ysmalari:

aveli666:

ysmalari:

Enough. I've said my piece in this thread and ended on what I thought was a fairly respectful way in my post before this, fair enough if you decide not to respond in kind.

sorry ysmalari, i didn't meant any offense. 

Appreciated aveli666, if only FIA/FOTA could follow suit and come to their own truce 

the world would be a lot more peaceful if we forget our differences and pay more attention to what we have in common says barack obama. in my dream last night, nico roberg came out of a motor home and said,'' there is something very wrong, the fota teams will never join f1 again. it is over.'' i was only relieved to find out that it was a dream.

red troll:

" mce_src="">

I love the portrait of you, red troll.  You are very handsome, and you look so wise as you sit at your computer.

aveli666:

the world would be a lot more peaceful if we forget our differences and pay more attention to what we have in common says barack obama. in my dream last night, nico roberg came out of a motor home and said,'' there is something very wrong, the fota teams will never join f1 again. it is over.'' i was only relieved to find out that it was a dream.

Do you believe this....??

This is seriously scary stuff.

 

pedekay:

aveli666:

the world would be a lot more peaceful if we forget our differences and pay more attention to what we have in common says barack obama. in my dream last night, nico roberg came out of a motor home and said,'' there is something very wrong, the fota teams will never join f1 again. it is over.'' i was only relieved to find out that it was a dream.

Do you believe this....??

This is seriously scary stuff.

 

it was just a dream, i don't think it will happen because i have never experience a dream come true so i doubt it f1 will ever stop or fota will ever leave f1. 

whenever red trol has no knowledge analytical ability on any subject he posts this ugly picture of himself, many no useful contribution to the debate. if it doesn't interest you then please don't look at it.

unless you are able to explain to us how carbon dioxide causes global warming and why the fia should add more biofuel to f1 fuel, stay out.

pedekay:

red troll:

" src="">

I love the portrait of you, red troll.  You are very handsome, and you look so wise as you sit at your computer.

i suggest you both troll along. 

aveli666:

justrace:

aveli666:

i am so sorry just race, i'll try to explain it better. oil does not come from the size of the earth. oil comes from the remains of organisms which lived millions of years ago. millions of years ago, the atmospheric composition of carbon dioxide was 90% and now it is 0.031%. this means nearly all that carbon dioxide has been converted into life form and all the life on earth now does not represent all that carbon dioxide so a lot of it must be hiding somewhere in the form of fossil fuels, oil coal and natural gas. the oil is underground because everything on earth is recycled. the law of conservation of energy say's energy can neither be created nor destroyed but can only be converted from one form into another and the law of conservation of matter says matter can neither be created or destroyed but can only be converted from one form into another.

there is a document on this called the origin and maintenance of the earth's atmosphere which you can have a look at. am not sure if am allowed to post the link here because it is in pdf form. 

Well, that is a point that makes more sense. While I agree that carbon does not get lost, there is no guarantee that any of the carbon will be in the form of oil, coal or gas, and still may not be in the atmosphere either.

So still, you have not provided any proof. Nobody will deny the amount of carbon on earth and its atmosphere, but that is no proof that oil will not run out.

ok justrace, please excuse me while i repeat myself. the oil industry claimed in the 70's that we'd run out of oil in 20 to 35 years time and we know that it is not true. in the 80's they said oil would run out in 35 years, in the 90's they said oil would run out in 35 years. so far, they have been wrong everytime so the chances of them being wrong is 100%.

this debate is like tossing a coin, heads or tails. the coin cannot land half way on heads and half way on tails, so it is either heads or tails. if they are wrong, then we will not run out of oil any time soon and if they are right, we will run out of oil. what i know is that no scientist who uses sensitive instruments states that their measurements are absolute because they know that the instrumentation could be further improved in the future so they say + or - 0.095% accuracy. this way their measurements are accepted now and in the future. for them to be found to have made wrong reports is a very serious issue. they must be truthful always. not too long ago there was a nobel price winning scientist who was found to have lied about the development of human cloning and was in big trouble with the scientific community. but with the oil industry it looks like it doesn't matter if they are wrong or not so they are not afraid to tell the world anything as there are no consequences for getting it wrong. because of this i believe more what scientist have to say than i believe the oil industry.

i have no absolute proof but that carbon dioxide must be somewhere in the form of fossil fuels. most people underestimate how small we are as a species on earth, we are just too small to be of any threat to the world. even if all the stockpiles of nuclear weapons were exploded at the same time it couldn't destroy the world as some have claimed. natural disasters do a lot more damage to the world than we could ever do. a single example, the city of pompey was buried killing more than 117,000 people by a single volcanic eruption of mount vesuvius in ad 79 for hundreds of years. they city was later discovered by archeologist in 1868 and you can visit it today to see the perfectly preserved buidings and figures of people who were buried under the ashes. this is just a single act of nature. no amount of human activity could rival the activities of earth. i can't say ''we are too small'' enough.

Well, that sounds a bit more moderate now.

I appreciate you now admit that you are talking about probability and not 100% truth.

I think what you missed with the previous (and current) predictions is that they are based on what is known. As more of the earth crust is explored the more accurate the predictions get, but admittedly there are still large white spaces on the globe.

You should however not make the mistake to switch from previous overly pessimistic to an overly optimistic forecast. As I said, much more is known now than 30 or 40 years ago.

aveli666:

pedekay:

red troll:

" src="">

I love the portrait of you, red troll.  You are very handsome, and you look so wise as you sit at your computer.

i suggest you both troll along. 

better still troll off 

aveli666:

pedekay:

aveli666:

the world would be a lot more peaceful if we forget our differences and pay more attention to what we have in common says barack obama. in my dream last night, nico roberg came out of a motor home and said,'' there is something very wrong, the fota teams will never join f1 again. it is over.'' i was only relieved to find out that it was a dream.

Do you believe this....??

This is seriously scary stuff.

it was just a dream, i don't think it will happen because i have never experience a dream come true so i doubt it f1 will ever stop or fota will ever leave f1. 

Well that's a great relief then.

aveli666:

aveli666:

pedekay:

I love the portrait of you, red troll.  You are very handsome, and you look so wise as you sit at your computer.

i suggest you both troll along. 

better still troll off 

Oh my jolly goodness, me and red troll are being told to troll along, and even better, to troll off.  Well, that has certainly put us in our places, hasn't it.

pedekay:

aveli666:

aveli666:

pedekay:

I love the portrait of you, red troll.  You are very handsome, and you look so wise as you sit at your computer.

i suggest you both troll along. 

better still troll off 

Oh my jolly goodness, me and red troll are being told to troll along, and even better, to troll off.  Well, that has certainly put us in our places, hasn't it.

well i thought you enjoyed trolling. 

justrace:

aveli666:

justrace:

aveli666:

i am so sorry just race, i'll try to explain it better. oil does not come from the size of the earth. oil comes from the remains of organisms which lived millions of years ago. millions of years ago, the atmospheric composition of carbon dioxide was 90% and now it is 0.031%. this means nearly all that carbon dioxide has been converted into life form and all the life on earth now does not represent all that carbon dioxide so a lot of it must be hiding somewhere in the form of fossil fuels, oil coal and natural gas. the oil is underground because everything on earth is recycled. the law of conservation of energy say's energy can neither be created nor destroyed but can only be converted from one form into another and the law of conservation of matter says matter can neither be created or destroyed but can only be converted from one form into another.

there is a document on this called the origin and maintenance of the earth's atmosphere which you can have a look at. am not sure if am allowed to post the link here because it is in pdf form. 

Well, that is a point that makes more sense. While I agree that carbon does not get lost, there is no guarantee that any of the carbon will be in the form of oil, coal or gas, and still may not be in the atmosphere either.

So still, you have not provided any proof. Nobody will deny the amount of carbon on earth and its atmosphere, but that is no proof that oil will not run out.

ok justrace, please excuse me while i repeat myself. the oil industry claimed in the 70's that we'd run out of oil in 20 to 35 years time and we know that it is not true. in the 80's they said oil would run out in 35 years, in the 90's they said oil would run out in 35 years. so far, they have been wrong everytime so the chances of them being wrong is 100%.

this debate is like tossing a coin, heads or tails. the coin cannot land half way on heads and half way on tails, so it is either heads or tails. if they are wrong, then we will not run out of oil any time soon and if they are right, we will run out of oil. what i know is that no scientist who uses sensitive instruments states that their measurements are absolute because they know that the instrumentation could be further improved in the future so they say + or - 0.095% accuracy. this way their measurements are accepted now and in the future. for them to be found to have made wrong reports is a very serious issue. they must be truthful always. not too long ago there was a nobel price winning scientist who was found to have lied about the development of human cloning and was in big trouble with the scientific community. but with the oil industry it looks like it doesn't matter if they are wrong or not so they are not afraid to tell the world anything as there are no consequences for getting it wrong. because of this i believe more what scientist have to say than i believe the oil industry.

i have no absolute proof but that carbon dioxide must be somewhere in the form of fossil fuels. most people underestimate how small we are as a species on earth, we are just too small to be of any threat to the world. even if all the stockpiles of nuclear weapons were exploded at the same time it couldn't destroy the world as some have claimed. natural disasters do a lot more damage to the world than we could ever do. a single example, the city of pompey was buried killing more than 117,000 people by a single volcanic eruption of mount vesuvius in ad 79 for hundreds of years. they city was later discovered by archeologist in 1868 and you can visit it today to see the perfectly preserved buidings and figures of people who were buried under the ashes. this is just a single act of nature. no amount of human activity could rival the activities of earth. i can't say ''we are too small'' enough.

Well, that sounds a bit more moderate now.

I appreciate you now admit that you are talking about probability and not 100% truth.

I think what you missed with the previous (and current) predictions is that they are based on what is known. As more of the earth crust is explored the more accurate the predictions get, but admittedly there are still large white spaces on the globe.

You should however not make the mistake to switch from previous overly pessimistic to an overly optimistic forecast. As I said, much more is known now than 30 or 40 years ago.

very true just race, unfortunately there isn't a machine out there which can accurately take measurements of how much is out there so people do the best they can with the knowledge they have.

will also like to add justrace, that many people, mainly politicians, have talked of stopping global warming. this is also not possible mainly because we are insignificant. the real significant contribution to global warming we make if when we use electrical equipment because using electrical equipment involves converting electrical energy into other forms of energy and when that happens some of the energy is waisted as heat. making electricity also adds a lot of heat directly to the atmosphere. nothing to do with carbon dioxide. so in a way if carbon dioxide emissions are cut, the contribution to global warming will be cut but it is insignificant. compared with increased energy from the sun due to solar flares. it will be interesting to here from someone who actually knows how the different excitation states of the double bonds in carbon dioxide contributes to global warming.

aveli666:

will also like to add justrace, that many people, mainly politicians, have talked of stopping global warming. this is also not possible mainly because we are insignificant. the real significant contribution to global warming we make if when we use electrical equipment because using electrical equipment involves converting electrical energy into other forms of energy and when that happens some of the energy is waisted as heat. making electricity also adds a lot of heat directly to the atmosphere. nothing to do with carbon dioxide. so in a way if carbon dioxide emissions are cut, the contribution to global warming will be cut but it is insignificant. compared with increased energy from the sun due to solar flares. it will be interesting to here from someone who actually knows how the different excitation states of the double bonds in carbon dioxide contributes to global warming.

Well, i am glad we could reach settlement regarding the future of oil. I do not really want to open another can of worms with global warning.

But I will say as much as that you said yourself that there is much more energy produced by the sun than the tiny little humans who in your words cannot have an effect on the earth whatsoever. I would not agree to that theory completely, but the main problem with global warming and effects like greenhouse gases is not the amount of energy produced or available, the problem is how much energy is preserved in the atmosphere.

justrace:

aveli666:

will also like to add justrace, that many people, mainly politicians, have talked of stopping global warming. this is also not possible mainly because we are insignificant. the real significant contribution to global warming we make if when we use electrical equipment because using electrical equipment involves converting electrical energy into other forms of energy and when that happens some of the energy is waisted as heat. making electricity also adds a lot of heat directly to the atmosphere. nothing to do with carbon dioxide. so in a way if carbon dioxide emissions are cut, the contribution to global warming will be cut but it is insignificant. compared with increased energy from the sun due to solar flares. it will be interesting to here from someone who actually knows how the different excitation states of the double bonds in carbon dioxide contributes to global warming.

Well, i am glad we could reach settlement regarding the future of oil. I do not really want to open another can of worms with global warning.

But I will say as much as that you said yourself that there is much more energy produced by the sun than the tiny little humans who in your words cannot have an effect on the earth whatsoever. I would not agree to that theory completely, but the main problem with global warming and effects like greenhouse gases is not the amount of energy produced or available, the problem is how much energy is preserved in the atmosphere.

you are absolutely right, it is the heat energy which accumulates in the atmosphere which is causing global warming. any heat released from the world goes into the atmosphere. 

heat from the sun, infra red radiation, heats up the earth and then the earth heats up the atmosphere as the heat is conducted and convected into the atmosphere and some radiated out into space. the amount of heat reaching the earth is greater than the amount of heat leaving the earth that's why we are experiencing global warming. the more energy we convert into heat, the more heat energy we add directly to the atmosphere. making electricity generates a lot of heat and using electricity also generates heat and all the heat generated adds to the atmosphere. but these contributions we make are too small compared to fluctuations which come from the sun due to solar flares. if you have a look at images of the earth on google earth, you will see the atmosphere as a blue haze around the earth. it is not very big compared to the size of the earth, only about 75 miles up from the ground.

we cannot stop earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, wind, wave and rain so how can we stop global warming? they are natural phenomenons. trying to stop global warming will be like trying to stop any of the above examples, not possible.