Climate Change -- conspiracy theory or is it time we all drive a Prius?

Quote: kenarman

The researchers should publish all their data not cherry pick it to their biases and not ignore the data that doesn't support their position. Peer review should be by random people not just their friends and those that agree with them. If your paper can't stand up to the pressure then it probably wasn't good science to start with. Universities where much of the papers come from should go back to allowing contrary positions. Those with contrary positions should face the same support and opposition as those that are pushing the currently accepted view.

So, you want more regulation. Same thing I wish conservatives embraced across the board, in business, and everything else. Instead of pretending it’s only good when it doesn't interfere with their own business interests.

But if you’re really talking about an honor system, it will end up with the same results as you’re complaining about.

Quote: rxwine

So, you want more regulation. Same thing I wish conservatives embraced across the board, in business, and everything else. Instead of pretending it’s only good when it doesn't interfere with their own business interests.

But if you’re really talking about an honor system, it will end up with the same results as you’re complaining about.

I want science to go back to the scientific method. Make your case and be prepared to prove and defend it. That is how science advances. Now we are stuck with 'truths' that can't be challenged. If you challenge the status quo you are shunned and/or booted out of the scientific community.

of course these matters that certain scientists go ape about would be cheerfully defended except for the politics of it

flat earth people are cheerfully debunked... climate science dogma, however, challenging that gets you compared to holocaust deniers ... some influential people have wanted prosecutions using the RICO law

Quote: odiousgambit

of course these matters that certain scientists go ape about would be cheerfully defended except for the politics of it

flat earth people are cheerfully debunked... climate science dogma, however, challenging that gets you compared to holocaust deniers ... some influential people have wanted prosecutions using the RICO law

Yes, I'm only sorry we don't have refreshing gas showers for you climate deniers to bathe in after arriving by train at the camps.

Do you really think geologists should let all the flat earthers into their club and give equal time? Why flat earthers are just scientists with non-mainstream views. Oh boy.

(I say geologists, as I'm not sure where they belong)

Quote: rxwine

Yes, I'm only sorry we don't have refreshing gas showers for you climate deniers to bathe in after arriving by train at the camps.

reminds me of this level of joke, "Blacks voted for Trump in SC better than expected ... they like him more now since he got a mug shot" [Trump himself told this joke]

so, good joke, but one that will offend some people

Looks like the EV news from Norway is a little depressing for those banking on EVs solving problems

Quote:

Using Norway as a model for CO2 reduction would be a mistake. Far more than any other country in the world, Norway benefits from its vast hydrological potential which generates nearly 92% of all electricity carbon-free.

The remark is an "even so" as EVs are not accomplishing what they want in Norway either

https://blog.gorozen.com/blog/the-norwegian-illusion

the Norway report is getting quoted a lot

One of the oldest battery technologies may be returning to the scene in a much more efficient form. Said efficiency of these zinc batteries without heavy electrodes is 92 percent, over previously 50 percent, minus a lot of weight.

Quote: SOOPOO

What % of EV charging will be done at home or work when your car will just be parked? Gotta be over 95%.

Even if that is the case today if we have mass adoption it will be nowhere near. The thing with this statement, which has been made many times by many people, is it assumes everyone has a nice house in a nice subdivision with a garage they can pull right into. Meanwhile at work their employer has a nice private lot they can charge all day in. It is the people making it assuming the masses live like they do.

I'd equate it to the complaint of some people about behavior on internet forums when they first came out---that white people generally assumed everyone they talked to online was white. (I will admit I fit that profile.)

Reality differs. Lots of people live in apartments or houses with on-street parking. They work in places without parking, or use their car in their job. Too many things to really say, but I would put this number at 40% or so, not 95%.

Quote:

There will be specific examples of people who drive hundreds of miles a day frequently that it is an issue for. For the majority of people the majority of the time it won’t be an issue.

The issue, though, is the times you need it. I know people who tow just every now ant then. Do they rent a vehicle to do that? Nope, makes no sense to do that. If "majority of people majority of the time" was a basis for things then people would just get a subcompact hatch and fold the rear seat flat since most car trips are just one or two people in the car carrying nothing more than groceries.



We do not buy cars based on that.