My most controversial car yet

[TheEgg]

First I gotta say thanks to Andy1 for the incredible render. My names Andy too.

I hope no one gets offended. I just don't believe in global warming. I think the earth may be getting warmer, but I believe thats being caused by natural causes and not gasoline and plastic bags.

Anywho, I worked very very hard on this car and this is the best I could come up with.

EDIT: Download (if anyone wants it)

DataFileHost - 18_Globalwarming_Bullcot.zip

This is for the Bullring COT mod. Comes with merged flat with no numbers so you could put your own on if you want.

 

[JeffJordan]

I disagree, but it's still a nice car...logos by you?

 

[TheEgg]

Yeah, I made everything myself except the template, contingencies, and the sun. The sun came from this picture and I had to do a lot of editing to it.

 

[pennst24]

I learned in science class that the Earth in moving closer to the sun every year, therefore the climate is getting warmer. Also, global warming detectors are located next to tall buildings' air coinditioner systems in big cities.

Also, good paint!

 

[hansonator69]

Awesome car, Egg, I always love your cars and your views

I reckon the invention of man-made global warming is some sort of plan for us to buy products.
I mean whenever we recycle something we're making someone rich.
Whenever we buy an energy saving device, someone is making money off it, etc.

 

[moppenheimer]

Great car!

While i dont necessarily believe in global warming, all the crap we do to this planet certainly cant be a good thing....

 

[Cheeze]

I learned in science class that the Earth in moving closer to the sun every year, therefore the climate is getting warmer. Also, global warming detectors are located next to tall buildings' air coinditioner systems in big cities.

Also, good paint!

Actually gravity is slowly pulling the Solar System apart by like a couple of milimeters a year

Manmade Globel Warming is just a bunch of crap so Al Gore could try to be the President back in 2000 imo.

Nice paint btw

 

[swetty]

isnt that the rasin bran dude?

 

[moppenheimer]

Manmade Globel Warming is just a bunch of crap so Al Gore could try to be the President back in 2000 imo.

Just fyi...he has been pushing global warming since the 80s.....before he was even Vice President. And It only really gained traction after the 2000 election. (Sure it was an issue in his campaign, but the "green fever" didnt catch on until a bit later.)

 

[fl17fan]

Awesome car, Egg. I agree 100% with everything you say on the car.

 

[Fisha695]

Car looks really great, kinda reminds me of something you'd see in one of those spoof movies, like on a magazine cover or something. l0l

Now on the other topic at hand.........

I was growing up in the 90s and the big thing was the Hole in the Ozone layer that was supposedly located over Australia (no idea why it was located there, that's just what they said) & Acid Rain, my little brother grew up during the last 10 years and they were taught about "Global Warming".... My mother grew up in the 70s and the big deal then was "Global Cooling"....

There is a cycle here, it's the cycle of "lets see how much we can scam people into spending to make us rich".

Is the earth getting warmer, sure it goes in cycles because if it didn't we'd still be in the first ice-age or one of the others that followed it. Do humans have some sort of impact on it, sure but then again so does every living thing on this planet, and well there is a lot more Fish in the sea and Birds in the sky then there are People on the land.

But when it comes down to it the Earth is 4.5 BILLION years old, this Global Warming stuff is based on 150 years of man-captured weather data of which maybe the last 40 years is truly close to accurate. Now 40 years out of 150 is a really small number, but 150 out of 4.5 BILLION is an even smaller number.

Also while I'm on a roll, how can Science be trusted? Think about it, what scientific fact is there that Water freezes at 32degrees F? Well none really just the guy who created it decided that 32 was the number of the day... You may have picked 7 I may have picked 985.... Just think about how different yet the same everything would be today, same in principle just different in "text" (maybe not the right choice of words). We know time as 60 seconds per minute, 60 minutes per hour, 24 hours a day, etc... Who created that? When did it start? When was it globally adopted? How can we compare "stats" & "history" before that to after that and keep it "accurate"...?

I guess what I'm trying to get at with that last little tangent is Science, Math, Language, History, etc... Everything we know as "fact" or "accurate" is really man-made and only "fact" or "accurate" becuase at one time somebody said it was. But no matter if you go by science or any religion I can think of the Earth was made by well Not-Man and it will end because of well "Not-Man".

[/Soapbox]

 

[Jordan Robson]

Car looks cool.

I'd like to hear from people who believe in global warming, tell me exactly what global warming actually is. I want to hear there side of the story and why they believe it, not why Al Gore says to.

Weren't we all suppose to have another ice age in the 70's? Now were gonna implode because of the heat?

Anyways, it's a good car and I believe it's a good discussion to talk about so as long as people don't get offended because some others may have a difference in opinion. And I completely agree with Mop.. Don't believe in the crap but I can certainly tell you there IS man made pollution in this world and it sure as hell DOES have an effect on this earth. Weather people wanna believe that or not is up to them. What we do to this earth is not healthy at all.

-Edit just read all of Fisha's post, he's exactly right about the 70's being the "ice age" saga people dealt with then. And now today it's supposedly to warm. There's a pattern folks.. It's called Earth and its natural cycle.

 

[James Hodge]

You should only make one change to the car in my opinion, and that would be to remove the word "Sorry" because you shouldn't have to apologize for having common sense.

Let me put it this way. If we were to use everyday objects to represent time, we could use a basketball to represent the amount of time the Planet Earth has been in existence. In comparison, the amount of time in which humans have existed, and not only existed but have been using technology that could have any impact on the planet in any way...could be represented by the size of the very tip of a ball point pen.

Earth has endured far worse throughout its long life than anything we could possibly inflict upon it. It seems quite arrogant to believe we could have the level of impact that certain people think we are having.

 

[Mike24]

First off, great looking car!



Now for the substance of my post...

Is the earth getting warmer, sure it goes in cycles because if it didn't we'd still be in the first ice-age or one of the others that followed it. Do humans have some sort of impact on it, sure but then again so does every living thing on this planet, and well there is a lot more Fish in the sea and Birds in the sky then there are People on the land.

But when it comes down to it the Earth is 4.5 BILLION years old, this Global Warming stuff is based on 150 years of man-captured weather data of which maybe the last 40 years is truly close to accurate. Now 40 years out of 150 is a really small number, but 150 out of 4.5 BILLION is an even smaller number.

Yes, the Earth does go in cylces. And yes, if it wasn't for that fact, we'd still be in the last ice age. However, global warming is a naturally occurring thing, which is being sped up by humans. What began 150 years ago? The industrial revolution, which began the process of burning coal, natural gases, etc, and releasing the resulting emissions into the atmosphere. Cars didn't really show up in bulk until recently, wherein it seems that every family has 2 0r 3, and the highways are clogged with vehicles that produce lots and lots of harmful emissions. Were this many cars around 40 years ago? No. Was global warming happening 40 years ago? Yes. Is it at a much faster rate than naturally expected today? Yes.

The U.S. is striving to reduce their carbon emissions, and has move past its industrial revolution phase. However, there are still countries out there like China, who emit a lot of carbon, and are still working in their industrial revolutions. Wonder why athletes had to wear masks in Beijing for the 2008 olympics? There's your reason. Additionally, this CAN be curtailed. By reducing emissions, you give the ozone a chance to repair itself. It will take time, and the climate will warm up more before we're done, but it can happen. Also, remember that even if the weather, (i.e. D.C's blizzard), indicates otherwise, that we are talking about many tenths of degrees per year. It's happening, but at a much faster, relative rate to what it used to be, wherein it was merely hundredths.

Also while I'm on a roll, how can Science be trusted?

First off, sir, let me respectfully disagree with the following sentiment...Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong...thank you.

Now...

How can science be trusted? Really? Science is a process from which all personal opinion is void. Science consists of experimental trials, which are rigorously standardized, to acquire the most accurate data possible. Science also changes over time. We learn new things, adapt, gain a greater presence of knowledge within the known universe.

Yes, things were originally man made...hundreds of years ag0. But those definitions come from thousands and thousands of tests, and are reconfirmed from millions and millions of calculations.




Let's take your temperature example into question, okay?

Think about it, what scientific fact is there that Water freezes at 32degrees F? Well none really just the guy who created it decided that 32 was the number of the day... You may have picked 7 I may have picked 985.... Just think about how different yet the same everything would be today, same in principle just different in "text" (maybe not the right choice of words).

Temperature is not some arbitrary value that some guy, Joe Temp, came up with while shooting pool with his buddies down at the bar. No. Temperature is defined explicitly within the Kelvin scale, which is thermodynamically defined as the change in energy, or heat, over the change in entropy. So, this would be, in units, KJ/(KJ/K)...or just K. The Kelvin scale ranges from 0K (absolute zero, the point at which energy ceases to exist, wherein even the smallest of particles cannot move), all the way up to infinity (heat can accumulate forever...well up until a point which seems like forever, which would be the summation of all of the energy present in the universe). The Kelvin scale can then be translated into Celsius, by adding 273. Therein, -273 C is absolute 0, and 0 C is the point at which water freezes. You can also convert into Fahrenheit. These conversions just allow people to connect some meaning to temperature. For instance, you know what 73 F feels like, the same that someone in France or Italy knows what 23 C feels like, and the same as a scientist knows what 296 K is.

Now, I know you're going to say, "But wait, aren't heat, energy, or entropy, and their resulting units, just values define by man?" The answer to that question is yes. But these established values come from thousands and thousands of experiments. For instance, the calorie was based off the amount of energy that it takes to raise 1 kg of water, 1 degree Celsius.

"But energy is defined by man, too!"

Well, yes, but so is everything. I'll explain that in a moment, but let's look at your argument on Time, first, to establish a baseline for my argument...

We know time as 60 seconds per minute, 60 minutes per hour, 24 hours a day, etc... Who created that? When did it start? When was it globally adopted? How can we compare "stats" & "history" before that to after that and keep it "accurate"...?

Now, your argument about time has more of a philosophical tone than Temp. That I can appreciate. Time is overly arbitrary, but was originally based on observations of the lunar and solar movements, in different respects, by the Greeks, Romans, and Mayans. Time is for the most part, arbitrary, but oh so necessary in order to maintain order.

And looking at your ending clause...

I guess what I'm trying to get at with that last little tangent is Science, Math, Language, History, etc... Everything we know as "fact" or "accurate" is really man-made and only "fact" or "accurate" becuase at one time somebody said it was. But no matter if you go by science or any religion I can think of the Earth was made by well Not-Man and it will end because of well "Not-Man".

I understand your last part about Math, Science, etc. And you are really getting into some deep philosophical notions, but you need to remember that Man gives birth to meaning, and if man chooses to follow this self-defined meaning, that is how Man will live. I like to think that the Earth, and the Universe were all made by a higher power, God, if you will, and that he gave Man the free will to define these things, to express himself, and to ask the big questions that are in the universe. He made us smart enough to be able to question our existence and to strive to attain an ultimate understanding of the universe, but not wise enough to ever attain it. That, is what I believe the human condition is. Why man defines the world around him with his own units, and research.




Now, to bring this argument back to your disbelief in global warming...

You say that you don't believe it because it is based off of "Man-made" data. This is totally irrelevant to the problem. Regardless of your opinion, man created standards and measurements which allowed him to explore and work with the world around him. If you don't want to live by these measurement standards, go ahead and define your own. If you run your tests consistently, regardless of your units, you will find the same thing. All of the measurements tell us that Earth is warming at a faster rate. You cannot argue with this fact. The Earth is getting warmer, and looking at the past 40 years, increased carbon emissions are to blame. And yes, the Earth was not created by man, but man has left a giant footprint on her landscape, which could hasten its deterioration.




Agree with me or not, I enjoy well founded debate over these types of things...philosophy, the universe, et al.


Regards,

Mike






...

Also. I don't like Al Gore, I never have, and I never will. But, I cannot argue with the results from global warming research. I voted for McCain, and place my self as a right wing leaning centrist on the political scale.

 

[Frigus5]

Great looking car! I don't believe in Global Warming either.

 

[Markfan]

Yes, the Earth does go in cylces. And yes, if it wasn't for that fact, we'd still be in the last ice age. However, global warming is a naturally occurring thing, which is being sped up by humans.

It could be somewhat, but I believe the amount of Carbon Dioxide formed by volcanoes far overwhelms the exhaust produced by all cars.

What began 150 years ago? The industrial revolution, which began the process of burning coal, natural gases, etc, and releasing the resulting emissions into the atmosphere. Cars didn't really show up in bulk until recently, wherein it seems that every family has 2 0r 3, and the highways are clogged with vehicles that produce lots and lots of harmful emissions. Were this many cars around 40 years ago? No. Was global warming happening 40 years ago? Yes. Is it at a much faster rate than naturally expected today? Yes.

Remember, we're also exiting the "little ice age" that ended in the late 17th-18th century, it could very well be coincidence it ended a century earlier than the Industrial Revolution and could be climing again to Pre-[Last True]Ice Age conditions naturally. We really do not know how weather works over a long-term (i.e. centuries) distance.

The U.S. is striving to reduce their carbon emissions, and has move past its industrial revolution phase. However, there are still countries out there like China, who emit a lot of carbon, and are still working in their industrial revolutions. Wonder why athletes had to wear masks in Beijing for the 2008 olympics? There's your reason.

Well China is the most polluted country when it comes to emissions in the world.

Additionally, this CAN be curtailed. By reducing emissions, you give the ozone a chance to repair itself. It will take time, and the climate will warm up more before we're done, but it can happen. Also, remember that even if the weather, (i.e. D.C's blizzard), indicates otherwise, that we are talking about many tenths of degrees per year. It's happening, but at a much faster, relative rate to what it used to be, wherein it was merely hundredths.

We do not have proof that there haven't been ozone holes in the past, even if the chemicals do deteriorate the ozone. And like I said about the Little Ice Age and the "rewarming" the temperature change could be cyclical.

First off, sir, let me respectfully disagree with the following sentiment...Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong...thank you.

I hope that was sarcasm, because there are numerous fields of science with inaccuracies in some way or another, it's impossible to create absolutely perfect formulas for physics.

Now...

How can science be trusted? Really? Science is a process from which all personal opinion is void.

Which is why they vote on reasons how phenomena occur.

Science consists of experimental trials, which are rigorously standardized, to acquire the most accurate data possible. Science also changes over time. We learn new things, adapt, gain a greater presence of knowledge within the known universe.

True, but the term "science" is used very loosely today, even by scientists, and several categories of "science" can not be experimented with, thus rendering them hypotheses.

Yes, things were originally man made...hundreds of years ag0.

I don't understand the point of saying things were originally man made hundreds of years ago, isn't that a given? And it's not like things aren't hand made today.

But those definitions come from thousands and thousands of tests, and are reconfirmed from millions and millions of calculations.

Are you referring to science in general or just global warming?

Let's take your temperature example into question, okay?


Temperature is not some arbitrary value that some guy, Joe Temp, came up with while shooting pool with his buddies down at the bar.

In theory any temperature scale is accurate to some degree, regardless of creator as long as it goes either up or down in a consistent amount, which is why we have several (Yes I know Celsius is virtually identical to Kelvin other than the point defined as 0) temperature scales, although Kelvin is the most useful since there's no negative value and thus can be applied in physics equations more appropriately, even though itself has inaccuracies. Since there's no way to prove that particles cease at 0K since there haven't been any points in the universe with a reading less than 2K using satellites, and the only way a an object can be detected is with radiation, which in theory something at 0K would not have.

*skips parts about arbitrarity since I have no nothing to say for or against it*

I understand your last part about Math, Science, etc. And you are really getting into some deep philosophical notions, but you need to remember that Man gives birth to meaning, and if man chooses to follow this self-defined meaning, that is how Man will live. I like to think that the Earth, and the Universe were all made by a higher power, God, if you will, and that he gave Man the free will to define these things, to express himself, and to ask the big questions that are in the universe.

I agree with most of this.

Now, to bring this argument back to your disbelief in global warming...

You say that you don't believe it because it is based off of "Man-made" data. This is totally irrelevant to the problem. Regardless of your opinion, man created standards and measurements which allowed him to explore and work with the world around him. If you don't want to live by these measurement standards, go ahead and define your own. If you run your tests consistently, regardless of your units, you will find the same thing. All of the measurements tell us that Earth is warming at a faster rate. You cannot argue with this fact. The Earth is getting warmer, and looking at the past 40 years, increased carbon emissions are to blame. And yes, the Earth was not created by man, but man has left a giant footprint on her landscape, which could hasten its deterioration.

Like I said above, I don't feel that emissions from cars are to blame for all of the warming, or even most of it, but odds are the warming will eventually balance itself out due to the increase of land usable by plants and the increased distribution of land that can be used by rainforests, plus the presuamble increase in precipitation that would occur from warming waters.

Agree with me or not, I enjoy well founded debate over these types of things...philosophy, the universe, et al.

I do too, I like to see how people respond or opinionate in debates.



BTW, nice car TheEgg. I do believe the Earth is getting warmer, but I don't believe it's caused by man like all of those "news"reporters keep ranting on.

 

[Mike24]

It could be somewhat, but I believe the amount of Carbon Dioxide formed by volcanoes far overwhelms the exhaust produced by all cars.

Not entirely true. Volcanoes have been producing CO2 emissions forever. If volcanoes, and other naturally occurring resources are the bulk produces of these emissions, now, then why hasn't the rate of warming per year been this substantial before the mass introduction of cars, factories and other CO2 powerhouses? This present data correlates to increasing amount of cars on the road, and the ever growing amounts of emissions from man-made sources.

Remember, we're also exiting the "little ice age" that ended in the late 17th-18th century, it could very well be coincidence it ended a century earlier than the Industrial Revolution and could be climing again to Pre-[Last True]Ice Age conditions naturally. We really do not know how weather works over a long-term (i.e. centuries) distance.

Nothing really to say here. It may have something to do with it, but I point to the spike in CO2 emissions over the past several decades, and the resultant increased trends in global warming.

Well China is the most polluted country when it comes to emissions in the world.

That was my point. While the U.S. is trying to cut down, there are other nations out there that are still pumping a lot of harmful emissions into the atmosphere.

We do not have proof that there haven't been ozone holes in the past, even if the chemicals do deteriorate the ozone. And like I said about the Little Ice Age and the "rewarming" the temperature change could be cyclical.

It is a fact that certain chemicals do deplete the ozone. Free radicals combine with O3, which breaks O3 down into O2, and another molecule.

I hope that was sarcasm, because there are numerous fields of science with inaccuracies in some way or another, it's impossible to create absolutely perfect formulas for physics.

Yep, sarcasm. Most physics formulas are designed to function within a vacuum, neglecting air resistance, so I know what you mean. However, while there are some fields with glaring inaccuracies and guesswork (i.e. quantum mechanics, and the more abstract fields), most of the concrete physical world fields, such as in this case, are very accurate, given all of the testing is standardized and consistent.

Which is why they vote on reasons how phenomena occur.

Scientists develop different theories. They have their own opinions, but those stem, for the most part, from standardized research, which allowed them to deduce the theory that they believe to be true.

True, but the term "science" is used very loosely today, even by scientists, and several categories of "science" can not be experimented with, thus rendering them hypotheses.

Agreed to some extent. The term "science" is used loosely today. The fields that cannot be explicitly experimented with are approached in different ways, such as research and observation.

I don't understand the point of saying things were originally man made hundreds of years ago, isn't that a given? And it's not like things aren't hand made today.

My point is, that the things that were defined many years ago form the basis for scientific thought today. The units and formulas derived then are the very nuts and bolts that current scientific endeavors work with today. This also ties into my ending clause about man giving definition to units, from which to understand the universe.

I know...poorly placed, and not really needed, but I wasn't writing a thesis paper, so I didn't go back and make my post perfect.

Are you referring to science in general or just global warming?

Science in general. This section of my argument pertained to his statements about general science, and the breakdown of how we define certain things.

Since there's no way to prove that particles cease at 0K since there haven't been any points in the universe with a reading less than 2K using satellites, and the only way a an object can be detected is with radiation, which in theory something at 0K would not have.

Agreed. 0 K is all theory. However, there are some very strong arguments about Dark Matter existing at a temperature of 0 K. We've also gotten very, very close to producing 0 K, on our own. But again, its all theory, which is the real fun of science.

Like I said above, I don't feel that emissions from cars are to blame for all of the warming, or even most of it, but odds are the warming will eventually balance itself out due to the increase of land usable by plants and the increased distribution of land that can be used by rainforests, plus the presuamble increase in precipitation that would occur from warming waters.

I really do have an issue with this statement. Given the increase of the rate of warming, as it correlates to increased CO2 emissions over the past few decades, it is not very likely that the warming will balance itself out, painlessly. Yes, if it were natural, it would be able to, and it will slow, due to the fact that global warming is natural. The problem is that nature would try to balance out synthetic, and the only way for that to happen is with very strong repercussions. For instance, take a Hurricane for example. This storm is not normal for a climate. It is very harsh, and disruptive to the natural state of things. How does nature balance out after a storm of such great magnitude? It's beautiful the next day...the calm after the storm. In my opinion, and in others I have read, global warming, if it continues at this rate, will end up producing a violent climate shift to rebalanced the state of the climate (whether this is will be a massive heating, or a cold spell, is still debated between those who accept this notion).


Now about the natural ways you say that this will balance out...

None of these things have anything to do with balancing out the planet. Precipitation from warming? Yes, it may rain more, but that doesn't mean the overall climate would cool...

Rainforest? May I remind you that the current rainforest is being depleted by loggers, daily.

I do too, I like to see how people respond or opinionate in debates.

Glad to have this discussion.

 

[Kevin_McAdams]

I want this car, so badly.

 

[JeffJordan]

Actually gravity is slowly pulling the Solar System apart by like a couple of milimeters a year

Manmade Globel Warming is just a bunch of crap so Al Gore could try to be the President back in 2000 imo.

Nice paint btw

I must point out, that Al Gore easily won the popular vote. That is in the statistics. Unfortunately, Florida screwed up and now we've had mistakes and a pointless war in the last 10 years.

Onto Fisha's enormous post...

Also while I'm on a roll, how can Science be trusted? Think about it, what scientific fact is there that Water freezes at 32degrees F? Well none really just the guy who created it decided that 32 was the number of the day... You may have picked 7 I may have picked 985.... Just think about how different yet the same everything would be today, same in principle just different in "text" (maybe not the right choice of words). We know time as 60 seconds per minute, 60 minutes per hour, 24 hours a day, etc... Who created that? When did it start? When was it globally adopted? How can we compare "stats" & "history" before that to after that and keep it "accurate"...?

I guess what I'm trying to get at with that last little tangent is Science, Math, Language, History, etc... Everything we know as "fact" or "accurate" is really man-made and only "fact" or "accurate" becuase at one time somebody said it was. But no matter if you go by science or any religion I can think of the Earth was made by well Not-Man and it will end because of well "Not-Man".

[/Soapbox]

I have used this argument against you on many other people. I have argued with all types of people about it. For the first paragraph, science is based on proof. We have seen the proof of Global Warming, in what everything Mike said. The creator of the 32 degrees thing was David Fahrenheit. On the Celsius scale, which came first, freezing was zero. The official conversion from Celsius to Fahrenheit is 9⁄5 + 32. Perfect path from 0 to 42.

I have had this argument when I was debating with a particularly religious friend about the universe and how it was created, is there a God, etc. I pretty much dominated and won the argument. Science is proof.

 

[hansonator69]

I love the deep discussion that's going on in this thread.
Sim Racing Design - Taking scientific theories, pulling them apart and examining them