New study refutes climate-change alarm

Stereotype much? You seem to have categorized people into one giant false dichotomy.

 

I had a good friend that was a machinist. We made several "gadgets" as the need arose.
One of them was a small machine that machined the capstan wheel for this tape drive.

It's a magnesium wheel about 2/1/2 inches in diameter with 2 sets 60 slots for vacuum to hold the tape when it started to accelerate. It was two opposed high speed spindles and a mechanism to index the wheel. Prior to the machine they had been machined by hand.
We hired a deaf guy to run it because it was very vocal.

Edit:
I noticed you Ametek pictures. The drive had two 1 HP Ametek Lamb reel motors. I did the electronics to control them. That was back when I still did real work.

 

Whatever you do, don't tell the car companies.

The hybrid and electric versions will be sold alongside one another and “future-proof” the pickup truck for Ford, Farley added. We know Ford has earmarked $15 billion for future electric cars, and we imagine an electric F-150 is a major project inside the Blue Oval—the automaker’s cash cow and wellbeing.

Read more: http://gmauthority.com/blog/2019/01...e-pipeline-will-it-surprise-gm/#ixzz5lbjOYdNe

 

Most people won't realize the problems with machining magnesium. To automate making something made by hand is good work.

A firm named Hottendorf from Santa Clara County made corrugated box machines. I made a lot of things for them. Ametek owned the company after buying out Bill Hottendorf. Bill was there when I did work but he ran it for Ametek. I got a call one day to work all the way through the weekend on parts to be shipped to Illinois to Ametek. Ametek put an urgent rush on them so the job was mine for cost and time + profit. I won't be able to locate photos to show what they looked like. A good way to think of them was the front axle of cars with a spiral gear in place of the end where the car brakes are. Anyway we got the job done on time for them. The buyer kind of cracked wise to me saying the cost would buy my shop a new pick up truck.

Bill was quite the inventor. This shows some of his patents.

https://patents.google.com/patent/US3648605A/en

 

Well they (Ford) claim they will have a 400 mile range for the electric truck they plan to build, but talk is cheap. The truck however will not be cheap. Now they are saying $70,000. Yep, a real car for the people.

When I can buy a subcompact electric car, for a reasonable price, that has a 400 mile range in cold weather I will buy one.

 

I believe in climate change and man's negligence to blame but what infuriates me (here in Sweden) is that while insect spray has been removed from the shelves for the sake of the environment, fast-food continues to flaunt their chicken nuggets and we can still purchase a case-load of Red Bull for the entire family.

 

Are you saying your government should ban Red Bull? Why?

 

The FIAT 500E

 

Yes, I am saying my government ought to ban Red Bull because it will send a Bull's blood pressure through the roof of the barn.

 

Americans have range anxiety. They think they need 400 mile range because they travel that far once or twice a year.

 

Didn't we have electric cars years and years ago?
MAGA
The company also announced plans to introduce two new electric vehicles within the next 18 months after delivering the first mass-market electric car with the Chevrolet Bolt, which goes 238 miles on a single charge and costs $37,500 before tax incentives.
GM said it would deliver at least 20 new electric vehicles globally by 2023.
The plan comes amid a global shift in focus as regulators emphasize electric vehicles, battery costs fall and hydrogen fuel cell technology advances.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2017/10/02/gm-electric-vehicles/722896001/

 

They got to do better than $33,000 and an 84 mile range.

 

I wonder. They drive to the corner shop for a pack of cigarettes (back again if they forgot matches) and drive up and down the full circumference of the entire shopping mall parking lot passing by a vacant slot 3 spaces from the entrance hoping to find a closer one. Maybe they do need a 400-mile range.

 

I should have read the fine print.

 

Worse than that. They could have parked at the charge station at the front door if they had an electric.

 

I am not totally in agreement. With gasoline, all it takes to get more range is several minutes at the pumps of today. We can pump fuel, pay for fuel and leave in moments. While true that the hybrid works to assist the battery, by battery alone you are still talking short ranges.

i have a far more pressing concern as do millions of Americans. Why is the best seller for FORD a pick up truck? This explains America. Why was the SUV the preferred vehicle before the
PU? When have you last seen the auto makers advertise tiny cars? Buick seems to advertise tiny cars. American cars were once the size of the 1950 Ford. But they grew and grew. And got more powerful. Auto makers currently sell cars with 1000 horsepower. And market them as extremely fast. We know the market for the performance car is limited and mostly by price. But let's not pretend we all want the micro car that will power you for a few miles then must be recharged.

 

There is some old study on this but IMHO it is BS. I drink a red bull every day and have good blood pressure. Caffein and Taurine are hardly deadly. Sugar is not healthy but there are sugar free energy drinks.

Who wants a government to make dietary choices? I'll take freedom over a nanny state.

 

Where you and I differ strongly is choice.

I want Americans to have a wide selection of automobiles. You seem to be eager to force them to power electrically.

Perhaps you never drove a truly powerful car. And Trust me, Tesla the electric is very fast. It has a major hurdle. It costs a whopping over 100,000 dollars. When Tesla sells the watered down version, it is nothing like the much faster top of the line model.

Here watch this modern sedan going over 200 mph. The sheer joy of one of these high performance vehicles must be tried to fully get it.

 

Someone on this forum once recommended the following book in one of the past global warming discussions.

From reading this book I learned that: 1) manmade global warming is real; 2) the impact of manmade global warming is greatly exaggerated; and 3) actions taken by the US to limit Carbon will more or less do nothing to affect climate.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008DZ2CCS/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_d_asin_title_o01?ie=UTF8&psc=1

It astounds me that the same people who beat the "sky is falling" global warming drum seem to be unconcerned about our 22 Trillion national debt.

 

I brought that book to the forum. I own the book. It is on top of my desk in fact.

Nobody has claimed humans do not add to warming. We resent being blamed for it and for trying to micromanage our lives to include cars we are allowed to drive.

 

Thank you. It was a good read and very informative.

 

How does climate change happening in the past refute the idea that climate change today is being driven by CO2 and this can be very damaging? From your own study, sea levels were 65 feet higher. That would absolutely swamp our major costal cities and cost us trillions in damages.

 

We can hold back the sea, Denmark does it.

That entire nation is below sea level.

And the highest I've heard any scientists say today is 8 ft.

Which would still flood all the coastal cities and push 200 miles inland but it's manageable.

 

I was born in Denmark, Denmark is above sea level. There might be some sea walls there but doing that around the world will be crazy expensive. Plus we will need much higher sea walls depending on the sea level rise we plan for and those sea walls will need to hold in cases of floods, hurricanes, and tsunamis.

The amount of sea level rise we will get isn't well known. If the entire arctic melted, then we will get about 20 feet. That is enough to flood major cities and put large coastal areas underwater and cost trillions of dollars in damage. However, we don't know when the Greenland ice sheets will collapse, so we really don't know. The Antarctic if completely melted will raise sea levels by 200 feet, but it will take a lot more warning for that to happen. The predicted temperature rise by 2100 varies from 3 F to 10 F, and that has a big impact on how much sea level rise there will be. But we know that temperatures will continue to rise past 2100 and raise sea levels even more, but we don't know how much exactly.

 

As I posted in the thread, the study indicates it will take centuries for all the ice to melt.

Plenty of time to move back our cities, build bigger sea walls, or build other barriers to combat it.

It's not happening tomorrow.

Your grandchildren's kids won't see it.