Hate new cars

sonocativo said:
Childish, ok keep thinking that. Gotta go feed the squirrels now.
Click to expand...

Childish? Not quiet.

I'm fully grown man and discuss in civil matter. I'm very familiar with pollution issue after years of study.

Why we have pollution regulation? Care to explain. The argument about government's secret and conspiracy theories are not valid.
 
Foxrac said:
Childish? Not quiet.

I'm fully grown man and discuss in civil matter. I'm very familiar with pollution issue after years of study.

Why we have pollution regulation? Care to explain. The argument about government's secret and conspiracy theories are not valid.
Click to expand...

My last post on this...
Do you really think the government tells you everything? Oh boy....hope you dont think they actually do.
 
sonocativo said:
My last post on this...
Do you really think the government tells you everything? Oh boy....hope you dont think they actually do.
Click to expand...

No, I only take studies from universities, medical communities and non-profit organizations, so they are separated from government branches.

Your statement remind me that smoking cigarette is good for you, lead paint doesn't harm to children, alcoholic beverage doesn't cause liver damage and unpasteurized milks don't cause GI illness. :roll:

I'm not against on fossil fuel, long as they could keep pollution under control for health safety, that what our government accomplished in 1970s, but most, if not all pollution regulation already passed in 1970s, before Obama took office.
 
Ask yourself these questions, are these "Studies" accurate? Reliable? Without bias? How do they compare? What are the chances they might overlook something? Too many variable to list that we MIGHT not be aware until later.

For instance, in early 80's studies shows adding MTBE chemical as an addictive on gasoline that help clean the air and yes, it worked, but 10 years later with mandatory addition of MTBE... oh shyt, never thought spills will contamines the soil and spread around causing cancer and so on, they realized that the original studies didn't include potential spills that MIGHT lead to cancer. Damage done, trillions of dollars already lost, and so on. Who forked these trillions of dollars damages? You guessed it right!, it is all of us! This is perfect example that not every studies are that accurate as you MIGHT wish for.

Hey, the new designed gas can dispenser sipnot with anti spill function, I had it and I STILL have spills anyway! What's point of these mandatory stupid sipnot? Get my drift?

The point is, if we do something even with good intention has potential of negative consequences. Not every cases have negative consequences.
 
diehardbiker said:
Ask yourself these questions, are these "Studies" accurate? Reliable? Without bias? How do they compare? What are the chances they might overlook something? Too many variable to list that we MIGHT not be aware until later.

For instance, in early 80's studies shows adding MTBE chemical as an addictive on gasoline that help clean the air and yes, it worked, but 10 years later with mandatory addition of MTBE... oh shyt, never thought spills will contamines the soil and spread around causing cancer and so on, they realized that the original studies didn't include potential spills that MIGHT lead to cancer. Damage done, trillions of dollars already lost, and so on. Who forked these trillions of dollars damages? You guessed it right!, it is all of us! This is perfect example that not every studies are that accurate as you MIGHT wish for.

Hey, the new designed gas can dispenser sipnot with anti spill function, I had it and I STILL have spills anyway! What's point of these mandatory stupid sipnot? Get my drift?

The point is, if we do something even with good intention has potential of negative consequences. Not every cases have negative consequences.
Click to expand...

I said that studies about pollution cause health problems are accurate, also they use air pollution monitoring to measure the air quality, so they set the statistic about pollution from automobiles has been declined after catalytic converter became mandatory standard in all automobiles. It will take many years for pollution from automobiles to declining because catalytic converter only became mandatory in newer cars only, but diesel and heavy trucks didn't use those until later.

My statement doesn't address about MTBE and gas can dispenser because I'm just strictly address about pollution cause health problems and gave a reason about why pollution from automobiles have dropped in BIG TIME.
 
Foxrac said:
I said that studies about pollution cause health problems are accurate, also they use air pollution monitoring to measure the air quality, so they set the statistic about pollution from automobiles has been declined after catalytic converter became mandatory standard in all automobiles. It will take many years for pollution from automobiles to declining because catalytic converter only became mandatory in newer cars only, but diesel and heavy trucks didn't use those until later.

My statement doesn't address about MTBE and gas can dispenser because I'm just strictly address about pollution cause health problems and gave a reason about why pollution from automobiles have dropped in BIG TIME.
Click to expand...
Many times when I drove my car out on the street and stopped at the light, I could smell smog even with the windows closed. I knew it must come from an old car so I looked around and there it was. The old pick-up truck really farted so badly. :lol: My former '94 Z28 failed smog inspection twice after 6 years.
 
:roll: I love how people say...

"It's ___________'s fault now" ---> insert whatever president is sitting president now. It is not always their fault-- There's Congress, Senate, House of Representative, corporations, lobbyists.

Not just one man.
 
CrazyPaul said:
Many times when I drove my car out on the street and stopped at the light, I could smell smog even with the windows closed. I knew it must come from a old car so I looked around and there it was. The old pick-up truck really farted so badly. :lol:
Click to expand...

Yes, it could be old cars without catalytic converter or bad catalytic converter, or bad parts.

In my area, I stopped and wait for other cars to pass before I turn to left, but old red truck with foggy window blocked me from turn to left and his truck went off with excessive black smoke that caused me to cough. I was like "what's d*ckhead is man" that he stopped his truck at middle of road and prevent us to go left or right.

I'm heavily debated about support emission inspection, but there is one problem - his truck is so old and may waive under law, but police officers could ticket him for excessive smoking on road and force to get car serviced before court could dismiss the ticket with court fee ($100 in my state), but those enforcement is less common, unless other drivers complain about excessive smoking on road with coughing and eye irritation.

I don't think any cars without catalytic converter cause excessive black smoke so it must be problem with car's engine or other parts, but any cars with no catalytic converter may give some white smoke that is less harm than black smoke.
 
Fox, I just had to laugh.
Yes you are correct..lead paint hurts childrens, adults as well....In concentrations.
The books/studies...whatever is correct as its done from a lab, concentrated.
They are incorrect in other aspect, set someone outside and put a rat in the lab, which one is bound to get sick almost immediately? The rat.
They say this and that causes cancer in labratory rats, but what they dont tell you is the natural cause of death in rats is...you guessed it ....cancer.
 
sonocativo said:
Bwaaahahahahaha
sorry, just had to laugh at that.
Click to expand...

sonocativo said:
Fox, I just had to laugh.
Yes you are correct..lead paint hurts childrens, adults as well....In concentrations.
The books/studies...whatever is correct as its done from a lab, concentrated.
They are incorrect in other aspect, set someone outside and put a rat in the lab, which one is bound to get sick almost immediately? The rat.
They say this and that causes cancer in labratory rats, but what they dont tell you is the natural cause of death in rats is...you guessed it ....cancer.
Click to expand...

I'm laughing at your posts that filled with conspiracy theories. :lol: :rofl: :lol:

No wonder why you can't prove about cars don't cause pollution.
 
Foxrac said:
I'm laughing at your posts that filled with conspiracy theories. :lol: :rofl: :lol:

No wonder why you can't prove about cars don't cause pollution.
Click to expand...

didnt say they didnt, but did say its not enough to cause what the government is blaming for global warming.

Get the movie Rain Man.
 
I knew what you mean, just that others have different perspective, sadly you know... There are always two sides of the coin. I used to be on the other side of the coin, now I'm on the side and am seeing it differently. Incredible!

sonocativo said:
Fox, I just had to laugh.
Yes you are correct..lead paint hurts childrens, adults as well....In concentrations.
The books/studies...whatever is correct as its done from a lab, concentrated.
They are incorrect in other aspect, set someone outside and put a rat in the lab, which one is bound to get sick almost immediately? The rat.
They say this and that causes cancer in labratory rats, but what they dont tell you is the natural cause of death in rats is...you guessed it ....cancer.
Click to expand...
 
sonocativo said:
didnt say they didnt, but did say its not enough to cause what the government is blaming for global warming.

Get the movie Rain Man.
Click to expand...

Did I mention about humans caused global warming in this thread?

Let me repeat, I do not believe that humans are causing global warming because we don't have solid evidence to prove that humans are responsible for global warming.

I'm STRICTLY focus on pollution, that's different from global warming and the emission laws that passed in 1970s ONLY FOCUS on pollution and toxic chemicals that affect our health.

I can't believe that you have difficult to understand about what I am saying or you are just trolling me.
 
Makes much sense to me, it is because you don't understand what he mean.

Let make it so f.......g simple, sometimes we try to reduce pollution, there are side effect thats MIGHT cause other problems and there are times worse than the first problem that has been solved. Often they were UNAWARE of it for several years, all the money spent.. bam found out there was actually side effect of specific method of reducing pollution. Had it happened before? I can BET my ass with you!

Foxrac said:
I can't believe that you have difficult to understand about what I am saying or you are just trolling me.
Click to expand...
 
diehardbiker said:
I read and re-read several times, makes me wondering what you are really thinking. :hmm: Okay, what's your point?
Click to expand...

First, sonocativo told me that he used to work in air quality monitoring and he said about there were barely pollution in road with a lot of cars, so I told him - most cars equipped with catalytic converter and our government required all cars that made after 1975 to be equipped with catalytic converter, so pollution from automobiles are declining to lowest - see statistic in my post above. Sonocativo denied this claim and made me wonder that he doesn't believe that automobiles are causing pollution or causing health concern. I believe that he may confused about pollution with global warming and I tried to explain clearly as possible. It looks like he isn't understand about what he is saying or trolling me.

There is question for you - why catalytic converter is mandatory in all cars? why we have emission (pollution) regulation? why we have emission test in some metro with moderate to poor air quality?
 
diehardbiker said:
Makes much sense to me, it is because you don't understand what he mean.

Let make it so f.......g simple, sometimes we try to reduce pollution, there are side effect thats MIGHT cause other problems and there are times worse than the first problem that has been solved. Often they were UNAWARE of it for several years, all the money spent.. bam found out there was actually side effect of specific method of reducing pollution. Had it happened before? I can BET my ass with you!
Click to expand...

I'm not talking about future statistic or asking for more emission laws, but I'm focus on current emission laws that passed in 1970s that successfully reduce the pollution and we have good air quality in most part of US, except for some area, especially Texas and California have moderate to poor air quality.

Let focus on 40 years result with air quality after emission laws that passed in 1970s.

I'm not asking for more emission laws or further to reduce the pollution, long as air quality is good.
 
Oh wow, I know that DHB and I have similar agreement on gun rights (I love GUNS), truck with diesel engine (I love BIG TRUCK with diesel engine), government is crazy (DEA, ATF, Obama, etc) and other various topics, but we can't agree about pollution, or possibly confusion in my posts or other member's posts.

It is not my thing to argue with members about pollution, but I'm interested to see 40 years result of emission laws that passed in 1970.

I know some of EPA regulation, especially address on global warming is overreach.

The government needs to balance between regulation and job growth until we have sufficient new technologies, especially reduce the emission with little or no side effects.
 
Back
Top