Agent009
Agent009
"The vanity of others offends our taste only when it offends our vanity"
View My AgentSpace

Print this Page | Digg It | del.icio.us

Do You Agree? GM's Bob Lutz Calls Global Warming "A Crock Of S***" While In Dallas

Bob Lutz, General Motors’ vice chairman and chief car guru, says what really turns him on is “doing the unexpected”–acting “contrary to the conventional wisdom, forcing people to re-think their beliefs.” Maybe that’s why Lutz, who made his name developing behemoths like the V-10 Dodge Viper, is so sold on the fuel-efficient new Chevrolet Volt, which will run on a lithium-ion battery and could go on sale by 2010. “The Volt thrills me because it’s the last thing anybody expected from GM,” the ex-Marine said at a private lunch in Arlington today. If you’re into cars or the car business, jump to read more of Lutz’s contrarian beliefs.

During a closed-door session with several journalists at the Cacharel restaurant, Lutz declared that:

–Hybrid cars like those made by Toyota “make no economic sense,” because their price will never come down, and diesel autos like those touted by Chrysler are also uneconomic. The only place in Europe that diesel-driven cars are big, he said, is where diesel fuel is half the cost of regular gasoline; in most places there, the costs are comparable and diesel has little market penetration.

– Global warming is a “total crock of ****.” Then he added: “I’m a skeptic, not a denier. Having said that, my opinion doesn’t matter. (With the battery-driven Volt), “I’m motivated more by the desire to replace imported oil than by the CO2 (argument).”

 

Read Article
Do You Agree? GM's Bob Lutz Calls Global Warming



Comments:

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters):
[img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent004.myautospies.com/users/150/Sample-Gallery/sample1.JPG[/img]

EnnNorakEnnNorak - 2/13/2008 7:27:17 PM
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Lutz speaks the GM party line or, more precisely, the auto industry party line. CO2 allows incoming wavelengths of sunlight to warm the earth but traps some of the longer wave radiation from earth as it tries to escape back into space. Water vapor is a much more abundant greenhouse gas than than CO2. Methane produced by overpopulating humans and the cows they eat (farts) is much more potent than CO2 and water vapor but makes up a small proportion of all the greenhouse gases.

Lutz may be vindicated if global warming produces a lot of humidity in the air and results in blanketing land masses with snow in the winter to the extent that the snow reflects much more heat back into space and triggers an ice age.


reply to this comment
adamsaf723adamsaf723 - 2/13/2008 7:54:46 PM
0 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
In ways he's right, that hybrids and desiels aren't making a big enough impact to justify their means and that alternate measures should be more researched, but at the moment, there isn't a cost effective or immediate replacement. Cars like the Volt are taking long because lithium battery packs aren't as stable as nickel, but nickel isn't as powerful. Hydrogen makes sense, but that's another skeptical means.

It's not like we can make friction magnetic cars and change all the roads into electron based surfaces overnight... not happening.

Time is what's going to solve the crisis, not the Volt. What a hypocrite though...


reply to this comment
randy33randy33 - 2/14/2008 12:05:01 AM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost

Lutz is correct. "Human-caused Global warming" is an absolute crock of ***.

Not only are we in the midst of a declining ice age (which peaked just 12,500 years ago), but just the very stipulation that carbon dioxide is "pollution" to begin with, as recited for political purposes by a handful of radical political organizations like the DNC and the UN, is absolutely ridiculous. Carbon dioxide, like water, is an essential ingredient for life. An "excess" of CO2 should no more be considered "pollution" that an "excess" of raindrops on a showery day! And what year does one even declare to behold the baseline concentration beyond which any additional quantity is "excess"? ?? (see chart below)

The **** that actually does make people sick is crap like sulfur dioxide, nasty free radicals, and industrial particulate. That's the stuff which makes the air wrong, not Carbon Dioxide. AND NOR DOES CO2 have one bit of influence on biodiversity either. Unlike globalwarmingists themselves, who in this century alone have done a monumental amount of damage to the environmental movement. Globalwarmingism is a wretched scourge on this Earth. Globalwarmingists are pathetic. Most of them are totally ignorant of what actually threaten biodiversity: 1) habitat destruction & fragmentation, 2) poaching, and 3) pollution. These are the THREE REAL THREATS to nature. And how many globalwarmingists can actually recite them? Ha, sickeningly little. This is a tragic irony that brings tears to my eyes.

Everyone pay attention: long-term climate cycles are natural, and we have nothing to do with them. Your sacrifice, if any, is meaningless. The next time some brainwashed fruitbag globalwarmingist brings up global warming -- even if just incidentally and inoffensively -- I urge you to STOP and put your hand in the air and demand they immediately declare what is their desired CO2 concentration. Yes, that's right -- have them declare what year on this graph (which I recommend you be able to pull instantly from your wallet) they desire to be THE everlasting, eternal concentration of CO2 on Earth:

http://tinyurl.com/39gnm4

Trust me, your actions may seem curt, but you will be doing them a favor. That's because, before your intervention, they'd essentially been demanding the Earth's climate hold steady in its present conditions, freakishly abandoning its long history –– deep ice ages followed by periods of undulating warmth. Natural cycles which have persisted peacefully on this beautiful planet for all of eternity.


reply to this comment
henbmwhenbmw - 2/14/2008 2:55:59 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Randy- Please go back to high school and take chemistry. CO2 and H2O are not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination.

Scientists are at a virtual consensus that climate change is indeed happening. Disagreeing with it is not an opinion, it is simply ignorant and naive.

Look up IPCC. It is a board supported by just about every environmental scientist in the world. It is happening, wake up.


reply to this comment
MadibaPMadibaP - 2/15/2008 2:09:53 AM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Have you seen the Al Gore film? Do you remember the ice core sample? That very same scientist when interviewed on his own explained how his research has been miss represented. He explained that there is a correlation between earth temperature and CO2, but the CO2 level FOLLOWS the temperature, not CAUSES it.

The real problem that the government's are hiding with the CO2 story is that we are most decidedly running short of oil production capacity and energy efficiency. What do I mean? We can't get it out the ground fast enough to supply everyone and it is taking more and more of the oil to supply the energy to GET the oil out the ground. Once it took 1 barrel of oil to pump 100. Now it takes 1 barrel to pump 5. This means we are in trouble, but they would rather have us cut down cause of CO2 than, hey chaps there ain't enough!


reply to this comment
Auto_expertAuto_expert - 2/15/2008 12:38:50 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Lutz is right. Not too long ago (1975) scientists thought we were headed for a mini ice age. One of their ridiculous solutions was to cover the ice caps with soot so they would melt. Don't believe me? Just google "The Cooling World". It was an article published by Newsweek dated April 28, 1975. Guess we're better off they didn't follow through on that hair-brained idea.

When did humans become so powerful that we could cool and warm the earth at will (nevermind that big ball of fire in the sky or the millions of other things that are out of our control)? I figure the time we can stop an earthquake is about the time we can warm and cool the earth at will.


reply to this comment
henbmwhenbmw - 2/15/2008 3:14:21 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Its surprising to see so many people in complete denial of our involvement. Let me ask you, what is really so crazy about humans changing the earth's climate? Look around you, the land is dominated by concrete and cement, steel and brick. You really think that changes so drastic and otherworldly wouldn't have an effect on this delicate planet?

It's easy to find articles dating back contradicting this or contradicting that, but rarely has a movement of this magnitude been created in vain.

Look at the facts, PPM of CO2 has increased ten fold in almost direct correlation with global fossil fuel emissions. Volcanoes? They release less than 1% of what humans do in CO2 emissions. Do you honestly think that 27 gigatonnes of CO2 a year are not going to change our planet at all?

At this point, dissent is synonymous with denial. Bounce around all you want, the wealth of information supporting human caused climate change is here to stay.


reply to this comment
tundrahqtundrahq - 2/18/2008 2:59:26 PMView My AgentSpace
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I must say I'm amazed at the quality of responses to this first comment...usually, discussing "global warming" results in foolish arguments that aren't backed by reason, yet nearly every comment was reasoned and intelligent.

I think the middle ground lies here: "Global Warming" is but one possible outcome. Increasing CO2 won't necessarily increase temperatures. While studies have shown that historically, CO2 levels correspond with higher temperatures, it's also been shown that mini ice-ages began shortly after dramatic increases in CO2 (triggered by volcanic eruptions, which contrary to what was written above, can ABSOLUTELY release more CO2 than mankind).

In short, no one can say for sure what will happen as more and more CO2 is pumped into the atmosphere. It could result in warming, but it could result in an ice-age too. Therefore, I prefer the term "climate change".

As for mitigating climate change, I'm all for it...provided it doesn't strangle our economy in the short term. I'm all for CO2 trading (providing it's a global system), and I think it's wise to investigate CO2 abatement.

Speaking of the oil industry, not many people realize that oil companies are in the best position to reduce atmospheric CO2. Gas injection is a common practice in oil recovery - if the gas they inject into the ground is CO2, we get oil while permanently storing CO2 away. That's a win-win solution.


reply to this comment
johannasjohannas - 2/13/2008 1:17:00 PM
-1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
My summary of lunch with Lutz:

"Every other auto manufacturer is totally backward. But here at GM, we have always pushed ourselves to make the best automobiles ever just for you, the smartest people on earth."


reply to this comment
PorschinatorPorschinator - 2/13/2008 9:18:43 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Unfortunately I do not agree that GM has "always" produced the best cars. Too many economic tie ups caused issues.

As for Global Warming I believe some aspects Lutz states are true. Humans do play a factor but Mother nature plays a larger part. There has been warming and cooling throughout Earths history. We are simply in a warming period and eventually another Ice age will begin and so on...



SevorbeupstryIsBackSevorbeupstryIsBack - 2/13/2008 1:28:15 PM
-3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
He absolutely right!

reply to this comment
theoptimisticpessimisttheoptimisticpessimist - 2/13/2008 1:32:10 PM
+6 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Hmmm, who do I believe, 95% of the scientists out there or a car CEO, who has to answer to shareholders?

reply to this comment
cktoocktoo - 2/13/2008 2:13:01 PM
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
You mean the same scientists and researches that get bazillions of dollars from governments pushing this theory? Environmental interests can be just as corrupt as corporate interests.


theoptimisticpessimisttheoptimisticpessimist - 2/13/2008 2:42:21 PM
+5 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
No, I mean scientist that risk or have lost their jobs for not supporting the current administrations oil company policy. We all know their is no such thing as a corrupt CEO, Good Lord give me a break.


cantaffordonecantaffordone - 2/13/2008 3:03:41 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
It really doesn't matter what a persons politics are. Most of us are not climate scientists (are there any in this forum?), so we tend to pick sides like we are picking a favorite football team. When the media gets on board, the mind numbed out there jump on too as thoutgh they are now expers on the subject. I do know this, the climate scientists of the world do not count among them, Al Gore. He flies around in private jets, drives, gas hogs and burns over 10K per month in energy bills at his house - then tells the rest of peons that we need to be more green. Ha! How can anyone take him seriously. I read this week that real climate scientists in Canada (a place that would benefit from a little warming) that sunspots are a better indicator of climate change and they are pointing to global cooling... Go team!


cdokecdoke - 2/13/2008 3:37:27 PMView My AgentSpace
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Ckoo is right in that there are groups that benefit from presenting one side of the other- Scientists included- they compete for funding.

I have a litmus test for climatologists that have performed data manipulation. That being if they show the long-term CO2 and Temperature vs. time profile, but keep the two curves separate. Anyone who graphs it this way is trying to sell you something. First, this type of presentation is strange - usually when you try to prove a correlation between two variables you graph them on separate and opposing axes, and modify the axes appropriately until you achieve a curve fit that is acceptable.

By graphing it in that manner, but separating the curves there is a deception that occurs as a result of the fact that there is an extra bit on information that is lost- the temperature curve proceeds the CO2 curve in time- not the other way around. The correlation is then presented as if CO2 causes Temperature increases- which said evidence does not support.

I have heard about the possibility of a systemic lag, but I have seen little evidence or analysis of this. Probably because were it true then something has changed as the current system is not behaving in the same manner- and that is even more difficult to explain.



cdokecdoke - 2/13/2008 3:38:44 PMView My AgentSpace
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
The trends I am talking about are those from the Law Dome and Vostok Ice cores.


cktoocktoo - 2/13/2008 6:00:12 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
"No, I mean scientist that risk or have lost their jobs for not supporting the current administrations oil company policy. We all know their is no such thing as a corrupt CEO, Good Lord give me a break."

Who said anything about there not being corrupt CEO's? Yes, there's corrupt CEO's...as well as corrupt scientists, but that doesn't fit into the media's little storyline. Also, I don't know of anyone who's actually lost their job for "not supporting this admin." Ok, maybe Paul O'Neil. Everyone in the media likes to throw out the NASA guy (forget his name), but he's been able to do/say pretty much whatever he's wanted to do and still has a job even though any administration, as much as we don't like it, is well within their right to change/modify/etc any document being presented on behalf of that admin. Ya think any other prior admin just let things be released without review or changes? Please. Anyway, my point once again, is any interest (corporate, non-profit, science, etc.) can be just as corrupt as anyone else. Follow da money...



cdokecdoke - 2/13/2008 9:39:08 PMView My AgentSpace
+5 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
To whomever de-boosted me- look it up if you don't believe me.

You know what they teach you at a science and engineering college? Anything less than full disclosure is deception.

You can get the Vostok Ice core raw information online. The lag incidentally is not insignificant: 800 years on average. Currently the some say that a small temperature change causes CO2 to evolve from the oceans and yeild a run-away green-house gas effect- which gains strength 800 years later.



HeyhuubHeyhuub - 2/13/2008 2:35:52 PM
+9 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
The same Japanese who sell more diesels in Europe then hybrids?

reply to this comment
BoredBored - 2/13/2008 7:09:15 PM
+4 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
@ JoshLexus4Ever,

spare us.
When someone brings out a mass produced hybrid diesel and/or hybrid bio-diesel (especially on big rigs), then we'll talk.


reply to this comment
EL34EL34 - 2/13/2008 1:35:11 PM
-7 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I have never believed in global warming, but of course I wasn't born to hold a stick with cardboard attached to it and protest.

EL34 ;-)


reply to this comment
jasaerojasaero - 2/13/2008 1:35:31 PM
+4 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Not really agreeing with this particular wording. Human produced CO2 output causing the global warming is probably as he says. Global warming itself is real for now, but not sure it will continue or if it is cause by humans and our cars and other things. Too many factors for even the smartest scientists and their data to ever have more than a hypothesis even though they like to call it theory.

reply to this comment
mini22mini22 - 2/13/2008 1:36:09 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I'm assuming he is a Republican conservative.

reply to this comment
lexusis350lexusis350 - 2/13/2008 1:54:00 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Is that a problem? So what if he is?


cktoocktoo - 2/13/2008 2:15:42 PM
-1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Well, we can surely bet he's not a feel-good liberal who screams about global warming as he waves to us "little people" while boarding his private jet.


nybimmernybimmer - 2/13/2008 1:51:04 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Unbelievable...he is channeling Michael Scott from "The Office".

Perhaps now that the writer's strike is over, NBC would consider doing a special GM edition of "The Office" where Michael Scott gets recruited away from Dunder Mifflin to run a fictitious car company?


reply to this comment
lexusis350lexusis350 - 2/13/2008 1:51:35 PM
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
It is a bunch of crap. It's the Liberal's way of scaring people into doing what they want. Sure, pollution is real, and yes, the climate is getting warmer. But as far as I'm concerned, it's not human related.

reply to this comment
w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 2:16:25 PMView My AgentSpace
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Yep. We live a "fear state" today in America. We have given up our freedoms for "protection" from the government (ever heard of he Patriot Act?) Fear is a successful political too that leads people to make decisions they would not normally even consider.

You have to watch V for Vendetta. The message of the movie is Brilliant



w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 2:17:55 PMView My AgentSpace
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
As far as not being human related: nobody knows for sure, which is why Global Warming is still a Theory yet to be proven.


w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 2:35:41 PMView My AgentSpace
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Dugit,

LOL, IM not, although he had some good ideas. I actually support John McCain just in case you were wondering.



w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 2:43:11 PMView My AgentSpace
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I might not agree with him on everything (like amnesty for illegals) But like the guy for his calmness and Reagan ideals.

I might have otherwise gone for Hillary (yes I'm an independent) but it doesnt look like she is getting the nomination.

As far as Obama and his love affair with the media who has been giving him favorable coverage and the excitement around him just because of his race (despite the fact he says he looks pat that issue)I would NEVER vote for him. He is so busy being a "different" candidate and promising all this change for America and creating this movement that he hasnt outlined any of his ideas yet. His background doesnt convince me either.




1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 2/13/2008 3:54:32 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
w209..."As far as not being human related: nobody knows for sure, which is why Global Warming is still a Theory yet to be proven."

Almost all of science is based on THEORIES. The theory of relativity, theory of evolution, big bang theory. There are actually very few FACTS (LAWS) in Science. What makes a good theory is one with evidence, evidence that is documented, peer reviewed, and repeatable. All of which makes the theory of global warming (including human contribution to it) a good theory, one that is accepted by the overwhelming majority of scientists.

Claiming that global warming is likely bogus because it is a theory only speaks to your complete lack of knowledge in this area.



w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 4:47:43 PMView My AgentSpace
0 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
1970Toyomark

"Claiming that global warming is likely bogus because it is a theory only speaks to your complete lack of knowledge in this area"

And I suppose that you have extensive knowledge on the subject? I never said it was bogus, I said that since it was a theory it deserves the benefit of the doubt, and shouldnt be considered a fact. But go ahead, enlighten me, and all of us in this forum with your credentials and knowledge in the field.

We await your response...



1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 2/13/2008 5:53:45 PM
-1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
My response is simple. I do not have to be an authority on the Science of Global Warming to know the validity of the theory, because almost every scientist, with their vast research, already agrees on it. And I'm not going to spend one second researching all the data out there for the narrow minded folks on this site. (not speaking to everyone, natch)

Now, you obviosuly did not read my response to you. What I claimed is something that you do not need to be a scientist to know, and that is that in Science there are very few laws and many, many theories. You contended that because Global Warming is only a theory, it is therefore questionable. That is the faulty logic that points to your ignorance on the subject of science in general.

"Conservative estimates indicate that there are 18 basic physical laws in the universe."
Powell, Michael (2004). Stuff You Should Have Learned at School

Science is made up of theories. Good ones stand the test of time, as the theory of Global Warming has, the evidence and acceptance becoming stronger each year.



cktoocktoo - 2/13/2008 6:10:26 PM
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
"...Science is made up of theories. Good ones stand the test of time, as the theory of Global Warming has, the evidence and acceptance becoming stronger each year."

You're kidding, right? The Theory of GW (man-made) has been around at best 15-20 years and before that it was the Theory of Global Cooling that was being trumpeted. And actually, the evidence and acceptance is becoming increasingly challenged, by even those that bought into GW at first. Then again you probably won't hear that on NBC...uhm, does GE ring a bell.



henbmwhenbmw - 2/14/2008 3:04:58 PM
-1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Wow. I thought this was a CAR website


w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 1:55:41 PMView My AgentSpace
-2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
GLOBAL WARMING THEORY = Just that, a Theory

During the Middle Ages the Earth experienced a sharp rise in temperatures, these lasted a few centuries and then receeded. The planet goes through temprature cycles and we may just be going through one of those now


reply to this comment
1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 2/13/2008 3:46:32 PM
-1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Any basic research on the medieval global warming period blows holes in the theory that we are just currently in the midst of the regular ups and downs of the earth's temperature. What we are going through now with golbal warming is unprecedented, rapid, and potentially deadly.

The rise in temperature during the middle ages was isolated mainly to Europe, was short-lived, and was not nearly as extreme as that which we are currently facing.

Any media, corporation, scientist or govt oficial still using the medieval warming as a counterpoint to global warming is outright lying.



w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 4:55:14 PMView My AgentSpace
0 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
1970Toyomarc

Again, you say that Medieval warming was isolated to Europe but how do we know as a fact? The knowledge, equipment, or technology did not exist then to make a clear corralation to what is happening today. Since there was no industry, powerplants, cars, or fumes going into the atmosphere we can safely assume it wasnt caused by man.

Although IT MAY be true that man may be accelerating this process or causing it, We still have plenty of research and discoveries ahead of us to prove Global Warming. Heck, scientists cant even explain the existence of the hole in the ozone layer at the poles or even why it expands and contracts regularly.

Dont be so quick to jump on the Global Warming Bandwagon with everyone else.



1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 2/13/2008 6:06:32 PM
-1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Re: Medieval warming, scientists studying ice samples, coral, trees, and other data can get rough estimates of climate going back hundreds, even thousands of years in different parts of the world. The data is there, look it up, instead of just repeating what Rush, Glenn, and Bill spew out. And again, these do not have to be hard facts or universal truths in order to be good science. They have to be accepted by the scientific community as solid data supporting an accepted hypothesis.

Where do you come up woith scientists being unable to explain the ozone layer hole? In fact there is general consensus on what has caused the depletion of the ozone layer. Since mitigating efforts over the past 2 decades have been enacted the ozone layer has rebounded somewhat. You holding out on some info there? Please share.



w209w114w209w114 - 2/14/2008 9:45:47 AMView My AgentSpace
-2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Lets hope Obama has an asnwer to these questions for once when he stops promising and criticizing the candidates who offer solutions. Im still waiting to hear his.

Barack Obama = Stupid people, Anyone can promise change, just look at Chavez and other dictators. They promised change and the ignorant went along with it.



CzelinskiCzelinski - 2/13/2008 1:57:13 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Well, we contribute to it as the human race. However, global warming naturally occurs anyway, regardless of how much we try to prevent it.

reply to this comment
_43LE_43LE - 2/13/2008 10:08:41 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Yes, but we know that the globe is warming up at a faster rate than the Earth has ever experienced and there is hard evidence that it is directly related to humans.


ILikeLamboILikeLambo - 2/14/2008 3:45:37 AM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
did anyone think that it might be because there are more people and cows in the world than ever before so we are all producing more CO2 because we are all burping and farting more


w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 1:59:34 PMView My AgentSpace
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
He's not the first to say this.

reply to this comment
OblivObliv - 2/13/2008 2:18:19 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Yep, it is a crock.

This earth will be in existance far longer then we will. Whatever we do to it will be long remedied after us being gone for a couple hundred thousand years.


reply to this comment
1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 2/13/2008 3:49:13 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
The earth sure will fix itself, but the other point of your post is correct as well, it will be after we are gone from the face of it. So why not just speed up our exit, lke we've been doing the past 100 years.


ShredmoShredmo - 2/13/2008 2:20:05 PM
0 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I don't think the environmental problem we have will be directly related to temperature, I think it will be the more unstable weather patterns. Call it what you want. I think it is best stated as pollution. IMO, the world’s weather is less stable as of late. Not to be in agreement or disagreement of the theory of global warming but...


reply to this comment
utahnkidutahnkid - 2/13/2008 4:11:43 PM
-2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
And how do you know that? Were you around a million years ago? a thousand years ago? I mean not to come down on the race as a whole but we really aren't as powerful as everyone would like to think we are.. It's fun to think we have the tools and computers out there that can accurately determine all this stuff but don't forget they can't even give an accurate 10 day forecast for your city.. Let alone determine the cause and effect of weather for the entire planet as a whole. The ONLY thing the know "for sure" is that the weather has never been the same on Earth.. It's ALWAYS been changing.


ShredmoShredmo - 2/13/2008 4:38:30 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Several times I mention that it is my opinion. None of it is fact, except for yesterday's weather. I base that off of the recorded stats, not by watching weather channel re-runs :)

To condense what I said previously, pollution is bad. Not sure about global warming being fact or fiction. If man is having an impact on the climate, extreme weather (cold and hot in the same year) will be (in my opinion) a bigger issue than the temp rising on average of a degree or so over ~20 years.



hybridfarcehybridfarce - 2/13/2008 2:21:17 PM
+5 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
The response on this article here contrasts very differently from the autobloggreen forum (http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/02/13/gms-bob-lutz-global-warming-is-a-total-crock-of-sh-t/) (I’ll save you from reading it – they all bash Lutz).

Since it seems to takes so long for the environment/climate to respond to man’s global effects, if at all (measured in tens of years), if indeed we are the cause of global warming, we are probably already screwed. Ten or twenty years of driving Prii (plural of Prius?) aren’t going to fix things in time. Maybe this is what Lutz meant to say? But he is correct in that we need to get away from foreign oil. Is it worth drilling for oil in the U.S.’ backyard (Gulf of Mexico, Alaskan coast) to get away from Chavez and OPEC?


reply to this comment
BigShow50BigShow50 - 2/13/2008 2:25:30 PM
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Interesting...1st off he should con't to talk about why GM lost billions of dollars($11 Billion previous years and now $39 Billion in 2007 and how it resulted to GM becoming part of a very poor equation developed by GM execs including "No Clue" Lutz. While he con't to lay people off, ruin other people's lives, shut factories down, and trying to revive the whole GM line by desperately re-badging vehicles from Europe(so what's new?) And now the Malibu is the greatest thing since slice bread(it's a rebage Saturn Aura & Opel, just wearing a different tie)...supposedly and now trying to say their Chev Volt is another great deal since slice bread. Where is the track record to even prove this and say other auto brand's level of innovation is useless? What he does not realize is that the "Crock of Shit" is what comes out of his mouth(it's what his shareholders "WANT TO HEAR!!!") and who he really is at the end of day...is Bobby Boy "No Clue" Lutz is the greatest pile of shit you can ever meet in the auto industry. Don't get me wrong...he is a smart guy, but he is just as stupid too. Good luck GM...you will need every bit of it, for the next 50 years!!!

reply to this comment
mini22mini22 - 2/13/2008 2:47:54 PM
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Most conservative republican's do believe that global warming is bullshit.If your a car guy where most of your profit used to come in the way of big SUV's and Trucks your pissed off at the higher fuel economy standards and pissed off at the Democrats for talking about greenhouse gases in the first place. Lets face it concerns about environment are everything that big business republicans are against. We don't have a pollution problems,the seas will not rise and cover our low lying areas due to the melting of the polar icepacks,we don't have to worry about foreign oil because will just bomb the shit out of those Iranians and take it for ourselves. Then we can go back to building those big SUV's and Trucks again and GM will start making the profit they feel they deserve.There is no problem at all.Mccain will win and with our permanent military presence in the gulf region oil will be plentiful. Those Europeans better get off this environmental crap too and start speaking english.

reply to this comment
1995e341995e34 - 2/13/2008 3:02:15 PM
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
"I’m motivated more by the desire to replace imported oil than by the CO2."

as long as he's on board to increase efficiency, i don't care about his motives.


reply to this comment
1995e341995e34 - 2/13/2008 3:03:27 PM
+5 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
there are great benefits for lefties and righties to both want more efficient cars.


w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 3:24:49 PMView My AgentSpace
+5 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Couldnt agree more


SteedPubSteedPub - 2/13/2008 3:28:02 PM
-4 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Glad to see Lutz has the balls to speak it.

"Man made global warming" is nothing other than a power grab by lefty loons.


reply to this comment
1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 2/13/2008 4:08:26 PM
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
So many posters on this site are so backward in their thinking. Between the ranting about Chavez, the hatred of hybrids, the distrust of the EPA and other mpg and emissions standards, it is so obvious that anything in this world that keeps you from your god-given right to do whatever you please, with no regard to anything or anyone else is a communist, godless, devil-inspired, world government plot.

Global Warming is real. Humans and our factories and cars are partly to blame. Our destruction of forests is also to blame.

Global Warming is a theory, but the FACT is, global warming WILL cause you to sacrifice, and to Auto fans the most visible sacrifice will be in the form of the automobile. This sacrifice scares you. I understand. So the easiest way to deny the fact of what is happening (your sacrifice) is just to debunk the theory, no matter how scientifically sound it is. To deny the theory means you can continue to use up Earth's vital resources, spew as much pollution into the air and water as you like, and pay no mind to the consequences. Because, hey, what we do has no effect on anything or anyone else, right?


reply to this comment
w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 5:23:24 PMView My AgentSpace
+5 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Nobody is scared here. I cant wait until performance electric cars become priced like average cars. It will save me a ton of $$$ and rid America of its dependence on oil. Who could ask for more? I think this is the direction in which we are heading slowly but surely.


henbmwhenbmw - 2/14/2008 3:25:10 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Well said 1970.

Earth! Fire! Wind! Water! Heart! GOOOO PLANET!



w209w114w209w114 - 2/13/2008 5:04:28 PMView My AgentSpace
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Spare us with the religious bullshit. The bible says a lot of things, many of which are wrong! but people fail to bring those us. The sun isnt scorching the Earth anytime soon.

The Earth has always had a share of good people, and bad people. I dont believe people are becoming more wicked. I believe people are becoming more capable of thinking for themselves by asking questions and challenging archaic religious propaganda

Sitting around repenting isnt going to do ANYTHING for us. Jesus provides those who dont want to take action with canned theories which dont let us ask questions. Suit yourself.


reply to this comment
SteedPubSteedPub - 2/13/2008 5:29:57 PM
-1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
MidEngine, your religious sentiment is appreciated. But if you believe in the Lord and the Bible as it is written, you know the prognistications cannot be changed.

If indeed as you suggest The Book Of Revelation backs up the notions of man made global warming, then it proves the fact that all the hybrids, electric vehicles, stamping out of capitalist freedoms, and elimination of greenhouse gases isn't going to stop it from happening.

It is so easy for the arrogant Illuminati that foist this Global Warming bologna upon us to overlook or ignore for their own agenda, the fact that we once had an Ice Age that has over millions of years as the scientists say, been dissolving.

The glaciers that once existed have long melted before man ever started romping around in Chevy Tahoes. The earth has been warming since the beginning of time, even before recorded time.


reply to this comment
1970toyotamarc1970toyotamarc - 2/13/2008 6:10:41 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
OMG. This is why I ask myself everyday what I am doing on this site. I need to go back to just reading the great articles (thank you 001 and even 009) and stay away from the forums. Wow.

reply to this comment
w209w114w209w114 - 2/14/2008 9:48:48 AMView My AgentSpace
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
^Apparently they Blocked out and removed MidEngine^

My comment was directed to his prophetic comment on "repenting to save ourselves"


reply to this comment
Agent009Agent009 - 2/14/2008 4:03:17 PMView My AgentSpace
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
You are correct midengine is history.. too many warnings and not enough respect to others.


henbmwhenbmw - 2/14/2008 3:26:12 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Yeah, just like how we landed on the moon.

reply to this comment
craigzcraigz - 2/13/2008 5:39:41 PM
0 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
He is correct. Global warming might be happening but, cars are not the major cause. The world would be getting warmer even if we were not here.

reply to this comment
PlanBPlanB - 2/13/2008 5:43:45 PM
+7 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Who the hell cares Lutz thinks, its just one old mans opinion who designs cars. And I believe global warming exists but its not our place to try and figure out who's lying or telling the truth, these days everybody has their own agenda whether they know it or not. Just try to do your part to make this world a better place whatever that may be... especially if you're responsible for children. The End.

reply to this comment
supermotosupermoto - 2/13/2008 5:48:05 PM
-1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Spot on.

Global warming is a genius plan to force every person on earth to replace all their possessions with more expensive stuff. Does anyone really think that a scientist paid a multi-million dollar grant by Toyota to write a paper on global warming is going to be unbiased? Gimme a break.


reply to this comment
g2okg2ok - 2/13/2008 6:23:41 PM
-1 Boost