Ian Wishart who is one of the top investigative journalists in the world has written a fascinating book called Air Con well worth a read. Here is a short video he has produced https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hro-8qpB_vg

Regards,
K-BIKE

NASA recently aired a report that said the Sun was the reason for the recent warming trend, sun spots, flares, and radiation. It is normal, part of the cycle. The report was aired on one TV channel that I saw, and several newspapers carried the story. But it was short lived. For some reason not to many reports have followed. It must have been inconvenient for the majority of news agencies to follow up on it!
I sometimes miss the deep snow of New England. But I do enjoy the warmth of North Carolina beaches! How about where you live?

The problem with GW (global warming) is that we don´t actually ´know´; but, hey, that´s how science works.

We ´know´ very little, we have theories for many things, and many of these theories are pretty good, but will eventually be shown to be inaccurate by another theory, that will eventually be shown to be inaccurate by another theory.

Most people, me included, believe in gravity. BUT if Newton´s theory had been 100% accurate then the rate of expansion of the universe would now be slowing, and it aint – probably. One day there´ll be a new theory
that explains this – mebbie there already is?

We have to remember that science is the best explanation we can find for a set of conditions that we think exist. Next year, or in 10 years time we´ll have more information and so the theories will change.

Try this one – how many degrees are there in a triangle? Nearly everyone I know responds 180. Up until about 1900 they´d have been right. I know loads of people who´ve been to Uni, many who have A level (Level 3) Maths, and they think it´s 180.

Why? Because that´s what we´re taught; another is centrifugal force – it´s a lie, it´s actually centripetal, but we aren´t taught that - ´til later. Centrifugal explains what we feel, not what is actually happening, and what is actually happening is Centripetal. In mathematical reality a triangle can have considerably more, or considerably less
than 180 degrees. (Google images: hyperbolic triangle)

GW is becoming a similar issue, certain people want us to see things in a linear manner, if something that was getting warmer is now getting colder, then that ´proves´ that GW is a lie.

GW and weather are almost certainly ´chaotic´. Cuz I don´t fully understand chaos theory I can´t explain it in depth, but basically think of two identical things moving in the same direction, at the same speed, in the same conditions. There´s a force that acts on both in exactly the same way. From what most of us are taught both things will be
affected in the same way; but not in chaos theory.

They may continue acting the same for a period, but sooner or later one of them is going to veer off in a totally unpredictable manner. That´s chaos.

So, we see Antarctica getting warmer – GW is true; then suddenly Antarctica gets colder – GW is false. Nope. If Antarctica gets warmer, then somewhere that was getting warmer suddenly starts to get colder, or two places get
colder, or three ...... And of course vice-versa. Focusing on one area proves nothing, we have to take a global view and that is way beyond me. Mathematicians and meteorologists – and many others – are working on this.

With the vast majority of them believing that the world is getting warmer much too fast, and if it continues then our kids or grand kids will have trouble.

Having talked to one or two scientists, they also believe that something else may come along and blow their theories out of the water, but they doubt it. Mind you, good scientists love doubt, cuz it means that thereś something
else to be discovered!

Try this, 20 to 25 years ago many of us probably believed the K100 to be the best bike ever. We may still love ´em, but do we really think they´re the best bike ever?

hope I don´t live to regret this post!

Interestingly the majority of climate scientists don't believe the global warming hype but the pro global warming people still keep saying that they do. It is one of those problems where if people, who as a mass have a very short attention span, are told something often enough and regularly enough they accept it as true even if it is patently false.

What this is about is to convince people like us that they should pay more taxes to "save the planet". What will happen to those taxes is an interesting question, some believe they will be channelled to finance the creation of the one world government and some believe they will be used to make some people and corporations fabulously wealthy.

One thing I know as an absolute fact (and an Inconvenient Truth) is those taxes will make all of us here on the list poorer (unless Al Gore is a secret list member and he will be the sole exception).
Regards,
K-BIKE

Just to add my pennies worth. What ever the truth, it is a. obvious that climate change is afoot. b. man made pollution damage both micro (local) and macro (ozone layer to sea bed) is at all time high (human time scale here). Stupid to chance it, even if there is no threat. First lesson mother teaches us; dont foul your own patch and if you do clean up after you.
American Inuit Indians had a great philosophy about this (dont know which nation/group I'm afraid) but it goes something like this. "We will never be able to answer the greater questions ("Life, the Universe and everything"), just way to hard to grasp. BUT...
once that is clear, it then makes proper sense to care for what keeps us alive and nurtures us. Thats called Old Mother Earth. Look after it/her and try to leave no tracks."
I aint no god damn HIPPY, or pagan moon worshiper, but I hate seeing litter being dropped, be it a crisp packet or thousands of tons of CO2 in the air. Not good at all and it must be having some effect for the worse.
Cheers, a petrolhead biker. BTB

A couple of comments to add.

As mentioned above all theories are good until proven otherwise.

One of the possible effects of "global warming" is to trigger another ice age???

And I strongly believe Mother Nature is very good at redressing the balance and while I would like to think "she" shouldn't have to we will be the recipient of a very stern dressing down should push come to shove.

Regards,

Phil

Exactly Phil. Its a matter of balance. Its obvious to even the most obtuse among us.
IE: There is NO problem fishing the seas but 'husband' the fish stock for the better for everybody (long term and short term) AND the fish. Examples...Stop using LINE LINES for tuna that is today slaughtering the albertross population for no real reason. Stop using purse netting that is hoovering up whole fish populations and totally f***ing whole areas of ocean. Did you realise 80% of the 'catch' is then used as FISH MEAL FERTILIZER to help grow grain to feed cattle kept in sheds which never see light of day. We then eat the cattle.
This is a collective insanity!!!
Why, 'cause we got things out of kinter. Again, example:
Us K100 owners of a certain age (with British roots) will remember SUNDAY LUNCH and the fact that the LAMB OR BEEF JOINT or the ROAST BIRD was a special meal once a week. It would last for monday/tuesday and even wednesday. There was a recognition that it was a special meal, which even gives the slaughtered animal a dignity in death. Now the same animals become a packet of chicken dinosors or turkey nuggets. Meat with every meal, sold to us as if it is normal consumption. All the while, fish stocks are pillaged to fuel the cycle, animals suffer appalling cruelty, populations become obese and the future looks damaged for numerous reasons. No... look back and remember SUNDAY LUNCH and that joint or roast. It was the weeks one and only big meat meal. Now meat has become a money making machine we have been sold, while 60% of the worlds human population is malnurished at this very time.
Crazy. Yes eat meat by all means, but keep it in balence. Animals should be walking around in fields, not eating grain grown using ravaged fish stocks. So not as much meat to eat EVERY day as burgers; but put hand on heart and tell me which 'Old Mother Nature' favours.
PS: Any clot that starts up, "there is still loads of fish in the sea" is foolish! The Grand Banks (for you in Canada) the North Sea for us in Europe, Iceland cod wars, the huge anchovy stocks off the coasts of South America and Africa, all fished to virtual extinction. Gone. Hundreds of years to recover, if they ever do at all.
We practised on the whales, they were big and easy to hit, took then we turned on the rest as stocks got smaller.. Right now there are big plans afoot to harvest the Antarctic Krill. Thats all thats left, and the very bottom of the food chain. Nowhere left after that...
Now I aint a enviromental guru, but I do know how to watch my K100 fuel gauge, and when it says nearly empty I trust it. What I dont do is speed up and continue out of town without a thought in my stupid little head.
Knock me off my soap box now, please. I need to go sailing this week end and chill out. Thanks for the rant. Peace love and hairgrease. B.T.B

Whoa!!!.... We have people with very strong opinions and knowledges on this forum.

Even if I am not the best at being careful about saving energy and limiting the amount of CO2 that I release in the atmosphere, I am very concerned by the facts.
Others talked about the bad things harming our environment, I will talk about what we try to do as individuals.
As an example, I would have been ready to invest in a small power windmill in order to generate my own clean electricity and reduce my Carbon foot print but the city by laws prohibits me to install such a device within the city limit (even a small one).
Travelling a lot in the city, I was at one point considering a small electric car but what would I have accomplished by buying one? To release more CO2 into the atmosphere.( We are still generating power with coal generated power plants.)

Apart from this, Halifax (Canada) is a world leader for recycling waste. This is a small step, but a very good beginning about being energy saving and recycling.

I am also working in the school system (non teaching but IT support) and can recognize that here kids are trained from their earliest age to be 'green'.

Our department takes care of over 12,000 computers and our goal is to reduce the consumption of coal generated power. In order to do so, we are replacing all the old CRT monitors with LCD ones (They consume 1/10 of the power). This investment eats a good chunk of our budget but we feel that as educators we have to be an example. we send the old CRT to be recycled, but where? In China where the poor workers dismantling the circuit boards are contaminated with heavy metal?
The other question is how much energy is consumed to build these new low power computer monitors... Do we gain anything other than generating jobs and wealth for big businesses?
I sometimes worried about the ecology being no more than a consumer scam. We think that we are acting in good faith when we only make multinational companies richer.

Our department also invested into software that will automatically shut down all the computers when the school is over(another energy and pollution saving)... All the new schools that we are building are "energy efficient". Thanks to our superintendant with futuristic views!

We are moving slowly toward a society of responsible people, but it takes time to educate the public and the politicians views about the subject are not always in line with the views of the scientists.

Alarmist reports and predictions of major environmental catastrophies is very good to make people aware of the way that we arm the earth.
Even if in the future science proves that previous predictions and accuracy were wrong, the steps that we are taking now will help our kids to live in a better world.

Now the big question is: Are we doing the right thing to help the planet or are we creating no more than a new line of lucrative businesses? Producing new goods requires power and generates pollution. Should we replace goods because they are not the most energy efficient or should we wait that a replacement is absolutely needed because of malfunction? Did anybody ever made a study about the impact on the environment?

The main focus of this forum being motorcycle oriented, some people will question about this type of post.
We don't live 100% for the bike and have other concerns in life. I am so glad that all of you are open minded and can share these concerns with your fellow bikers.

for all the posters of this thread.

Bert

NIce one Bert. You are quite right, this is a BMW K100 forum. As such we all should take this little bit of pride from our attitude towards keeping 20+ year old bikes running.
Please consider this fantastic statistic; during an average cars 'life' (what ever that is) 80%, yes 80%, of the entire pollution the car creates is made during the manufacture process. That is before it has even 1 single click on the odometer. It took me a moment to suss, but consider; the mining, smelting, reprocessing, shipping, shaping and forming the metallic parts (including alloys, wiring, et al). Plastics, paints, rubber and so forth, again transporting it all and producing it at individual sites even before it starts assembly as a 'car'.
I am sure you can follow the drift here. Even if the 80% figure is open to some debate, it seems a likely reasonable estimate. So now we the users are being told to buy the 'clean' NEW cars. In the UK laws are tightening fast, and the 'scrapping' policy (get £2000 for scrapping your old motor if you buy a new one) only speeds this process. Is this a consumer con job? The powers above must know the statistics. What are we to think armed with this knowledge? I hate being taken for a fool. Could we used Cuba as model, and just keep the old ones running till they just expire a death. Employment would not suffer since they need a whole industry to keep them going.
Food for debate and thought. Keep those K100's running I say and be proud of it. Hope that brings on back on topic. Cheers BTB

Good on you BTB,
This crazy consumerism is only countered by folk like us who choose to ride 20 or so year old bikes hence maximising the utilisation of the energy debt used in making it. We have a 1985 Volvo which is my wife's daily drive a 1990 K100 RS, a 1990 and an 1995 both AMG Mercedes' in the family. We also have a brand new Honda Accord Euro company car but we won't talk about that one.
Regards,
K-BIKE