So that just about wraps it up for global warming

[alitalf]

I watched "The Great Global Warming Swindle" a couple of days ago. It increased my knowledge of some of the reasons I had already had doubts about the theory that human activity was causing any significant fraction of the climate change that is happening, as well as adding other reasons not to be a true believer.

Global warming caused by human activity seems to have many aspects including; a misunderstanding, a scam, an excuse to increase taxes, and a cult or a religion.

Comments

[didiusjulianus.livejournal.com]

I do largely agree, but the current problem with the ideas for putting up taxes on larger/less economical vehicles is that it tends to penalise those who a. use them for sensible reasons at least some of the time, such as those living in rural areas who need them for their work, or to get to their homes in the winter, and who can't always afford to have a second smaller vehicle for the rest of the time, and b. those who have more people to tranport regularly, such as carers of children and elderly relatives, rather than penalising those who have them as status symbols largely tranporting one person on congested city roads, who will often continue to do so, because they can afford to.

It's also true that drivers of smaller more economical cars (and their passengers, even more importantly) statistically come off much worse in car accidents, so unless we can prevent all larger cars being on the road (not to mention vans and lorries) I shall be sticking with relatively large cars if I can afford to buy and run them, in order to protect the occupants who are my reponsibility.

[sigisgrim.livejournal.com]

Your last statement is rather wide sweaping and I would suggest not particularly accurate.

To take the Renault rage as a sample (for no other reason than I know some of the safety results) the Clio is a small car and the current model is very safe (scoring the maximum of five stars on the European safety tests). In contrast I understand that the older model of the seven-seat Vauxhal Zaffia MPV (around 2001) was very poor on rear-end safety: the passengers in the rear two seats were liable to serious injury if the vehicle was hit from behind.

It is probably more accurate to say that the more modern the car the safer it is, than to say that small cars are less safe than large cars.

[sigisgrim.livejournal.com]

The problem with any tax system is that it can be simple or it can be fair, but it can't be both.

To be simple every road user pays a similar amount of road tax. To be fair everybody pays by the mile travelled. Personally, I'd prefer the fair system, because I'd make sure that I would not get excessivly hit by the higher rates.

There are good reasons why, as you say, that, for example, people in rural areas may need to drive large (and less efficient) vehicles. This is why I favour the fair system. These people shouldn't be peanalised by being, for another example, a thatcher who needs to transport tools and ladders and staw around rural areas: things like those don't easily go in a small van and an SUV is probably the best vehicle for the job. People who run stables tend to have a genuine reason for using Range Rovers and the like.