Climate Change

Your capacity to twist evidence knows no bounds.
The EU (and UK) actively encouraged diesel use because they were led to believe that diesel was less polluting than petrol. It subsequently emerged that car manufacturers had doctored the research evidence, and their cars, to hide the truth.

 

You really are a bit of a clot, Who gave the UK/EU the evidence to say it was less polluting? The manufacturers!!! There is no twisting only in your mind, You state that EU manufacturers doctored the results of emissions yet dispute why they did this, It was to protect the major EU manufacturers who are the biggest producers of diesel engines in the world so they could go on polluting and making engines that did this, The other claim that pollution especially carbon dioxide levels has increased due to the massive increase in cars and vans is self evident as in 1950 there was 8million cars registered in the USA yet only 8 years later that had grown to 68 million cars in the USA and has grown to around 1 Billion worldwide all polluting the air around us and contributing to global warming,
You really should check your facts before accusing people of twisting evidence because to most it appears that it is you that does it more than most

 

No one is disputing that car engines, diesel or petrol, are major polluters, and that the massive growth in car use is a significant problem.
But all governments around the world have promoted car use and manufacture. To single out the EU is ridiculous.
And to suggest that the EU deliberately promoted diesel use for its own ends is also ridiculous. Everyone thought that diesel was less polluting than petrol until it emerged that car manufacturers had been fiddling the figures. Our own government slashed road tax on diesel cars so that people would choose diesel, for environmental reasons.

 

The EU is culpable in promotion and defence of the diesel engine, They are the worlds largest commercial manufacturer and hundreds of thousands of jobs depended on it along with the income to those countries within the EU, They helped the manufacturers massage figures and those manufacturers paid experts to promote the diesel engine, The fact that Gordon Brown ignored the now growing evidence to the contrary and that particulates were hugely damaging to the atmosphere and human health and promoted the diesel engine is a judgement on him and his gullibility and stupidity

BTW it is interesting the EU has given a very light fine and minor investigation in to the emissions scandal while the USA with much stricter controls have fined them hundreds of millions and some may go to jail on the USA side

 

How did the EU 'help manufacturers massage the figures'? Where's your evidence for this?

How do you know that Gordon Brown ignored 'mounting evidence' against diesel'? It's now 11 years since Brown was PM. Back then most people believed that diesel was cleaner than petrol. Why single out Brown?

 

er, we'd still be rubbing sticks together to get energy if it weren't for fossil fuels.......

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41985715

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/sep/22/the-rise-diesel-in-europe-impact-on-health-pollution

 

I couldn't make it unfortunately. I had to attend a pro fracking demonstration instead in the hope it'll lower my gas bill.

 

Very very few people dispute climate change, What really is in dispute is the cause of it and if it is man made,

 

Is calling people you disagree with 'idiots' really the way to go....?

 

Strange debating technique for sure.

 

You were also probably "wildly optimistic" when you thought a football forum might be the place to debate it.

 

Indeed. The stance on climate change must depend on which agenda you prefer to follow. Apparently there was more co2 in the atmosphere leading in to the last ice age than now and if you Google termites and co2 you'll maybe think that we're a bit behind in the race to accelerate climate change....that and all that algae in the sea producing nasty gases.
I'm not denying climate change, just wary that there are so many complex factors in this and too many twAts with something to gain that it's unlikely we'll be given a clear, unbiased, objective opinion from any bugger.

 

Indeed. The stance on climate change must depend on which agenda you prefer to follow. Apparently there was more co2 in the atmosphere leading in to the last ice age than now and if you Google termites and co2 you'll maybe think that we're a bit behind in the race to accelerate climate change....that and all that algae in the sea producing nasty gases.
I'm not denying climate change, just wary that there are so many complex factors in this and too many twAts with something to gain that it's unlikely we'll be given a clear, unbiased, objective opinion from any bugger.

 

This is not biased either way but you have to remember both the Government and United Nations etc gave millions to universities and "Experts" who the more evidence they created the bigger the grants they got, The University of East Anglia was an example of this, No doubt others took the money the same

 

The governments knew full well what was going on when they turned everyone towards diesel powered cars.

 

Nice one day the planet will cleanse itself of us, we have developed the power to destroy this planet, so i have little faith in just assuming any change we are experiencing is just natural. The fact humans could develop things that could destroy the very thing that gives us life should show our ultimate flaw. One day things will come home to roost. We think we are above everything else on this planet and that our technology will solve everything, but it won’t.