EnterName

No. I don't have to agree with everything that gets a response from me on here. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, Wxy.

For the record, Lee is wrong, as usual. 😄 I'm surprised he hasn't dog-whistled his little protege in here to bark nonsense at me.

You do realise they'll never let you into the Clique if you disown "Social Justice"? 😋 But more importantly. Full analysis here. Please see the comprehensive analysis I provided a few posts ago. Cute! But there's a guiding hand of big business behind the push for "Climate Change" initiatives. Much like this Coke advert. Nice-sounding, but actually all about transferring money from many people to a few people. What I was trying to do, unsuccessfully it seems, was to get you to criticise what he was saying. I even provided you a crib-sheet of reasonable contradictions to Blair's points, which was characteristically helpful of me. 😇 But no. As far as you're concerned he's 'wrong' and that's all there is to it. Why is he wrong? 'Everyone KNOWS he's wrong! No need to actually get into what he says!'(!)

Just for fun, I asked Grok AI to come up with some CO2 stats. First, I asked "what percentage of the atmosphere is CO2?" Then I asked "What percentage of atmospheric CO2 is produced by human activity? Give two answers, one as percentage of total co2 and one as percentage of atmosphere." Finally I asked "Of that 34.6% of total atmospheric CO2 what percentage does the UK produce? Give three answers. One, answer as a percentage of the human-made CO2 (the 34.6% of atmospheric CO2 you told me about). Two, the UK CO2 production percentage as a percentage of total global CO2, and also the UK CO2 production percentage as a percentage of total atmosphere." Even if the UK achieves net-zero, that will still leave 99.9908% of global CO2 remaining. (Note, that 99.9908% remaining CO2 still only comprises less than 0.05% of the earth's atmospheric gases.) If someone would be so good as to tell me how reducing global CO2 by 0.0092% will improve the climate, please tell me what impact it will have and show the data used to come to that improvement?

Over-engineering is always preferable to just-enough engineering IMO, which is why my Asy 6's are Y speed rated.

Oh yes, the faux-right quickly latched on to the trick of using a "green" agenda to raise taxes.

Hello and welcome. Check out the Scala-specific forum. 😊 https://www.briskoda.net/forums/forum/384-%C5%A1koda-scala/

That's pretty good going! 👍

a) Yeah, but as I have shown previously, the UK could achieve "Net Zero" and it would have zero impact on "climate change". None. I remember when the climate alarmists used to tell us how much sea levels would rise, or how much the temperature would go up, and they had to stop doing that because they kept looking ridiculous. They even had to rebrand "Global Warming" as "Climate Change" because they got that wrong too. There has always been liberal/left-leaning scaremongering which has been leverage to raise taxes and pursue a globalist agenda. In the 1960's, oil was about to run out in the next 10 years or so. In the 1970's, and I remember being taught this at school, another ice age was going to freeze us all in the next 10 years or so. In the 1980's, acid rain was going to kill all plant life in the next 10 years or so. In the 1990s, the Ozone Layer was going to be destroyed in the next 10 years or so, with catastrophic results for humanity. In the 2000's, the glaciers were all going to melt in the next 10 years or so. In the 2010s, sea levels were rising and low-lying land was going to be flooded in the next 10 years or so. In the 2020's, CO2 is going to cause catastrophic climate change, in the next 10 years or so. You don't have to be "far-right" to spot a pattern of behaviour in the scaremongering. b) You'll have to ask Blair exactly what he meant by "short term". What does it usually mean? c) I disagree.

True, you didn't use that phrase precisely, but happily (after having seen many thread disappear as a result of the Clique's shrieking, not that I consider you a part of the Clique, you are very much your own person) I have a copy of what I'm on about. My post covers my side of the CO2 debate, too. (Handy!) I quote your post at the bottom. You talk of "indirect imperialism and oppression", and that absolutely is a Social Justice talking point, as is your suggestion that "wealth redistribution is inevitable". 'I didn't rob that bank Your Honour, I simply redistributed the wealth!' 😉

Ugh! You have your opinion, and other people have their opinions. Asserting you opinion as "facts" doesn't add weight to it. If you disagree with any of the statements Blair made, then please feel free to state your disagreement. Yes, nuanced and detailed debate is always best. If you recall, I am quite happy to engage in detailed posts, and have, many times. I've gone through the CO2 issue with you before in great detail and you swerved off the issue of climate change and onto social justice. I have no idea whether those posts have been memory-holed or not, but you won't gaslight me into pretending that discussion didn't take place. Because this place has now degenerated to the point where nuanced and detailed debates on issues that are not Skoda related have a nasty habit of disappearing, there is little point in wasting time engaging in it. That said, you're always a pleasure to interact with @wyx087 , so I'll induge you. 😊 Blair said people were “being asked to make financial sacrifices and changes in lifestyle when they know that their impact on global emissions is minimal” This is a fact. People do not believe the climate narrative. They know their lifestyle changes will have minimal effect on climate change and that any changes they do make will certainly be far outweighed by the total disregard for climate change shown by "developing" countries. He said “any strategy based on either ‘phasing out’ fossil fuels in the short term or limiting consumption is a strategy doomed to fail”. This is a fact. Our whole civilisation is pretty much built on fossil fuels. Playing eco-warrior and pretending not to use them is all well and good for virtue-signalling with like-minded people "on the right side of history", but the reality is that fossil fuels are going nowhere. He said the current climate debate was “riven with irrationality” and suggested net zero was losing public support. This too is a fact. I have pointed out this irrationality, and it's clear that "net zero" IS losing public support. For you to disagree with Blair, you would have to endorse (more or less) the following contradictions to Blair's statements: a) People are not being asked to make lifestyle changes that will have minimal effect on global emissions. To make life easier for you, I'll even take anecdotal evidence on how they're not being asked to make lifestyle changes or the lifestyle changes they're being asked to make have a measurable impact on global emissions. b) Phasing out fossil fuels in the short term or limiting consumption is likely to succeed. c) The current climate debate is completely rational and the public are solidly behind "net zero". This is something you signally omitted from doing. Now I realise I have a gift for explaining things that some people struggle to understand, but surely you could have understood what Blair was saying and refuted it without needing me to spoon-feed you an answer?

Take a pic of them and post it on here. I too drive like an old duffer, mainly because I AM an old duffer. My brakes are the ones that came with the car and have done over 25K miles. Here's what they looked like just now.

Take your pick! They are his statements, in quotation marks for clarity. Correct them as you see fit.

Sure, here you are, go for it!

You might want to look into The Blair Institute, as it has disproportionate effect on Government policy. Beyond that, instead of dismissing everything he says as "opinion", it might be more convincing to take "facts" he alleges, and correct them. @Ootohere 's post shows some of the funding, but there is also a lot of Government money that gets laundered, for want of a better word, through various charities and NGOs to people like Blair and Gates. (Hence all the bleating about DOGE putting a stop to USAID. That's p'd on a lot of people's chips). Unfortunately for Blair, while previous submissions to various governmental institutions have been welcome, such as during COVID-19 (https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/2160/html/), with his latest proclamation he's stepped on a few toes. So because he's gone off narrative on "Climate Change", suddenly the TBI is a problem and must be looked into. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/apr/30/blairs-net-zero-intervention-invites-scrutiny-of-his-institute-donors

Amen to that! https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/apr/29/phasing-out-fossil-fuels-doomed-to-fail-tony-blair-climate

Funnily enough, I was mooching about under my car yesterday (I want to claim I was rust-proofing the rear subframe, but I'm not convinced it'll be particularly effective), nevertheless, I discovered a gap between the plastic rear valance/splitter/whatever and the car's bodywork, and looked up between the gap to see body-colour sheet metal (some part of the boot I assume) with a lot of surface rust on it. I'll try and get a pic of it, but I was actually quite surprised at how much there was. Beyond that, I'll have to get some sort of waxy spray to inhibit further rusting. Incidentally, if you don't like rust on your car, it's always worth having a look underneath. When my car was on ramps getting the gearbox serviced, I noticed what I felt was a little too much rust on the rear subframe and suspension arm for my liking, and I decided that, when I could be bothered and the weather was nice enough, I'd do something about it. Here are before and after pics of my faffing around "rustproofing" some of the underside of my car yesterday, on what was a perfect day for faffing around on a car.

I imagine the insurer views this question similarly to a wife whose husband has just asked her what she thinks about the idea of an "open marriage". 😄

I'm old enough to remember when the left were assuring us that there would be no ice in the Arctic by <date+just enough time for tax increases to save the planet>. Similarly, sea-levels were going to rise to unmanageable levels by <date+just enough time for tax increases to save the planet>. Now it's CO2 that is going to somehow destroy life on earth by <date+just enough time for tax increases to save the planet>. Are we not worried about ice in the Arctic any more? Are we not worried about sea levels any more? I've already gone through the CO2 figures with you lot, and all that happened was George went suspiciously quiet on the subject, and Wyx changed tack and let slip that the whole thing is about wealth redistribution. The CO2 crisis is a red herring. And that's before you open the can of worms that is political donors making fortunes out of the "Green" industry. (Of all flavours, this isn't just a Labour Party problem.) https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/06/06/green-energy-tycoon-dale-vince-labour-election-donations-5m/

CO2 does NOT cause damage to the climate.

Of all the possible reasons to leave this place, this seems unlikely. It's no different to navigate than it was before, as far as I can see. Yeah, the search function is clueless, but that's nothing new. I have to point out that using a website to make a statement announcing you're not going to use the website is somewhat contradictory, but pointing out contradictions is kinda my thing. 😋 Anyway, good luck with the new site! 👍

Full-on nerdy posts are a feature, not a bug. The EA888 Gen3B is a very economical engine if driven gently.

As usual, @J.R. is correct.

I phoned Ken this morning and learned the oil used at Transmission Technology for the DQ381 is PETRONAS Tutela Multi DCT 700. https://www.opieoils.co.uk/p-226851-petronas-tutela-multi-dct-700-transmission-fluid.aspx Data sheet below: https://cdn.opieoils.co.uk/pdfs/petronas/20201102-Petronas-Tutela-MultiDCT700-TDS.pdf IMO, that "data sheet" has a bit too much self-congratulatory guff about how great the oil is, but there it is. So there you have it. EDIT: God help me, but here are links to the latest updated data & safety sheets, in case anyone is interested. 😄 https://uk.pli-petronas.com/index.php/en-gb/product/10461/pdf