Picked up a fare (in my London taxi) to Buckhurst Hill in Essex on
Thursday night. Lady about 30 years old.

On the way she goes on about how we are polluting the planet and must do
something to stop greenhouse gases as we (the human race) are
responsible for Global Warming. I agree that we pollute the planet, that
the planet is getting warmer, but state that there is no absolute
certainty that GW is man made and that it *could* just be part of a
natural process.At this she goes on about how it *is* caused by us and
that everyone *must* do something or we will all suffer due to GW.

Then we get near her home. There is a fairly steep hill with lots of
speed humps in it to get to her turning. Then she says that she drives
along this road nearly every day. I ask her why she does this as it's
not too far to walk to the nearby station.

Her reply? "I walk to the station when I go to work but I use the car
when I go to the gym"

You could have blown me down with a feather! I asked why she couldn't
walk or cycle to the gym and her reply was "It's too dangerous to do
that around here" From the way she said that I inferred that she meant
there was a likelihood of being attached by muggers. This was possibly
more imaginary than real. However, this was her justification for using
a car to go to the gym - a non essential journey if ever there was one.

Seems that many people pay lip service to the idea of being less
polluting just as long as it doesn't interfere with their lifestyle !

For the record I'm quite happy to try to reduce my pollution by not
being an 'aggressive' driver, not accelerating too hard, and looking
ahead so that I don't have to brake too hard. It not only makes good
sense from a pollution point of view, it also makes economic sense as I
use less fuel and get greater mileage from my brake pads. My wife is
good at recycling most things from our family waste. Our personal
'carbon footprint' is getting less, but I believe that there is
currently too much emphasis on this and not enough on other aspects of
pollution, which may cause us more damage than any (natural) warming may
do.

I wait for the usual rant from Duhg but There must be some of you who
can put forward intelligent opinions.

--
Mike Hughes
A Taxi driver licensed for London and Brighton
at home in Tarring, West Sussex, England

"Mike Hughes" wrote in message
...
Picked up a fare (in my London taxi) to Buckhurst Hill in Essex on
Thursday night. Lady about 30 years old.

On the way she goes on about how we are polluting the planet and must do
something to stop greenhouse gases as we (the human race) are responsible
for Global Warming. I agree that we pollute the planet, that the planet is
getting warmer, but state that there is no absolute certainty that GW is
man made and that it *could* just be part of a natural process.At this she
goes on about how it *is* caused by us and that everyone *must* do
something or we will all suffer due to GW.

Then we get near her home. There is a fairly steep hill with lots of speed
humps in it to get to her turning. Then she says that she drives along
this road nearly every day. I ask her why she does this as it's not too
far to walk to the nearby station.

Her reply? "I walk to the station when I go to work but I use the car when
I go to the gym"

You could have blown me down with a feather! I asked why she couldn't walk
or cycle to the gym and her reply was "It's too dangerous to do that
around here" From the way she said that I inferred that she meant there
was a likelihood of being attached by muggers. This was possibly more
imaginary than real. However, this was her justification for using a car
to go to the gym - a non essential journey if ever there was one.

Seems that many people pay lip service to the idea of being less polluting
just as long as it doesn't interfere with their lifestyle !

For the record I'm quite happy to try to reduce my pollution by not being
an 'aggressive' driver, not accelerating too hard, and looking ahead so
that I don't have to brake too hard. It not only makes good sense from a
pollution point of view, it also makes economic sense as I use less fuel
and get greater mileage from my brake pads. My wife is good at recycling
most things from our family waste. Our personal 'carbon footprint' is
getting less, but I believe that there is currently too much emphasis on
this and not enough on other aspects of pollution, which may cause us more
damage than any (natural) warming may do.

I wait for the usual rant from Duhg but There must be some of you who can
put forward intelligent opinions.

You make good points, especially about the hypocritical passenger.

On 16 Mar, 08:52, Mike Hughes wrote:

...I believe that there is currently too much emphasis on this and not enough on other aspects of
pollution, which may cause us more damage than any (natural) warming may do.

Hear hear! I consider GW to be what Hitchcock would call a 'MacGuffin'
- a diversionary tactic dressed up as the most important detail (not
that I'm one for conspiracy theories, but...) I do think that if there
wasn't so much GW propaganda about, more people would be more
concerned about the state of the country's balance sheet, especially
pensions, education and healthcare.

(I'm a cause-of-climate change sceptic, BTW. Clearly it's happening,
but what's the actual cause? (Nature, in my humble opinion) There's
far more real concerns to keep us occupied, but as is human nature we
tend to focus, or are made to focus, on the ones we can do least
about).

Anyway, to bring it back on to topic, I'm now going to Manchester city
centre. I'm going to drive to Cornbrook metrolink station, park there
and use the tram to get into the city - contributing to a decrease in
city centre congestions and exhaust emissions and enrich the local
economy with the financial support of the public transport system. I
just hope my car doesn't get ****ing vandalised in the car park again.

wrote:
On 16 Mar, 08:52, Mike Hughes wrote:

...I believe that there is currently too much emphasis on this and
not enough on other aspects of pollution, which may cause us more
damage than any (natural) warming may do.

Hear hear! I consider GW to be what Hitchcock would call a 'MacGuffin'
- a diversionary tactic dressed up as the most important detail (not
that I'm one for conspiracy theories, but...) I do think that if there
wasn't so much GW propaganda about, more people would be more
concerned about the state of the country's balance sheet, especially
pensions, education and healthcare.

(I'm a cause-of-climate change sceptic, BTW. Clearly it's happening,
but what's the actual cause? (Nature, in my humble opinion) There's
far more real concerns to keep us occupied, but as is human nature we
tend to focus, or are made to focus, on the ones we can do least
about).

Anyway, to bring it back on to topic, I'm now going to Manchester city
centre. I'm going to drive to Cornbrook metrolink station, park there
and use the tram to get into the city - contributing to a decrease in
city centre congestions and exhaust emissions and enrich the local
economy with the financial support of the public transport system. I
just hope my car doesn't get ****ing vandalised in the car park again.

Try driving something more pikey?

On 16 Mar, 10:09, "Brimstone" wrote:
.. I
just hope my car doesn't get ****ing vandalised in the car park again.

Try driving something more pikey?

Seems to make little difference, pikey cars are usually easier for
kids to joyride, less sophisticated security.

On Mar 16, 8:52 am, Mike Hughes wrote:
more imaginary than real. However, this was her justification for using
a car to go to the gym - a non essential journey if ever there was one.

I train at a gym (which I walk to) and it does make me laugh the
number of people who
drive there to spend 20 minutes on a running machine then drive home
again. I often
wonder if its ever occured to them that if they ran to the gym then
ran back home
again immediately they could get their exercise, save on gym
membership and
save on petrol all in one go. Theres nowt as queer as folk...

B2003

On Mar 16, 10:01 am, wrote:
concerned about the state of the country's balance sheet, especially
pensions, education and healthcare.

If global warming (whatever the cause) really kicks in there'll be a
lot more
important things to worry about than the above - like famine in europe
and
mass migration north from africa and the med region for example.

but what's the actual cause? (Nature, in my humble opinion) There's
far more real concerns to keep us occupied, but as is human nature we

I'm not sure how much more "real" you can get that the state of the
planet
we all live and depend on. Pensions , education etc are all rather
contrived
in comparison I would have thought and will be irrelevant anyway if
theres an
economic collapse brought on by climate change.

B2003

On Mar 16, 12:35 pm, "Boltar" wrote:
On Mar 16, 10:01 am, wrote:

concerned about the state of the country's balance sheet, especially
pensions, education and healthcare.

If global warming (whatever the cause) really kicks in there'll be a
lot more
important things to worry about than the above - like famine in europe
and
mass migration north from africa and the med region for example.

given the range of projections that might not happen; you might see
the warmer weather of 1-2 degrees increasing food yields.


Fod

On Mar 16, 8:52 am, Mike Hughes wrote:

Seems that many people pay lip service to the idea of being less
polluting just as long as it doesn't interfere with their lifestyle !

It's the same as congestion etc - everything would be ok if everyone
ELSE gave up driving. Like the school run - 'I have to take the kids
in an SUV because of all the dangerous cars on the road'.
People are addicted and in denial, that's all I can say.

On Mar 16, 1:18 pm, "Fod" wrote:
On Mar 16, 12:35 pm, "Boltar" wrote:

On Mar 16, 10:01 am, wrote:

concerned about the state of the country's balance sheet, especially
pensions, education and healthcare.

If global warming (whatever the cause) really kicks in there'll be a
lot more
important things to worry about than the above - like famine in europe
and
mass migration north from africa and the med region for example.

given the range of projections that might not happen; you might see
the warmer weather of 1-2 degrees increasing food yields.

If that were the case then shouldn't the med and northern africa be
the bread basket of europe?

B2003