A question to people who think the EV is the future

[Ph1llip]

I've said this before, but maybe I have to say it again once and for all for it to sink in:
- Maybe you two should stop relying on YouTube videos for your edumacation needs.

I think you mistakenly quoted STCo instead of me.

There is nothing wrong with educating yourself via YouTube. Or any other source for that matter. I learn a lot of things from lot of sources and am not too proud if the source isn't highbrow. But predictably, how typical of the woke elites to look down on anything they don't consider sophisticated enough to learn from.

Proverbs 12:15 (NASB)
The way of a fool is right in his own eyes,
But a person who listens to advice is wise.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

I've said this before, but maybe I have to say it again once and for all for it to sink in:
- Maybe you two should stop relying on YouTube videos for your edumacation needs.

You really need to get out more, the facts we post are everywhere. You choose to look the other way……. Remember the light at the end of the tunnel is probably an oncoming freight train. Just remember you must step out of the way.

 

[spARTacus]

You really need to get out more, the facts we post are everywhere. You choose to look the other way……. Remember the light at the end of the tunnel is probably an oncoming freight train. Just remember you must step out of the way.

Maybe it's the light of an EV?

Remember, just because you and/or someone else feel strongly opinionated about something (anything, pick any topic you want, doesn't have to be about EVs) and just because there are internet posts that reflect the same position, doesn't mean the stated position or opinion is a fact. Lots of what you post are not facts, but instead are just opinions, with also equal opposing opinions. When/if you ever acknowledge such from the perspective of the existence of multiple viewpoints, you'll probably end-up more at peace with yourself, with others and the world around you. I came to peace with such long ago in terms of getting out more, part of when I was growing up.

 

[spARTacus]

I think you mistakenly quoted STCo instead of me...

Perhaps, I may have erroneous remembered both of you two as seemingly relying on that particular YouTube poster for authorative knowledge.

 

[spARTacus]

...There is nothing wrong with educating yourself via YouTube. Or any other source for that matter. I learn a lot of things from lot of sources and am not too proud if the source isn't highbrow....

Agree that it's wise to sample many sources of information. Also important to seek out and sample sources that present positions against and contrary to what one believes. Otherwise, one's beliefs and awareness have high probability of ending up limited and faulty.

 

[spARTacus]

...But predictably, how typical of the woke elites to look down on anything they don't consider sophisticated enough to learn from...

Perhaps, you'd probably have to test that theory with someone who claims such.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

Maybe it's the light of an EV?

Remember, just because you and/or someone else feel strongly opinionated about something (anything, pick any topic you want, doesn't have to be about EVs) and just because there are internet posts that reflect the same position, doesn't mean the stated position or opinion is a fact. Lots of what you post are not facts, but instead are just opinions, with also equal opposing opinions. When/if you ever acknowledge such from the perspective of the existence of multiple viewpoints, you'll probably end-up more at peace with yourself, with others and the world around you. I came to peace with such long ago in terms of getting out more, part of when I was growing up.

You really have no idea, we state facts from federal/state/local fire and safety departments. You choose to discount or ignore the truth.

 

[spARTacus]

You really have no idea, we state facts from federal/state/local fire and safety departments. You choose to discount or ignore the truth.

More sounding technique?

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

More sounding technique?

Just truth

 

[spARTacus]

Just truth

So it's truth that because salt water interacts with severe negative consequences for batteries/EVs, because of that EVs are fantasy? Or, since we have another report of an EV scooter fire burning down a building, because of that EVs scooters are bad for NYC, shouldn't be used and need to ASAP be abandoned?

As we've previously discussed, there's lots still to mature with the transition away from fossil fuels, lots that will still get better for making sure there is correct safety regulations and practices in place/used and reputable products sold/used, lots that still needs to mature and stabilize for EVs in comparison relatively to what ICEs enjoyed for basically decades and decades to mature and evolve.

Maybe if you state more clearly between what you think you're trying to post as opinion vs what you think you're trying to post as fact, maybe that will help for more credible postings and discussions.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

So it's truth that because salt water interacts with severe negative consequences for batteries/EVs, because of that EVs are fantasy? Or, since we have another report of an EV scooter fire burning down a building, because of that EVs scooters are bad for NYC, shouldn't be used and need to ASAP be abandoned?

As we've previously discussed, there's lots still to mature with the transition away from fossil fuels, lots that will still get better for making sure there is correct safety regulations and practices in place/used and reputable products sold/used, lots that still needs to mature and stabilize for EVs in comparison relatively to what ICEs enjoyed for basically decades and decades to mature and evolve.

Maybe if you state more clearly between what you think you're trying to post as opinion vs what you think you're trying to post as fact, maybe that will help for more credible postings and discussions.

When you were pushing on people a vehicle which may have to be used in an emergency to get out of a situation that can catch fire months or weeks later cannot be refueled quickly enough for a safe evacuation. This is OK to you.?

You really need to stop reading the government propaganda and actually start to look around you and see the real world effects of electric vehicles and why they do not work.

 

[spARTacus]

When you were pushing on people a vehicle which may have to be used in an emergency to get out of a situation that can catch fire months or weeks later cannot be refueled quickly enough for a safe evacuation. This is OK to you.?

You really need to stop reading the government propaganda and actually start to look around you and see the real world effects of electric vehicles and why they do not work.

Like I posted quite a while ago in here, your criteria are not necessarily the same criteria that others have. Lots may have the same criteria as you. Lots have lesser criteria. Lots are fine with what you view as current limitations and pitfalls of EVs. For many, those aren't limitations or pitfalls for them.

You really need to stop assuming you are the only right and others can't possibly have a different view that could for them be right. You really need to look around you and see that the real world is not about always trying to convince people to your view and opinions, but rather the real world is also about sometimes trying to understand the different views and opinions that others have. Go ask your kids and grandchildren about that. Time to stop viewing things as only black and white.

 

[spARTacus]

When you were pushing on people a vehicle which may have to be used in an emergency to get out of a situation that can catch fire months or weeks later cannot be refueled quickly enough for a safe evacuation. This is OK to you.?...

...and by the way (which I am sure you know, or at least you should know if you have been paying any attention to what's been posted), I have not pushed any of that.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

...and by the way (which I am sure you know, or at least you should know if you have been paying any attention to what's been posted), I have not pushed any of that.

You always come up with the…….it’s political……….or some propaganda……..facts don’t like politicians do

 

[spARTacus]

You always come up with the…….it’s political……….or some propaganda……..facts don’t like politicians do

You accused me of pushing EVs to people in contradiction to their needs, for when/if they had need criteria situations as you had outlined. I pointed out that I have never done such, and that you know (or should know) that I have never done such.

Your response to me pointing that out to you, your response to me indicating that you falsely accused me, your response to that is that I always indicate that things are political and/or that propaganda is always involved? Where's the logic in that response?

By the way, your response does seem to demonstrate that you are probably politically or propaganda motivated in your postings. Why else would you not actually want to (or be able to) actually logically respond?

 

[spARTacus]

You always come up with the…….it’s political……….or some propaganda……..facts don’t like politicians do

By the way, yes, if you only look for negative view points about something or only for evidence that supports and agrees with your opinion and viewpoints, then that's only ever what you'll find. Then pushing that as truth and fact, and as the only truth and fact, well yes that would basically be propaganda and politically motivated behaviour. Facts don't have like or dislike for politicians. It's politicians that have more or less like of facts depending on the degree of alignment the facts have with what they want to push, and it's politicians and their supporters that will spin things in certain ways depending on what they are trying to articulate or propagate.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

By the way, yes, if you only look for negative view points about something or only for evidence that supports and agrees with your opinion and viewpoints, then that's only ever what you'll find. Then pushing that as truth and fact, and as the only truth and fact, well yes that would basically be propaganda and politically motivated behaviour. Facts don't have like or dislike for politicians. It's politicians that have more or less like of facts depending on the degree of alignment the facts have with what they want to push, and it's politicians and their supporters that will spin things in certain ways depending on what they are trying to articulate or propagate.

Sorry, I do not look for only negative things I look for factual things, not feel good night I hope not let’s make sure let’s make the world a better place. Facts plain, and simple. The EV is not going to help the environment. It is not going to be the savior of mankind. It’s a dud that the government has decided with a few of his closest cronies to rip people off with.

 

[spARTacus]

...The EV is not going to help the environment...

That is very clearly an opinion, not a fact. Good job trying to state it in demonstration of saying that you only state facts, not opinions. By posting that statement claimed as a fact, it serves as another example of what I have been saying, about how lots of what you post as fact is actually opinion. The correct associated fact would be something like:
- "Stein believes that EVs are not going to help the environment". Now there's a fact.

...(EVs are) not going to be the savior of mankind...

That is an abstract and compound statement. Lots of things may further contribute to the downfall of mankind, or improve (or worsen) how mankind is going to have to exist in the future on this planet (or even if we will be able to exist at all). Although lots is still being debated, the global scientific consensus is clear that mankind and it's burning of fossil fuels (and current ICE role in such) is contributing to global warming, and therefore a reduction of dependency on fossil fuels and current ICE is going to help make things betters. Although your statement was abstract and compound, I'll suggest it's clearly not a fact and therefore another example of you posting an opinion claimed as a fact. The correct associated fact would be something like:
- "Stein believes that EVs are not going to help mankind".

It’s a dud that the government has decided with a few of his closest cronies to rip people off with.

Who is "his" in this case? Based on your other posts, I am assuming you mean Biden, the current US president? So you think the move towards EV is some idea Biden has personally come up with, some sort of conspiracy to rip off the US taxpayer? Do you have no idea about how the knowledge of global warming and transition away from fossil fuels has grown over many years and decades, across many different parts of the globe, by many different groups of people and experts, irrelevant of governments that have come and gone and changed over that same time period? So you think maybe Biden and some of his closest friends (or some similar group maybe not exactly those individuals at all points in time) have been personally orchestrating all of this, world-wide, for many years, some sort of conspiracy? Clearly you can agree that at best you are speculating, not stating facts but again posting opinion (I won't comment on at worse what it is you are doing with your statements)? BTW, such an opinion/approach has been used before and is used often in political circles on all sides, claims that some certain topic/movement of the day is being used for personal benefit of the current politicians of the day. Politicians are leaders, they try to move things in certain directions based on where they believe things need to go and/or based on where the population base/voters are saying things need to go. The current population base/voters in the US (and the world) have spoken on the subject about global warming, fossil fuels, EVs, etc. Maybe it will change again at next elections. Yes, there is always some element of truth that politicians or their supporters/lobbyist might make money or personal gain from their leadership decisions with where they take their nations. That has happened in the past and will always also happen in the future, and not just on the subject of EVs. To white wash the EV topic as only about a personal gain situation, well that's more speculating and conspiracy theory stuff again, not fact, at best opinion. And, it's politics to tie it back to being about the current colour of US politics. I am not sure if I ever again need to point out that you are politically motivated in your opinions and postings here in CB, after what you just re-stated, because of how you stated it. A cleaner posting could have simply been:
- "Stein believes that the movement to EVs is not a good idea (for various different reasons/opinions) and therefore Stein will only vote for politicians who are against EVs and politicians who will turn back the transition away from fossil fuels. Who else is with Stein? Come join Stein and his beliefs, to help influence next election time" (also BTW why I have on several occasions said you should just simply create a political thread, right vs left, US Dems vs US Reps, Biden vs Trump, etc.)

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

That is very clearly an opinion, not a fact. Good job trying to state it in demonstration of saying that you only state facts, not opinions. By posting that statement claimed as a fact, it serves as another example of what I have been saying, about how lots of what you post as fact is actually opinion. The correct associated fact would be something like:
- "Stein believes that EVs are not going to help the environment". Now there's a fact.


That is an abstract and compound statement. Lots of things may further contribute to the downfall of mankind, or improve (or worsen) how mankind is going to have to exist in the future on this planet (or even if we will be able to exist at all). Although lots is still being debated, the global scientific consensus is clear that mankind and it's burning of fossil fuels (and current ICE role in such) is contributing to global warming, and therefore a reduction of dependency on fossil fuels and current ICE is going to help make things betters. Although your statement was abstract and compound, I'll suggest it's clearly not a fact and therefore another example of you posting an opinion claimed as a fact. The correct associated fact would be something like:
- "Stein believes that EVs are not going to help mankind".


Who is "his" in this case? Based on your other posts, I am assuming you mean Biden, the current US president? So you think the move towards EV is some idea Biden has personally come up with, some sort of conspiracy to rip off the US taxpayer? Do you have no idea about how the knowledge of global warming and transition away from fossil fuels has grown over many years and decades, across many different parts of the globe, by many different groups of people and experts, irrelevant of governments that have come and gone and changed over that same time period? So you think maybe Biden and some of his closest friends (or some similar group maybe not exactly those individuals at all points in time) have been personally orchestrating all of this, world-wide, for many years, some sort of conspiracy? Clearly you can agree that at best you are speculating, not stating facts but again posting opinion (I won't comment on at worse what it is you are doing with your statements)? BTW, such an opinion/approach has been used before and is used often in political circles on all sides, claims that some certain topic/movement of the day is being used for personal benefit of the current politicians of the day. Politicians are leaders, they try to move things in certain directions based on where they believe things need to go and/or based on where the population base/voters are saying things need to go. The current population base/voters in the US (and the world) have spoken on the subject about global warming, fossil fuels, EVs, etc. Maybe it will change again at next elections. Yes, there is always some element of truth that politicians or their supporters/lobbyist might make money or personal gain from their leadership decisions with where they take their nations. That has happened in the past and will always also happen in the future, and not just on the subject of EVs. To white wash the EV topic as only about a personal gain situation, well that's more speculating and conspiracy theory stuff again, not fact, at best opinion. And, it's politics to tie it back to being about the current colour of US politics. I am not sure if I ever again need to point out that you are politically motivated in your opinions and postings here in CB, after what you just re-stated, because of how you stated it. A cleaner posting could have simply been:
- "Stein believes that the movement to EVs is not a good idea (for various different reasons/opinions) and therefore Stein will only vote for politicians who are against EVs and politicians who will turn back the transition away from fossil fuels. Who else is with Stein? Come join Stein and his beliefs, to help influence next election time" (also BTW why I have on several occasions said you should just simply create a political thread, right vs left, US Dems vs US Reps, Biden vs Trump, etc.)

Your long winded response is almost ridiculous beyond the pale. This is a very simple concept when the government picks a winner or loser in business it always lands up with the loser. There have been multiple cases throughout history were this is the case. To push EV’s onto the public is ridiculous they don’t want it it’s not going to do the job that it’s intended to do, yet, this is the savior of mankind, according to the federal government and the government in Canada. The problem lies with the fact that too many people have their hands in the till, and too many companies are now used to slobbering at the government trough. So I will ask you this question again, since no one ever answers it, what is going to happen when the government runs out of money and can no, longer fund a loser?

 

[spARTacus]

Your long winded response is almost ridiculous beyond the pale....

Your post touched on many variables so I assumed you wanted to hear about all of them. If you actually have no desire to listen to or read what others are saying/posting in response to what you are posting, then you are no better than Yamma was, in terms of only wanting to spread what you think. If that's the case, then why are you here on CB as essentially a public forum? You should follow the advice I earlier gave to Yamma, to create your own forum where only you are the Boss and Admin. Then, you'd have the soapbox you are looking for and you'd be in full control of it.