing it. I find it hard to believe given the small amount of our carbon emissions that are actually absorbed into the atmosphere. But we’ve been all over this already.

    CO2 is benign beneficial naturally occurring gas our 'betters' have chosen to demonize to suit their particular political anti Western agenda. There is nothing demonstrably wrong with our climate as hard evidence from the last century freely attests :)


  • I said

    The markets simply are not ready yet to meet the demand for clean vehicles by 2030, and so Rishi's revised date is sensible. No point in setting deadlines if they are unachievable. That's what Scotland did, and look what happened.

    yes they would be but they and the customers would much prefer the current law of 2035 or later. You are arguing to advance the compulsion by 5 years

    The staff here send me bizarre messages I'm barred from replying to and now I'm blocked from starting new conversations. icon_rolleyes.gif

    This place could have been good but 'could' is so last tense. I'll be back, maybe but no one hold their breath.

  • The hole in the ozone layer was real, Echo. Fortunately, we discovered it was CFCs and promptly banned them. The ozone layer is now slowly but surely repairing itself.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2023/01/09/the…ort-finds-.html

    Climate change is real and this can be readily observed around the world, including here. The only real question I still have about that is whether it really is carbon that’s causing it. I find it hard to believe given the small amount of our carbon emissions that are actually absorbed into the atmosphere. But we’ve been all over this already.

    LOL - of course. We all know these people never lie.

    They can produce a graph and photos of OJ Simpson riding a Cow on the Moon if they wish. There will be many people accept it as true.

    8| All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered: the point is to discover them. (Galileo)

    IF YOU STAND FOR NOTHING - YOU FALL FOR EVERYTHING.

  • yes they would be but they and the customers would much prefer the current law of 2035 or later. You are arguing to advance the compulsion by 5 years

    No, as I made clear to you in my later post, 2030 is not achievable.

    The markets simply are not ready yet to meet the demand for clean vehicles by 2030, and so Rishi's revised date is sensible. No point in setting deadlines if they are unachievable. That's what Scotland did, and look what happened.

  • LOL - of course. We all know these people never lie.

    They can produce a graph and photos of OJ Simpson riding a Cow on the Moon if they wish. There will be many people accept it as true.

    You are refusing to believe it on principle, not because you have evidence to the contrary. The ozone layer problem was real. You have no solid reason to disbelieve it.

  • You are refusing to believe it on principle, not because you have evidence to the contrary. The ozone layer problem was real. You have no solid reason to disbelieve it.

    I do not believe it, in any form. Never have from day 1. Then the green bottle tops appeared.

    8| All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered: the point is to discover them. (Galileo)

    IF YOU STAND FOR NOTHING - YOU FALL FOR EVERYTHING.

  • You are refusing to believe it on principle, not because you have evidence to the contrary. The ozone layer problem was real. You have no solid reason to disbelieve it.

    Do you not believe in the principle point re 30,000 rapes? Is 10,000 rapes OK?

    8| All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered: the point is to discover them. (Galileo)

    IF YOU STAND FOR NOTHING - YOU FALL FOR EVERYTHING.

  • I do not believe it, in any form. Never have from day 1. Then the green bottle tops appeared.

    But you don’t say what evidence or rationale makes you disbelieve it. That’s all I’m saying to you.

    Do you not believe in the principle point re 30,000 rapes? Is 10,000 rapes OK?

    What’s that got to do with climate change? Please stop deflecting and keep to the point. I’m happy to address that in the appropriate thread.

  • Quote from OLD BOY

    You are refusing to believe it on principle, <<<<<<

    I simply point out your modus of argument. I apply it back at you. Is that OK?

    8| All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered: the point is to discover them. (Galileo)

    IF YOU STAND FOR NOTHING - YOU FALL FOR EVERYTHING.

  • No, as I made clear to you in my later post, 2030 is not achievable.

    I told you that but you were the one arguing for 2030 for banning sale of petrol cars

     . . I believe it is possible to reach net zero, as near as dammit, simply by limiting the choice of all new purchases to climate-friendly products, effective from 2030 where suitable ‘clean’ products were available. . .

    The staff here send me bizarre messages I'm barred from replying to and now I'm blocked from starting new conversations. icon_rolleyes.gif

    This place could have been good but 'could' is so last tense. I'll be back, maybe but no one hold their breath.

  • I told you that but you were the one arguing for 2030 for banning sale of petrol cars

    You are not reading the whole post. You have actually quoted the words I used - ‘where suitable ‘clean’ products are available’. We are not producing enough EVs yet to satisfy the demand and hydrogen cars are not yet available. That is the reason Rishi has delayed the target to 2035, just to recognise that,which I support.

  • yes they would be but they and the customers would much prefer the current law of 2035 or later. You are arguing to advance the compulsion by 5 years

    What's a clean vehicle. We are devastating acres and acres of land to dig up lithium and cobalt. We burn fossil fuels to create the energy for the EV's. EV's only last half as long, so we have to build twice as many, and the building of a car is extremely pollutive. Then we have to start figuring out a way of destroying the batteries, because in reality it is far too time consuming to recycle them. In brief, EV's are far worse for the planet than a modern petrol car. Hydrogen has always been the way forward. Anyway, it doesn't matter what we do, we are responsible for less than 1% of the emissions

    The intelligent are being oppressed so the stupid don't get offended

  • You are not reading the whole post. You have actually quoted the words I used - ‘where suitable ‘clean’ products are available’. We are not producing enough EVs yet to satisfy the demand and hydrogen cars are not yet available. That is the reason Rishi has delayed the target to 2035, just to recognise that,which I support.

    Toyota make a hydrogen car, and if you live in one of the few places in the country that has a pump you can buy one. It's called the Mirai. BMW and Toyota claim by the year 2030 most of their production will be hydrogen. Hydrogen has always been the sensible way forward, and the EV will become the Betamax of the car world

    The intelligent are being oppressed so the stupid don't get offended

  • You are not reading the whole post. You have actually quoted the words I used - ‘where suitable ‘clean’ products are available’. We are not producing enough EVs yet to satisfy the demand and hydrogen cars are not yet available. That is the reason Rishi has delayed the target to 2035, just to recognise that, which I support.

    I don't know about you but my calendar says 2024 not 2030. And if your wish for law was passed now there very much would be enough electric cars produced.

    But the public doesn't want them, the proposition is unsellable.

    The staff here send me bizarre messages I'm barred from replying to and now I'm blocked from starting new conversations. icon_rolleyes.gif

    This place could have been good but 'could' is so last tense. I'll be back, maybe but no one hold their breath.

  • I believe what I believe and never feel I have to justify it, especially on people with a history of being absolute bastards, liars and corrupt scum.

    8| All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered: the point is to discover them. (Galileo)

    IF YOU STAND FOR NOTHING - YOU FALL FOR EVERYTHING.

  • You are refusing to believe it on principle, not because you have evidence to the contrary. The ozone layer problem was real. You have no solid reason to disbelieve it.

    I'm not convinced the "hole in the ozone layer" was a real danger, which we fixed by removing CFCs. There was a "thinning" in the ozone layer over the Antarctic but there is nothing to prove it was as a result of CFC's. In fact for CFC gases to affect the ozone layer, they must stay in tact as a CFC gas until they reach about 15 miles high in the atmosphere. I doubt this happens at all and if it did, we would see thinning of the ozone layer where CFCs are the highest levels. They don't all gather over Antarctica surely ?

    More likely, the hole in the ozone layer, climate change etc are all vehicles to enable global treaties to be put in place to control people, just like what we see locally such as 15 minute cities, ULEZ and LTNs. They all do one thing - remove peoples freedoms and hand control to unelected bureaucracies. They are also good revenue generators, first we saw with taxes and now we see with fines

  • Bread posted ............

    "More likely, the hole in the ozone layer, climate change etc are all vehicles to enable global treaties to be put in place to control people, just like what we see locally such as 15 minute cities, ULEZ and LTNs. They all do one thing - remove peoples freedoms and hand control to unelected bureaucracies. They are also good revenue generators, first we saw with taxes and now we see with fines"


    Thats exactly what happened.

    8| All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered: the point is to discover them. (Galileo)

    IF YOU STAND FOR NOTHING - YOU FALL FOR EVERYTHING.

Participate now!

Don’t have an account yet? Register yourself now and be a part of our community!