Go Back   Motorcycle Forum > Motorcycle.Com General Discussion > Motorcycle News > Old News > Paranoid News Clips

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-27-2001, 08:08 AM   #41
heart-of-sword
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 14
Default Re: No More Two-Strokes

Hell yeah!! I'm with you my brother.
heart-of-sword is offline   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links Remove Advertisements
Motorcycle Forum
Advertisement
Old 09-27-2001, 08:21 AM   #42
Patrick-of-the-Hills
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 155
Default Re: No More Two-Strokes

1. Funny how you're talking about exactly the same thing that I was, aerosols being the vaporous/gaseous "particles" on a near-molecular scale that cause a lot of problems. You even said it yourself: "...gases like NOx that are emitted can participate in nucleation of new particles." And given proof like the smog in LA or Houston or a lot of other places which often originates over broad areas, it makes sense to do someting about it. (It always sort of amuses me to see how many people promoting anti-environmental views claim to have worked for the EPA.)



2. Yeah, some naturally occurring greenhouse effect is very nice; dropping down towards the liquefication point of nitrogen every night wouldn't be very fun. But it's the addition of so much more greenhouse gas (carbon dioxide, but also methane, which is much more insidious in this respect, and some others), and the simultaneous reduction of forests and other means of removing those gases from ambient air, that is changing the balance that once allowed life to flourish so extensively, and causing any number of changes in weather patterns that affect, and often endanger, great portions of the planet.



3. Before someone thinks I'm just doing this because I love my local utilities, realize that I completely agree that it's sick that consumer goods are increasingly squeezed while the biggest sources of the problems (unprogressive power companies, smelters, refineries, agribusinesses, other heavy industries) have the money and muscle to defer their own responsibilities from being brought to their attention. They and their PR people (such as the folks who thought up the cutesy ad about lighting the treehouse with "clean coal" technology) have a special circle in Hell waiting, provided they don't make this entire place one first. At the same time, for the sake of the argument, I'm pretty sure that a two-stroke weedeater produces more pollution for the power it uses than the electric company's offering.



4. "Buying what you want" and all the other "invisible hand" arguments are reasonable, within either theoretical settings or granted broad allowances for their application to an often irrational (read: short-sighted, stupid, or self-centered) society, but they miss the huge point that simple economic efficiency is not the only thing that matters. Celebrating the bottom line blinds you to any number of other concerns, both tangible and intangible. Even the most effective lassiez-faire systems still need social controls to compensate for non-market effects, as just about every civilized society outside the US has realized and accepted. This has nothing to do with political egos.
Patrick-of-the-Hills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2001, 08:31 AM   #43
Lincoln
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 203
Default Re: No More Two-Strokes

"There is nothing that a two-stroke engine can do, which cannot also be accomplished by some other less-polluting engine."



ok, this is where i leave this site, since it's getting crowded with people who obviously know nothing about motorcycles. seeya

Lincoln is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2001, 08:31 AM   #44
Patrick-of-the-Hills
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 155
Default Re: No More Two-Strokes

Thank you for quite literally making my day, especially in the midst of the arguments I'm waging above. It's a relief and a pleasure to see someone making end-to-end sense.
Patrick-of-the-Hills is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2001, 08:38 AM   #45
KX250
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 2
Default Re: No More Two-Strokes

Cheers to that...!!! i couldn't agree more, to bad I only had to read to the very end of the thread to find some sound knowledge on all the subjects at hand..!
KX250 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2001, 08:54 AM   #46
Bat_Matt
Founding Member
 
Bat_Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 39
Default Wow. Well I

No, I haven't been living in the Berkeley science department for the last ten years. Name some of these scientists who disagree with the fact of global warming. You can find a few people who will say anything but it doesn't change the fact that the scientific community (who, surprisingly enough, are not all liberals) agrees on the existence of global warming to an unprecedented degree. The questions which remain are "To what extent is humanity responsible for the current rise in temperatures?" and "Can we do anything about it?"



>>>>Let me tell you what we DO know. It is known that the earth itself is responsible for over 95% of the greenhouse gas "emissions" in the atmosphere.



Well, let's let the EPA handle this one (this is from a 1999 Q&A on global warming)

"Q:I've heard human CO2 emissions are small compared to what's released by nature?

A:The Earth has a natural CO2 cycle which moves massive amounts of CO2 into and out of the atmosphere. The oceans and land vegetation release and absorb over 200 billion metric tons of CO2 into and out of the atmosphere each year. When the cycle is balanced, atmospheric CO2 levels remain relatively stable. Human activities are now adding about 7 billion tons of carbon into the atmosphere every year, which is only 3-4% of the amount exchanged naturally. The oceans and land vegetation are absorbing about half of our emissions; the other half remains airborne for 100 years or longer. This is what is causing the rapid buildup of CO2, a buildup which dwarfs natural fluctuations."



You can read the rest of the publication at http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/pub...ach/gw_faq.pdf



But don't take the EPA's word for it. After all, they are a government organization dedicated to protecting their own jobs and are probably not unbiased. Go to http://www.marshall.org/guide.htm

This is an FAQ from the George C. Marshall Institute providing not only mushy-greeny-motherearthy-kneejerk liberal answers to global warming questions but honest to god references in actual peer reviewed journals. Journals like Science, Nature, Journal of Geophysical Research, Climate Research. Nobody is making this up. Global warming is real and sticking our head in the sand, name calling and saying, "But I LIKE two-strokes (or SUVs, or cars in general)" is not going to change that fact.
Bat_Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2001, 08:57 AM   #47
Bat_Matt
Founding Member
 
Bat_Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 39
Default Amen Brutha

If I send you a self-addressed, stamped envelope, will you send me your autograph?
Bat_Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2001, 09:24 AM   #48
Bat_Matt
Founding Member
 
Bat_Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 39
Default Yes, I am an idiot.

Well, I had you going there, didn't I?



Of course, like me, you probably won't read that webpage but...



I linked there from www.globalwarming.org which also links to Center for Environmental Education Research which is maintained by none other than the Competitive Enterprise Institute.



The George C. Marshall Institute has this to say about their funding.



"Since the Marshall Institute was founded in 1984, we have restricted our fund raising to private foundations and individual donors"

...and this...

"But we were wrong to think the policy would permit us to avoid the charge of being a corporate funded think-tank. No matter what we do to correct the record when we are accused of being funded by big business, no matter how many calls we make, or letters to the editor we write, the lie persists. "

...and this...

"From now on the Marshall Institute will accept grants for general program support from corporate foundations and in some cases directly from corporations"

...and of course this...

"This fall, the Institute received its first-ever grant from a corporate foundation-- the Exxon Education Foundation"



Basically, what I'm trying to say here is this... It's impossible to find anyone who is idealogically pure as snow. This Mitchell FAQ is blatant in its belief that global warming doesn't exist and isn't a problem. Take a look at Figure 1 on that web page. Any idiot can see the two correlate. But the Institute claims they don't. All of the Institute's questions are actually addressed in the EPA .



'nuff said. I get two slaps on the wrist for throwing that link up there in anger. All I'm asking is that you go out and look on the web and find some actual scientific info on this stuff, rather than relying on vaguely remembered scientists and meteorologists who "disagree". Even conservative pubs admit, there has been at least 0.5 degree increase in the last century.
Bat_Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2001, 09:44 AM   #49
goddamoldladies
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 19
Default Re: No More Two-Strokes

speaking as someone who lives in europe i find this whole debate interesting ..the us which has a small percentage of the world population produces close to 25% of the worlds pollution ...that includes cars , rubbish etc etc..

its funny how that your government tries to clean up such an infintesimally small percentage of that pollution by cleaning up 2 strokes.

it seems like peeing in the ocean..why bother do that when everything else is f**cked up anyways...over here no problems with 2 strokes but much tighter regs on car emissions factories etc..seems more practical.

this is starting to sound like a we're better than you letter but its not even if we are ..

'til 2006 keep burning the oil....(btw just bought yz250f to replace yz250 stroker ..much prefer it )
goddamoldladies is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2001, 10:29 AM   #50
Sparky
Founding Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 54
Default Re: No More Two-Strokes

Right on James! I fit that profile exactly. Basically pull out the RZ for race days in Daytona or a sunday morning blast. When it comes to commuting it's the Duc or the Honda.
Sparky is offline   Reply With Quote
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off