MotorTrend F150 Lightning Tow Test

shelbyfv wrote:

ksss wrote:
An "Independent opinion" Good luck finding that. If you remember the prior term for "Climate change". It was global cooling due to increase in CO2, until it was determined that term didn't fit the agenda. **** data couldn't support the position. However, we call it climate change, ahh now there is a term that is much more flexible. So now everything from the recent floods in KY, hurricanes, drought in the West and anything else that can possibly be linked to Climate Change is used as fodder to fill the disinformation cannon. Worse thing is some people actual believe it. Only 10K years ago there was severe climate change with zero human influence. The change so abrupt that places that would be considered tropical, became covered in glaciers. If you remember high school earth science class they told you all about it.

Point being, human influence on the planet likely has some impact currently, but not nearly enough to justify the extreme position. It was happening way before human influence stepped in. The data to support the climate change agenda is weak at best and purposely deceptive at its worst. So now finding Independent Information not influenced by political opinion and personal bias seems impossible. The result is where we are now..."**** the torpedoes, full speed ahead" toward solving a problem (costing countless Trillions of dollars and untold pain and suffering) that may not exist.

The point about changing the column is spot on, wish we had a "like" button.

This is what I can't understand. You and I aren't in any position to even have access to this data, much less interpret it. The people who have the data and can understand it are in agreement. Do we listen to them or some TV commentator or politician? Folks should ask themselves who stands to gain from promoting this anti-science sentiment.