Forum Discussion
shelbyfv wrote:
ksss wrote:
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.
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.
Something tells me you're a Dr. Fauci fanboy!shelbyfv wrote:
nickthehunter wrote:
I may be the only one who mentioned it specifically but wouldn't you agree climate change is the elephant in the corner? All the EV hate, but what's the alternative? If someone thinks ICEs are a viable alternative for the future, they either don't believe climate change is real or they just don't care. "Just don't care" is an honest though misanthropic position. "Don't believe" is ignorance, you won't find any informed support for it.
I went through every post on this thread - you’re the only one that mentioned climate change. Seems you’re the one pushing an agenda - and the agenda is “anyone who dares to have different opinion then you is ignorant”.
The problem is that everyone has to be on board....China (among others) with 1.4 billion people is not... Worse is we buy a lot of stuff from them, including so called green items....Which are not produced in a enviromentally friendly way. We seem to be OK with others polluting to supply us with items that we deem green.
Bottom line, fossil fuels will continue to be used, by other countries.
There really isn't much point in ruining our economy, and making those that don't like us much rich in the process.ksss wrote:
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.
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.PButler96 wrote:
shelbyfv wrote:
nickthehunter wrote:
I may be the only one who mentioned it specifically but wouldn't you agree climate change is the elephant in the corner? All the EV hate, but what's the alternative? If someone thinks ICEs are a viable alternative for the future, they either don't believe climate change is real or they just don't care. "Just don't care" is an honest though misanthropic position. "Don't believe" is ignorance, you won't find any informed support for it.
I went through every post on this thread - you’re the only one that mentioned climate change. Seems you’re the one pushing an agenda - and the agenda is “anyone who dares to have different opinion then you is ignorant”.
ROFLMAO.....
Well Greta, then you always have things such as this
Even Greta is realizing this now that she’s not 13 years old anymore. Probably matured a little now. She’s been keeping her yap shut recently.
Unless you meant Greta Van Fleet!- 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. shelbyfv wrote:
^^^Guess I'm missing your point.:h
No, you’re not, but I wouldn’t expect you to admit that you do. It would contradict your flawed stance.
You might go find Yosemite and drag him in here to help you. Your team is getting a little thin and he’s good at spewing idealistic drivel.bikendan wrote:
1320Fastback wrote:
I am not sure if I am more shocked at the dismal range or the $92,700 price of the 1/2 ton truck.
Just saw an ad for a white F150 Lightning for $120k in stock, at the dealership I bought my used F150.
Yup, many of the EVs are just a way for the rich to spend or flaunt their money (with less bang for the buck than a comparable priced petro vehicle). Not unlike the big V12 cars of the early 20th century, except now they get to throw around words like environmentally responsible and think they’re continuing to look like jet setters. (And even Shelby and clan can’t argue this).
Cars like the P90 Plaid, E mustang, Lightning and Hummer are nothing more than a status symbol and in no way represent someone who’s trying to save the environment. They don’t show up at the enviro rallys. LOL
Even the “economical” EVs could be replaced by something more economical for someone trying to save money. Although I do see the benefit in reasonably priced EV commuters.- ^^^ Point taken, I should have said viable alternative for personal transportation. Freighters, trains, planes, long haul trucks etc. may very well be around for our lifetimes. Recreational towing, unless it moves away from ICEs could be a casualty long before those are impacted. We are the low hanging fruit, easy targets. We should be cheering for something that may keep us on the road. FWIW, you are incorrect about just moving CO from one column to another. And again, I'm not pretending to understand all this. I'm not educated enough and maybe not smart enough. I'd be surprised if anyone participating in these discussion was qualified to have an independent opinion. My position is that when it's something beyond my level of competence I'll defer to the experts with credentials. Some folks might choose to listen to TV personalities.
shelbyfv wrote:
Just what is your definition of "viable alternative"? Even if every vehicle on the road was an EV, you would not solve your climate change problem, you'd merely switch your CO percentages from one column to another. Anyone that thinks ice is going to be eliminated in the next 30 years is sadly imbibing in a little to much Kool-Aid.
"If someone thinks ICEs are a viable alternative for the future, they either don't believe climate change is real or they just don't care. "Just don't care" is an honest though misanthropic position. "Don't believe" is ignorance, you won't find any informed support for it."
Hence, why I ask about your definition of "viable alternative". If you think ice is going away, just start explaining to me what happens to things like ocean freighters, diesel locomotives, airplanes, ... and I'll give you list of about 20 others when you explain those 3 to me.
Love to see what happens to that battery powered ocean cargo ship after about 3 days with high seas, no sun, and a big storm bearing down on them.
But not to worry, it's never happening in real life.- ^^^Guess I'm missing your point.:h
