McLaren become the first Carbon Neutral Formula 1 Team

[Dave M]

I'm saying I believe the science is a joke.

Distorted funding for science is a joke, but it always has been.

My concern is in the secular west science is the new religion but science is hard, religion was easier to understand with it's nice solid facts to hold onto.

So they turn scientific debate into believers and non-believers and all of a sudden the joke that is funding gets even more ridiculous because the ass-hats who dole out the money are scared to be seen in the 'non-believer' camp.

The science is fine, the public, media and funding bodies though - lol.

 

[Demon]

It's blindingly obvious that I wasn't talking about it being a joke from the point of view of corporate social responsibility . CSR is designed to add value through pandering to stakeholders' misguided opinions, it's just that firms never admit it. Therefore of course F1 teams are being sensible. I'm saying I believe the science is a joke.



Ooooh, a graph.
Do you have one that directly links CO2 levels to temperature change?
Or maybe one that contains CO2 data from ice cores dating back thousands of years, which show that CO2 fluctuates naturally anyway?
Or one that shows a period in which CO2 is rising but temperatures are falling?
Or perhaps one that proves that CO2 drives temperature and not vice versa?
Do you realise how little information a 40 year period actually gives us, in the big scheme of things?

Correlation != causation. Here's another graph for you:



That's right, CO2 is at a historically very low level. And guess what? The dinosaurs didn't drive 5 litre Mercedes or run coal fired power stations.



This discussion is about CO2, not 'crap' as you so eloquently put it. Natural cycles have a much higher effect on the atmosphere than the CO2 released through man made activity, which is just processed by vegetation and the oceans anyway.

The error is, you have zero idea what impact we are having on the 'natural cycle'.. Sticking your head in the sand and hoping all change is just a natural cycle seems as poorly thought out as the people you are ridiculing. The only fact we know is that we don't know enough.. the only sensible thing to do is sit on the fence, be as balanced as we can whilst we figure it out..

I just think we should be as neutral 'generally' so that we can let the earth follow it's natural cycle.... although the scope of that is far far wider then CO2..

But at the end of the day, the Carbon Neutral marketing is stupid, it's largely meaningless and very misleading..

 

[Skeeter]

The only fact we know is that we don't know enough..

It doesn't stop people thinking they do though.

You are right. We have so little understanding or data that it is simply impossible to make any calls for or against human impact on CO2 figures.

A woman I used to work with had a good way of looking at it. Our planet goes through major changes on a yearly basis, categorised into seasons. Now imagine if each season lasted 10,000 years, and was just a natural cycle of the planet. There would be no records or living memory of previous seasons, so imagine the panic that would spread if the trees started turning orange, and temperatures started going down, and it started raining more... People would start to think the planet was dying. In actual fact, its just a natural cycle that we do not have enough data to understand.

The simple thing you have to understand is most people are stupid. It doesn't take much scratching of the surface to realise the numbers (and graphs, a la Clarkey) presented to you by the Daily Mail, etc are misleading or even completely meaningless. And even a large proportion of people who understand that are still subject to 'following the crowd' and being drawn into opinions based on popular belief. And Governments and Businesses know that. Naturally, they then pander to those belifes (which in turn re-enforces them) for their own benifit, be it winning votes, or making money.

Meanwhile, other potentially hazardas emissions are being completely ignored, and other global issues being pushed aside in favour of Mr MP winning Mrs Bloggs vote because "he's cares about the environment because he has fitted solar panels to his roof".

CO2 is a marketing excersize, and its working. At a personal level, I have not been given anywhere near enough meaningful information to form an opinon either way on the effects of human activity on CO2 emissions. Those who dismiss the impact as having no effect are as misguided as those who are certain is is having one, but nothing compares to the idiocy of either side of the argument being used to impose laws.

 

[Participant]

I don't for one minute pretend that doing nothing is the right thing to do..

the only sensible thing to do is sit on the fence, be as balanced as we can whilst we figure it out..

Sit on the fence or do something, which is it?

I'm personally not convinced by CO2 being a major cause of 'global warming', hence I felt the urge to debunk Clarkey's silly graph that he posted as though it wrapped up the whole issue.

 

[Skeeter]

Graphs like that are the whole problem.

It only takes 2 seconds to look at the numbers in context and realise its utterly pointless. But unfortunately most of Joe Public is persuaded by a graph with a line pointing upwards.

 

[ShakenNstirred]

carbon neutral is just a buzz words that companys like to have on there CV
means bugger all in the realworld

 

[CaptainRAVE]

Shame they don't put the money into their F1 car to start winning championships again.

 

[Dave M]

how much would it take to tempt newey then?