Board logo

WHAT???
speedyxjs - 24/11/09 at 07:03 AM

Hammerhead eagle-i thrust a failure?

02GF74 - 24/11/09 at 07:07 AM

quote:
The test applauded the Top Gear's three presenters for making an effort, but finished by saying "whether this car will help save the world or not, the answer is probably not".


No car is going to save the world. Only way is to walk, dumbasses.

smart51 - 24/11/09 at 07:59 AM

quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
No car is going to save the world. Only way is to walk, dumbasses.


Erm, I'm not sure about that. Kind of misses the point of "Geoff" though.

speedyxjs - 24/11/09 at 08:05 AM

quote:
Originally posted by smart51
quote:
Originally posted by 02GF74
No car is going to save the world. Only way is to walk, dumbasses.


Erm, I'm not sure about that. Kind of misses the point of "Geoff" though.


But geoff/hammerhead eagle-i thrust, was faster than the g wizz (and performed better in the crash tests and 33% hill )

r1_pete - 24/11/09 at 08:25 AM

And it was all filmed backwards, if you look at the front on Geoff the bumper holes are taped over.

On Hammerhead there were the springs poking through those holes to support the bar....

speedyxjs - 24/11/09 at 08:35 AM

quote:
Originally posted by r1_pete
And it was all filmed backwards, if you look at the front on Geoff the bumper holes are taped over.

On Hammerhead there were the springs poking through those holes to support the bar....


Please tell me you have watched it more than once to notice that?

Steve G - 24/11/09 at 09:09 AM

Pah - and the Autocar staff call themselves professional!! They know nothing..... absolutely nothing I tell ya. 6 stars for the Hammerhead Eagle-i Thrust at the very least!!!!

blakep82 - 24/11/09 at 11:58 AM

Thrust i eagle hammerhead gets 4 starts from me just on its name!

blakep82 - 24/11/09 at 01:16 PM

However, they pointed out the car's treacherous handling, poor performance and dire build quality.

hmm, G whiz?

A1 - 24/11/09 at 03:34 PM

thing everyone misses is that if we stop living now, its not going to take effect for like 200years.
global warming is a natrual cycle, its happened before and itl happen again.

I love the 'green' Stiggy

smart51 - 24/11/09 at 04:30 PM

quote:
Originally posted by A1
global warming is a natrual cycle, its happened before and itl happen again.


This I have to disagree with. You can doubt the evidence but you can't make it say that.

speedyxjs - 24/11/09 at 09:07 PM

quote:
Originally posted by A1
thing everyone misses is that if we stop living now, its not going to take effect for like 200years.
global warming is a natrual cycle, its happened before and itl happen again.


Totally agree. All the cars in the world put out the same co2 in a year as one volcanic eruption (of which there are loads of per year).

The real issue is non renewable power sources (Oil)

Benzine - 24/11/09 at 09:28 PM

quote:
Originally posted by smart51
You can doubt the evidence but you can't make it say that.


You can if you ==> fiddle with it <==

"the emails appear to show researchers manipulating raw data and discussing how to dodge Freedom of Information requests."

JoelP - 24/11/09 at 09:47 PM

quote:
Originally posted by speedyxjs
quote:
Originally posted by A1
thing everyone misses is that if we stop living now, its not going to take effect for like 200years.
global warming is a natrual cycle, its happened before and itl happen again.


Totally agree. All the cars in the world put out the same co2 in a year as one volcanic eruption (of which there are loads of per year).

The real issue is non renewable power sources (Oil)


The volcano one is nonsense, as volcanos themselves are part of a natural cycle and thus have no net effect on atmospheric CO2. The CO2 gets absorbed by the sea and incorporated back into rocks at the same rate as volcanos pump it back out.

Anyway, the fact of the matter is, the sum total of all CO2 out-gassed by active volcanoes amounts to about 1/150th of anthropogenic emissions, so there. I read that on the internet so it must be true

smart51 - 24/11/09 at 10:39 PM

quote:
Originally posted by JoelP
quote:
Originally posted by speedyxjs
All the cars in the world put out the same co2 in a year as one volcanic eruption (of which there are loads of per year).


The volcano one is nonsense, as volcanos themselves are part of a natural cycle and thus have no net effect on atmospheric CO2. The CO2 gets absorbed by the sea and incorporated back into rocks at the same rate as volcanos pump it back out.


Yes, the principle is of equilibrium. CO2 is put in the air all the time by nature and it is taken out all the time by nature. Atmospheric concentrations of CO2 are therefore roughly stable. Man made emissions are adding about 3.5% more CO2 to the atmosphere than nature. The effect is that atmospheric levels of CO2 have increased from a fairly stable 0.3% to almost 0.6%. The effect on the climate is like putting another jumper on the earth. It will make it warmer.

A good illustration of equilibrium is an old fashioned weighing scale. There was one in the museum at Avery when I worked there. There was a 1 tonne weight on one side and 1 tonne of "goods" on the other. the scale was in perfect balance. The curator kept a few 1/2p coins, which weigh about 1g near the scale. He would put one coin on 1 side of the scale and the balance would slowly move until it reached the end stop. Just a 1 part per million change was enough to upset the equilibrium. So it is with climate change. Except we're not adding 1 part per million, we're adding 3500 parts per million.