Edited by that ain't the way to have fun, son at 10/06/09 1:07 PM
that ain't the way to have fun, son was starred
that ain't the way to have fun, son was unstarred
@brake booster by Lucas: Lately I've been a fan of Lion Stout 8% from Sri Lanka (I like Guinness, but too watery for me). Plus, the sheer wastefulness of drinking a beer brewed/bottled/canned on the COMPLETE OTHER SIDE of the world releases a lot of CO2 during transportation.
@Ash78, 4 days left: Umm...Isn't Sri Lanka on the other side too? Actually it seems to be even far from the US than Ireland is. Geography is not my strong point so correct me if I am wrong.
OK, I just read the complaint. The CO2 emissions claim wasn't the problem at all. It's the fact that they used "its" instead of "it's" and "theres" instead of "there's".
So you are telling me that Chevy, Dodge, and Ford trucks are not each respectively the most longest lasting, dependable trucks on the road with more repeat buyers than Chevy, Dodge, or Ford?
They are using the 'green' status of on particular unit as a halo model to make you believe all MB's is green. Sort of like Dodge uses the Viper to make you think the avenger is not what it is.
50/50 on it. If the green ratings are that important, you'll do a quick online search before moving ahead anyway.
"caveat emptor"
(BTY, I wonder how the Advertising Standards Authority would look upon an add from Southfield Chrysler/Jeep?)
I've seen many diet plan, diet pill, and male enhancement product commercials that blur the line a lot worse than this does. How many intestinal cleansing and "truth" about home remedy infomercials will it take before Big Brother forces these charlatans out of business?
This ad is not entirely misleading. Most folks are inclined to look at the fine print to see exactly to what they refer. I am suspicious by nature, so I tend to look for qualifications.
@Timtoolman, finally gainfully employed: Keep in mind that in much of Europe, the subtitled word "Advertisement" runs during all commercial breaks on TV. I neither agree nor disagree with this level of consumer protection. I mostly just weep.
An ugly car that is painted in an ugly brown color, marketed to tree huggers with trust funds, who obviously don't care about the environment, but would like to fit in with their hippy friends.
In terms of truth in advertising, this is borderline.
Also, this whole CO2 business is just stupid. CO2 is produced by everything living- even trees (see: photorespiration), and regulating it on cars is not negating any of the other CO2 that is produced from anywhere else. Focus on the fuel efficiency and the useless CO2 numbers will likely go down as the engines get more efficient. Look at how they're choking diesel engines with the new regulations; the diesels have actually lost some fuel efficiency with the restrictions. That said, I don't like smog, but increasing efficiency will decrease the pollutants because less fuel will be burned. It's just common sense and doesn't require a chemistry degree to figure out- unlike those CO2 numbers.
@Z71: I'm confused. Don't trees kinda need CO2 to survive? By creating more CO2, I'm feeding more trees! I'm convinced that environmentalists hate nature.
@Z71: At least the focus on CO2 (and not smog) has allowed Europe to have lot of diesels...unlike the here in the US. But taxing people based on their car's CO2 emissions AND heavily on their fuel consumption--that sucks.
@AmishJohn: If I read the article on photorespiration correctly, then if the trees take in too much sugar, then they will breathe in oxygen and breathe out CO2. I think it happens fairly commonly (but I'm not a botanist, so don't hold it against me if I'm wrong).
@Ash78, 4 days left: If the "cap and trade" bill passes, then we'll all be screwed into taxes on CO2 emissions; Also, I live in NY so I already know that high gas taxes really suck.
@Ash78, 4 days left:
The focus on CO2 is recent. The popularity of diesels is much older. Besides, x% reduction of CO2 emission = x% reduction of fuel consumption, assuming you only consider 1 type of fuel.
@duurtlang: Sorry I wasn't clear...I meant to differentiate the European focus on CO2 emissions, while the US focused more on smog (nitrogen oxide) emissions. We're all converging, but this discrepancy is what allowed diesels to flourish in Europe, while not even being available here in the US.
@Z71: Yes there's a CO2 cycle, but we're unbalancing it by burning the carbon that's been sequestered in fossil fuel and to a lesser extent cutting down the forests that participate in photosynthesis. Those are the only explanations for the huge rise in atmospheric CO2 in the industrial age to a level that hasn't been matched in over 500,000 years.
Greater Brittany scares me more than the US lately.
Sure, it is (thankfully) still rare for an obese British gentleman to paint himself from head to toe in the colour of his favorite sports team, then appear on national tv in his underpants, as 100's of 1000's of Americans do every Sunday and Monday night (and the occasional Thursday). But Brittan, for some reason, has decided that its citizenry is incredibly stupid, and unfailingly criminal. As such, more and more of British life is being regulated, watched, taxed, or all of the above.
More frightening for me is that my former colony didn't rebel. Instead we politely asked for our independence. So as to not offend our former masters, we kept the queen on our money, the GG in Rideau Hall, and a very close tie between our legislation and that of the U of K. It is only a matter of time before Canada starts down this slippery police-state slope.
@Feds: On the other side of the fence and in regard to moronic sports fans everywhere, it's still rare for American sports fans to beat the opposing team's fans to death. I'm just sayin' you gotta look at both sides.
@Feds: I'm no expert, but it seems to me that the British person's desire for privacy is exceeded only by their suspicion of others. Hence the current regulatory slide. Also hence the excellent murder mysteries. (Just how DO those nice old folks think up all those ways to commit murders?)
I'd argue that the net effect of this ad was good for the environment - it resulted in jobs for ASA folks who would otherwise simply be wasting oxygen.
11/09/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
My argument for sitting on the sofa being good for the planet is unassailable.
Someone throw me a Guinness...from Ireland. I want the good stuff.
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
I'm glad to hear someone say they want a beer with more body than Guinness, because I get eye rolls when I mention it.
Lion Stout...I'll keep an eye out.
I wish we could get more of the world's stouts here. I might have to go on a local hunt....
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
So you are telling me that Chevy, Dodge, and Ford trucks are not each respectively the most longest lasting, dependable trucks on the road with more repeat buyers than Chevy, Dodge, or Ford?
I need to see your references...
10/06/09
50/50 on it. If the green ratings are that important, you'll do a quick online search before moving ahead anyway.
"caveat emptor"
(BTY, I wonder how the Advertising Standards Authority would look upon an add from Southfield Chrysler/Jeep?)
10/06/09
This ad is not entirely misleading. Most folks are inclined to look at the fine print to see exactly to what they refer. I am suspicious by nature, so I tend to look for qualifications.
10/06/09
10/06/09
For some reason I feel like Devil's advocate today.
10/06/09
Agreed... I'm starting to embrace streaming video.
10/06/09
An ugly car that is painted in an ugly brown color, marketed to tree huggers with trust funds, who obviously don't care about the environment, but would like to fit in with their hippy friends.
10/06/09
Also, this whole CO2 business is just stupid. CO2 is produced by everything living- even trees (see: photorespiration), and regulating it on cars is not negating any of the other CO2 that is produced from anywhere else. Focus on the fuel efficiency and the useless CO2 numbers will likely go down as the engines get more efficient. Look at how they're choking diesel engines with the new regulations; the diesels have actually lost some fuel efficiency with the restrictions. That said, I don't like smog, but increasing efficiency will decrease the pollutants because less fuel will be burned. It's just common sense and doesn't require a chemistry degree to figure out- unlike those CO2 numbers.
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
The focus on CO2 is recent. The popularity of diesels is much older. Besides, x% reduction of CO2 emission = x% reduction of fuel consumption, assuming you only consider 1 type of fuel.
10/06/09
10/06/09
@Z71: Yes there's a CO2 cycle, but we're unbalancing it by burning the carbon that's been sequestered in fossil fuel and to a lesser extent cutting down the forests that participate in photosynthesis. Those are the only explanations for the huge rise in atmospheric CO2 in the industrial age to a level that hasn't been matched in over 500,000 years.
See also Climate myths: Higher CO2 levels will boost plant growth an...
Also, another CO2 cycle is it getting dissolved in the ocean; increased atmospheric CO2 means a more acid ocean.
Educate yourself, [en.wikipedia.org]
10/06/09
Sure, it is (thankfully) still rare for an obese British gentleman to paint himself from head to toe in the colour of his favorite sports team, then appear on national tv in his underpants, as 100's of 1000's of Americans do every Sunday and Monday night (and the occasional Thursday). But Brittan, for some reason, has decided that its citizenry is incredibly stupid, and unfailingly criminal. As such, more and more of British life is being regulated, watched, taxed, or all of the above.
More frightening for me is that my former colony didn't rebel. Instead we politely asked for our independence. So as to not offend our former masters, we kept the queen on our money, the GG in Rideau Hall, and a very close tie between our legislation and that of the U of K. It is only a matter of time before Canada starts down this slippery police-state slope.
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09
@Alfisted: Exactly. You got Don... we got Craig Sager. My eyes!
10/06/09
10/06/09
10/06/09