I just used the Dinosaur event as an example, which turned the earth into an ice ball. Even with todays technology not much could be done. Mother nature is much stronger than we are, just look at the natural disasters that happen and we are helplessSo if you can see a dinosaur extinction event coming you would prefer to call it nature and do nothing?
I am not saying we shouldn't go with electrification and BEVs, but the pro Global Warming groups make it sound like it is the fault of the Industrial Revolution which is part of the problem but only a partBasically it's a bank of capacitors or some destroys-itself battery and a coil, like a slinky. Charge the coil then stretch it to exand or contract the area. But the amount you can put in a man-mobile unit would be a field like you get from a MRI, but you really want to vary the field quickly, so it resonates many components quickly.
But that means that the targets can also hardne themselves as well, since it's a human-sized object, and can then have human-sized sinks to absorb or dissipate the energy.
Modern Humans have only been on the planet a hundred thousand, and civilization only ten thousand. Just because the planet has changed climates a million or billion years ago doesn't mean it would be habitable for us. Why wouldn't we want to make sure the planet remains habitable? We can do that. So we should.
-Crissa
...there is no such thing as a "pro Global warming group"...I am not saying we shouldn't go with electrification and BEVs, but the pro Global Warming groups make it sound like it is the fault of the Industrial Revolution which is part of the problem but only a part
It is the fault. We have the receipts. http://www.realclimate.org/index.ph...ncreases-are-due-to-human-activities-updated/I am not saying we shouldn't go with electrification and BEVs, but the pro Global Warming groups make it sound like it is the fault of the Industrial Revolution which is part of the problem but only a part
Regarding the Ferrell/GM Super Bowl ad:I’m a Ferrell fan, but we Norwegians do mostly buy *American* EVs though ... That’s Teslas. The GM brand has little standing here I think. The Bolt was briefly sold as an Opel.
We tried to make an EV of our own called Think in the 90s which Ford bought and closed down I think.
Interesting. So if a teenager is asked, "Why did you leave that shirt on the floor?" and they respond, "because I couldn't be bothered to go the extra step and put in the dresser", we might call them a slob or lazy. We wouldn't call them pro-mess necessarily because it seems weird. But, petroleum extractors and refiners have their own research about the effects of their products (similar apathy to a teenager) and took the extra step deny, deflect, or diminish the effects of petroleum products on the environment....there is no such thing as a "pro Global warming group"...
...I would describe that as a "Pro-Money and fuck everyone else" group...Interesting. So if a teenager is asked, "Why did you leave that shirt on the floor?" and they respond, "because I couldn't be bothered to go the extra step and put in the dresser", we might call them a slob or lazy. We wouldn't call them pro-mess necessarily because it seems weird. But, petroleum extractors and refiners have their own research about the effects of their products (similar apathy to a teenager) and took the extra step deny, deflect, or diminish the effects of petroleum products on the environment.
So, however odd it may sound, I would say yes, any company or group of companies that actively try to avoid the consequences of their global warming actions are, in fact, "pro Global warming group". Is it divisive or even a tad dramatized, sure, but after a couple of decades of feet dragging and FUD, the label fits.
Interesting. So if a teenager is asked, "Why did you leave that shirt on the floor?" and they respond, "because I couldn't be bothered to go the extra step and put in the dresser", we might call them a slob or lazy. We wouldn't call them pro-mess necessarily because it seems weird. But, petroleum extractors and refiners have their own research about the effects of their products (similar apathy to a teenager) and took the extra step deny, deflect, or diminish the effects of petroleum products on the environment.
So, however odd it may sound, I would say yes, any company or group of companies that actively try to avoid the consequences of their global warming actions are, in fact, "pro Global warming group". Is it divisive or even a tad dramatized, sure, but after a couple of decades of feet dragging and FUD, the label fits.
I’m not going to speak for climate activists. But as an example of one that is a counter example of your travel example there is Greta Thunberg. In spite of her propensity for sea sickness, she crosses oceans in sailing vessels.For many, including me, it's hard to take the 'global warming' activist seriously. They never live up to the proposed objectives for everyone else. If they really believed about 'carbon footprints' they wouldn't be jetting around the world to attend all hyped conferences on global warming(Zoom conferences would work just fine). They would also forgo any unnecessary travel, such as vacations(holidays for you Europeans), ski trips, fishing/camping trips, etc., etc.
But that will never happen. You can bet the farm on it.
Yeah and they live in heated / cooled houses and use hot water! Hypocrites!For many, including me, it's hard to take the 'global warming' activist seriously. They never live up to the proposed objectives for everyone else. If they really believed about 'carbon footprints' they wouldn't be jetting around the world to attend all hyped conferences on global warming(Zoom conferences would work just fine). They would also forgo any unnecessary travel, such as vacations(holidays for you Europeans), ski trips, fishing/camping trips, etc., etc.
But that will never happen. You can bet the farm on it.
That's probably why they kept the Standard Range rear-wheel Model Y. Tho in the snow you'd want a front-motor version.1. People’s daily driving is seldom over 75km which is the RAV4s electric range. (And Tesla shouldn’t be afraid of selling models with relatively “low range”.)
She did this one time and one time only. She was being pressured to live up to her beliefs in global warming and carbon footprints. I believe she was caught not long after waiting for a flight.I’m not going to speak for climate activists. But as an example of one that is a counter example of your travel example there is Greta Thunberg. In spite of her propensity for sea sickness, she crosses oceans in sailing vessels.
So she's fake if she does it and hypocritical if she doesn't?It's all for show and nothing else.
It's reminiscent of the 'running out of crude oil' about 20 yrs ago.
EXACTLY! It's not necessary. If you REALLY believe in the 'in 10 yrs we are doomed if we don't act now"Yeah and they live in heated / cooled houses and use hot water! Hypocrites!
No offense taken.So she's fake if she does it and hypocritical if she doesn't?
Gosh, that seems like a winning argument. 9-9
(No offense meant, of course, just pointing out the obvious problem there)
-Crissa
