From the article: “How many good-looking women did you see at Greenham?”

Ummm… how many people named Jeremy Clarkson have anything intelligent to say? Mr Clarkson’s “what me worry” dismissal of the reality of the fuel crisis facing the US is mind boggling and characteristic of the same sort of head in the sand oil soaked idiots who got us into this mess in the first place. What a misogynistic loser! BTW, Jeremy, a barrel of oil now costs about $70+ not $35 and guess what? All those folks who predicted this oil crisis were…correct.

An oil crisis is what happened in America in the 1970’s, not right now. If you take a drive today, you don’t see people lined up for blocks, waiting for the gas station to get a shipment of petroleum. Also, I read somebody’s comment that trillions of barrels of oil can be extracted from right here in the US, through oil shale. I confirmed it on Wikipedia, which studies show is just as good a source as the Encyclopaedia Britannica. That doesn’t mean I condone guzzling gas. It’s still good to conserve, but we are not going to run out of oil in this century or the next. Besides, we will have, by that time, developed cars that run on biowaste and outaccelerate Bugattis. So I’m not worried, just as Mr. Clarkson isn’t.

Mr. Clarkson is very funny on TV, and very imbecilic when writing editorials (ok, ok, so I have read one or two decent ones, but for the most part…). He drives a Ford GT, I mean, that thing uses more gas than a Ferrari 430! Of course he is in denial…he doesn’t understand that its not only the eventual running out of fossil fuels that is causing a problem, but also that the environment is suffering because we are using all those fossil fuels. This is something not understood by other people who post on this car blog (see the gas pricing thread for further proof).

Jon.

“He drives a Ford GT, I mean, that thing uses more gas than a Ferrari 430!”

According to http://www.fueleconomy.gov the FordGT gets more MPG than the 430:

F430: MPG (combined) 13mpg ($3449 annual in gas)
FordGT: MPG (combined) 16mpg ($2803 annual in gas)

I dont know why they exaggerate the fuel economy of the FordGT on Top Gear so much. I mean its funny but not true, they shoulda been ragging on James’ F430 when they did that supercar race to Paris last season.

WRONG

Ford GT

Fuel Type Premium
MPG (city) 13
MPG (highway) 21
MPG (combined) 16
Fuel Economics
Cost to Drive 25 Miles $4.67
Fuel to Drive 25 Miles 1.56 gal
Cost of a Fill-up $47.09
Miles on a Tank 252 miles
Tank Size 17.5 gal
Annual Fuel Cost $2803

Ferrari 430

Fuel Economy
Fuel Type Premium
MPG (city) 11
MPG (highway) 16
MPG (combined) 13
Fuel Economics
Cost to Drive 25 Miles $5.75
Fuel to Drive 25 Miles 1.92 gal
Annual Fuel Cost $3449

All depends how you drive the car, but at idle, and in the city, the GT is going to get worse gas mileage, that’s what you get for using a massive supercharger (unlike a massive turbo, which does the same thing, but at high speeds). And I’m not basing this on the show; this is coming from someone I know in Miami that has both (F430 coupe, not the spyder), and its based on his observations. Anyways, regardless of Clarkson single car, the bigger, worldwide problem due to the use of fossil fuels is real and must be dealt with.

Jon.

“I read somebody’s comment that trillions of barrels of oil can be extracted from right here in the US, through oil shale. I confirmed it on Wikipedia…”

While you are at Wikipedia, maybe you should read the articles on global warming and global dimming.

What worries me is not running out of oil, but what kind of world we will live in as we consume all of it.

I find Clarkson and Top Gear entertaining. However, if I were to choose between climate scientists and Clarkson as “card carrying lunatics,” Clarkson wins the lunatic award by a mile.

first of all, RTFA. as usual, clarkson writes brilliantly ironic rubbish. his attitude is so grossly presumptuous that it’s funny again. just savour his last paragraph, and you’ll see that indeed he cares about oil preservation:

“In fact, you can buy whatever car you want. Not an Audi Q7, though. I drove one in Norway recently and it seemed to be rubbish. And a rubbish car, I’m afraid, is a waste of petrol.”

nicola

Freshies, great post.

Regarding the Q7, as a car it is miles ahead of what Clarkson has: a Volvo XC90 (bore), and it’s a much better car and cheaper than its closest rival: the BMW X5.

Jon.

Doom and Gloom. Typical resonses. Why not just kill yourselves now and get if over with. Jesus Christ!

^^^ No **** ^^^ Hey J i m, just kill yourself and get it over it with!

Clarkson is god. Don’t mess with his opinions. Let his opinions rule over you.

And the Q7 competes with the Mercedes-Benz GL and the LR3. They’re 3 row’ers.

It doesn’t compete with the GL, since the GL is in a much higher price bracket. Perhaps you mean the ML? Anyways, Audi’s main competition is always BMW.

Jon.

It doesn’t compete with the GL, since the GL is in a much higher price bracket. Perhaps you mean the ML? Anyways, Audi’s main competition is always BMW.

Jon.

Q7 starts at $50k. GL starts at $55K. They’re 3-row’ers. Both midsize, despite MB’s claim…

People who call environmentalists ‘lunatic radicals’ are so severely uninformed, it’s not even funny. And because they can’t see the effect plainly before their eyes, its like global warming doesn’t exist. Reminds me of people who sleep with other people and then find out that person has AIDS, and their best excuse is “she / he didn’t look like they had AIDS�. WTF kind of logic is that?

Jon.

Wow! A great blog!

Digitalzombie, i don’t think a marsh would have stopped a force 5 hurricane, or absorbed enough water to prevent the floods that were upwards of 15 feet deep. I do agree that wildlife is vital for the ecosystems and ultimately us as everything is connected, but dreaming that Captain Planet magically saves us from natural disasters is pure lunacy.

Also, ecologists would tell you that maintaining wet areas for decades, even centuries is impossible as the natural cycle of things is to fill in the areas of water to eventually become forests. Then the forests get destroyed (by things like Katrina) and return to areas like bogs, swamps, ponds, lakes, etc.

The best solution for our harmful interactions on the environment is to make sure to make as little impact as possible as nature has its own cycles and our actions may accelerate or decelerate them to detrimental levels. To bio-engineer plants that grow quickly would actually harm the environment as it would displace the slower growing plants and the animals that eat those slower growing plants. Kudzu, which grows about 2 inches a day has choked out most of the other plants in its growing areas. Those victim plants had no defense as Kudzu is native to Japan, not the southern USA.