Academy prof's book looks at cars, environment (Annapolis Capital)

[GreatAmerican]

<p>[Academy</a> prof’s book looks at cars, environment - Naval Academy - (HometownAnnapolis.com)](<a href=“Real Estate – Capital Gazette”>Real Estate – Capital Gazette)</p>

<p>

In a democratic country that operates on free-market principles, consumers can get cleaner, more-efficient cars if they demand them, a Naval Academy historian writes in a new book about automobiles and the environment.</p>

<p>“The latent powers of consumers to get what they want - good or otherwise - is there, but it is not often realized,” said Dr. Tom McCarthy, a Crownsville resident whose book “Auto Mania: Cars, Consumers, and the Environment” was released Oct. 28 by Yale University Press…

</p>

[Zaphod]

<p>

The automobile’s contribution to global warming is an “irrefutable scientific fact,” Dr. McCarthy said.

</p>

<p>LOL.</p>

<p>SURE it is! :rolleyes:</p>

[xchefmike]

<p>A banker now spouting science.
Just rehashing other bad workproduct.
Krakatoa is estimated to have released more CO and CO2 into the atmosphere in the few seconds it took to erupt than the entire industrial revolution.</p>

[GreatAmerican]

<p>^^^^^
“A Convenient Lie” vs. “An Inconvenient Truth”</p>

<p>Take your pick.</p>

<p>Anyone up for a Nobel Peace prize?</p>

[Zaphod]

<p>Well, considering they give it to fools, traitors, and terrorists these days, I figure the next winner will come from among Nancy Pelosi, John Kerry, and Osama Bin Laden, respectively. ;)</p>

[itlstallion422]

<p>Seeing as Prof. McCarthy has a PhD from Yale in Environmental History, I’d say hes extremely qualified to speak about the history of cars impact on the environment… Having actual knowledge to go along with the credentials, hes not going to bombard you with video of polar bears struggling in fragile ice while a concerned Oprah looks on in horror. Given that this is a current hot topic, it may be interesting to see what someone with an academic pedigree has to say say on the subject instead of listening to the horribly under qualified likes of Al Gore or __________(insert actor name)… All that being said, heres an interesting article on an opposing view…</p>

<p>[Science:</a> Al Gore Is a Greenhouse Gasbag - Philly Mag](<a href=“http://www.phillymag.com/articles/science_al_gore_is_a_greenhouse_gasbag/]Science:”>http://www.phillymag.com/articles/science_al_gore_is_a_greenhouse_gasbag/)</p>

<p>

“Sea level is rising,” Giegengack agrees, switching off the sound. But, he explains, it’s been rising ever since warming set in 18,000 years ago. The rate of rise has been pretty slow — only about 400 feet so far. And recently — meaning in the thousands of years — the rate has slowed even more. The Earth’s global ocean level is only going up 1.8 millimeters per year. That’s less than the thickness of one nickel. For the catastrophe of flooded cities and millions of refugees that Gore envisions, sea levels would have to rise about 20 feet.</p>

<p>“At the present rate of sea-level rise,” Gieg says, “it’s going to take 3,500 years to get up there. So if for some reason this warming process that melts ice is cutting loose and accelerating, sea level doesn’t know it. And sea level, we think, is the best indicator of global warming.”

</p>

[Zaphod]

<p>

Seeing as Prof. McCarthy has a PhD from Yale in Environmental History, I’d say hes extremely qualified to speak about the history of cars impact on the environment…

</p>

<p>That makes him an historian, not a scientist.</p>

<p>

Having actual knowledge to go along with the credentials, hes not going to bombard you with video of polar bears struggling in fragile ice while a concerned Oprah looks on in horror. Given that this is a current hot topic, it may be interesting to see what someone with an academic pedigree has to say say on the subject instead of listening to the horribly under qualified likes of Al Gore or __________(insert actor name)…

</p>

<p>Amen.</p>

[itlstallion422]

<p>I will concede that I don’t take an environmental historians claim that it is “irrefutable scientific fact” that cars have contributed to global warming on face value. I will however agree that American society and culture has allowed and even encouraged the use of certain types of cars that are more harmful to the environment. With the muscle cars and big caddies of the pre-catalytic converter era, to the more recent SUV boom (I drive a blazer by the way), the American people have often traded away fuel economy and emission standards when purchasing cars. Furthermore, cars have become an engrained part of the American culture, especially in Southern California where they have been a causal factor in the smog that often blankets much of that area… </p>

<p>At the absolute least I think it would be an interesting read. If there’s one thing about historians, they cite the @#$% out of their books. So while I may not take a historians view on global warming at face value, I atleast can assume that any historian worth his salt will back up any statement like that with legitimate sources</p>

[Zaphod]

<p>

I will however agree that American society and culture has allowed and even encouraged the use of certain types of cars that are more harmful to the environment.

</p>

<p>Says who?</p>

<p>Cars today are FAR cleaner than anything that existed even 10 years ago. While the numbers have obviously increased, there is still no directly-attributable relationship between autos and climate change.</p>

<p>

Furthermore, cars have become an engrained part of the American culture, especially in Southern California where they have been a causal factor in the smog that often blankets much of that area…

</p>

<p>Funny how that happens in a place where all the enviro-whackjobs hang out and live, eh? I guess the upper crust in Hollyweird are perfectly content to tell the rest of us peasants what we can drive, but not to ditch their SUV’s and Ferraris. Typical.</p>

<p>As for the auto being an iconic part of American culture, it’s because it is a fundamental part of our individualism. Whoever came up with the slogan, “It’s not just your car. It’s your freedom.” was 110% spot-on. I like being able to travel when and where I want in the comfort of my own car instead of some crowded, smelly, and unreliable public transportation system. Until they invent the Star Trek transporter (or until Hillary becomes President, proclaims herself Empress Hillary the Great, and bans private automobiles), the auto is going to remain an American icon. All that will change is the power source, and that will be market-driven far more than government-driven.</p>

<p>

If there’s one thing about historians, they cite the @#$% out of their books.

</p>

<p>Who cares what they cite if their conclusions are all wrong?</p>

<p>

So while I may not take a historians view on global warming at face value, I atleast can assume that any historian worth his salt will back up any statement like that with legitimate sources

</p>

<p>Be cautious. Global warming is a trendy topic that promises lots of money and fame to those who toe the line and genuflect before the altar to Saint Gore. That can skew objectivity. Otherwise, by all means read it and see what he has to say.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, I’ll keep driving my Civic to work and my Trooper for fun. :)</p>

[itlstallion422]

<p>

Cars today are FAR cleaner than anything that existed even 10 years ago. While the numbers have obviously increased, there is still no directly-attributable relationship between autos and climate change.

</p>

<p>Agreed on that point. However, its not the state of cars today that has potentially brought up environmental issues. The issues that we face today are because of past decisions. For example, prior to the oil crisis of '74 Americans craved their Cadillacs and Camaros. In the 1990s, the SUV took over… We even saw such monstrosities as the Excursion, even if for only a few years, hit the market. While these later cars all had better emissions standards than their older counterparts, from an environmental point of view they still burned a hell of a lot of hydrocarbons.</p>

<p>

Funny how that happens in a place where all the enviro-whackjobs hang out and live, eh? I guess the upper crust in Hollyweird are perfectly content to tell the rest of us peasants what we can drive, but not to ditch their SUV’s and Ferraris.

</p>

<p>Take away the urban centers and Southern California is one of the bastions of American conservatism… As far as the car being engrained into American culture, maybe ill tackle that one tomorrow because the possible causal factors are too numerous for me to even think about and boil down to a concise argument at this time as I have to prep for my obligations tomorrow. </p>

<p>

Who cares what they cite if their conclusions are all wrong?

</p>

<p>Possibly, but I’d also argue that neither of us is qualified to make that conclusion… We can have our views, and personally I don’t think that the global warming issue should be as high a priority as people make it out to be. But we have Al Gore to thank for that… Any small changes that we make will be completely and utterly undone by the rapid industrialization taking place in Asian societies that in total number a few billion and don’t place developing “green” technology over rapid industrialization…</p>

<p>But anyway, I definitely gotta hit the books…</p>