Chuck Finley69
Active member
I cannot make you, a known pedophile, look good.
Oh no my pickup is dead………another reason the EV is not the future as appearing in…………MOTOR TREND….
- Thread starter SteinwayTransitCorp
- Start date
SteinwayTransitCorp
Well-known member
No what he is saying is real issues not maybe issues. People are starving to death….real issue. Poverty is a real issue. Yet we are turning our back in the west a technology that can solve this, why the leader of China has this part right. We are not going to stop using existing fuels until all our people are lifted out of poverty. Same thing in South American and India. So we are doing what? Besides cutting our own throats and going bankrupt.
spARTacus
Well-known member
Who is he or who are you to suggest to be able to judge/sentence what issues are more real vs less real, what ones are real vs maybe?
Last edited:
SteinwayTransitCorp
Well-known member
You really don‘t read the response fully, so I have nothing to say.
spARTacus
Well-known member
I read the response fully, and then went straight to a main point of contention. A real world approach. Address main points of contention adequately, and then one gets a framework from which to help address anything else.
SteinwayTransitCorp
Well-known member
No you did not and that’s fine, your opinion is yours and mine is mine period.
spARTacus
Well-known member
Well that's the crux of most of the disagreements and banter here in CB, and also often why things escalate, because of opinion being posted and then alternate opinions, and then opinions about opinions.
spARTacus
Well-known member
He may be saying real issues vs maybe issues, but what he's really saying is "what he considers to be real world issues" vs "what he considers to not be real world issues", his opinion of what ones are more important than others, which almost certainly isn't going to be aligned with everyone else's opinion.
Yes, that's important.
Yes, that is important.
Not sure why you say the west is turning it's back on poverty/starvation, and also not sure why you think not moving away from fossil fuels is going to solve poverty/starvarion any faster than how it hasn't solved those in the opportunity it had during the last half century or longer.
China is probably being just like the US, wanting to retain as much control as they can over others globally and also retaining control over their own citizens from revolting.
That could be a course of action option. It might not be good for the planet and therefore also not good for China and the US in the long term, if by doing such we basically sentence the planet to death. Pull everyone out of poverty now (if that could magically be achieved from fossil fuels even though such hasn't been achieved thus far to date), and then later have them all perish anyway.
Everyone has tough short vs longer term benefits/decisions to make, and the developing world is more inclined to worry about the shorter term ones. We've already discussed this, that globally moving away from fossil fuels also requires solutions for the situations the developing world is in.
From what I can tell, we're trying to move away from fossil fuels, because that course of action option is the best decision overall.
Last edited:
spARTacus
Well-known member
Like I said, most of it is about opinions one way or the other, and regardless of if some think I conveniently only read and respond to some parts of posts.
SteinwayTransitCorp
Well-known member
By breaking up the sentences you change the meaning thought process. You do this to get the outcome you want to see.
spARTacus
Well-known member
No I don't. I can only read and interpret what is posted. By breaking up the sentences, I am logically addressing what was written, item by item.
SteinwayTransitCorp
Well-known member
Again when you break up a paragraph you change the though process…sorry just a fact.
spARTacus
Well-known member
I can only interpret what was intended from what I read, from what is written. I can't see inside someone's head for what they otherwise meant/intended. If you think I changed the intention of something based on how I responded, let me know specifically what.
SteinwayTransitCorp
Well-known member
It’s just a fact sorry.
spARTacus
Well-known member
Sorry, it's an opinion.
You might not like how sometimes posts are responded to and such may expose other ways in which meaning could also be conveyed, and that's fine also, thats why there are often follow on posts. Feel free to elaborate further in follow on posts, additional view points, in order to convey what you wish.
SteinwayTransitCorp
Well-known member
No I am not going to argue and longer just like Yammer/Kraft by stripping things out of a paragraph and then the total conversation you change the meaning ……..ok now back to our regularly scheduled programming
spARTacus
Well-known member
If you think by me responding to things individually in what you post, if you think that is me being malicious to try to twist your words or meaning/intention around, then let me know what aspects and I'm sure through follow on posts/clarifications we'd be able to set things straight.
SteinwayTransitCorp
Well-known member
Sorry, no comment needed or required
SteinwayTransitCorp
Well-known member
LMAO