GREEN NEW DEAL = BLIZZARD OF LIES

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

Or maybe lets look at Germany, does this show a country with a viable alternative to ICE?

Yes, yes it does!

EWS you might want to tell that friend of yours before he asks!

https://impakter.com/top-electric-cars-in-germany-a-complete-buyers-guide-for-2023/

The growth in electric car sales: a long trend.

Last October, 67,845 new passenger plug-in electric cars were registered in Germany. It is a 25% increase compared to 2021, bringing the market share up to 32.5%. In November, the sales of full-electric vehicles increased by 44% reaching a total of 57,980 for a 22.3% market share.

December was the best month for car sales with a 55.4% growth. Full electric cars made up 33.2% of sales, while plugin hybrids made up 22.2%. Plugless hybrids accounted for 12.8% of sales, leaving just a third of sales for combustion-only autos (31.8%).

 

In 2022, BMW sold more battery-electric cars worldwide than Audi, Mercedes-Benz, and Porsche combined. Tesla outsold globally the German premium luxury brands combined in terms of electric cars sold. Porsche had the highest percentage of electric cars in its global sales mix but sold fewer BEVs in 2022 than in 2021. This actually shows a trend: in Germany, local car brands tended to have a smaller share of electric cars in their sales volume compared to foreign carmakers.

Brand	All Cars	BEV	% BEV	% 22/21 BEV	% 22/21 All Sales
Audi	1,614,200	118,200	7.3	44.3	-3.9
BMW	2,100,692	172,000	8.2	107.7	-5.1
Mercedes-Benz	2,043,900	117,800	5.7	124.0	-1.0
Porsche	309,900	34,800	11.2	-15.7	2.6
Volkswagen	4,563,300	325,100	7.1	23.6	-6.8
Tesla	1,313,851	1,313,851	100.0	–	40.3

Edited August 11, 2023 by Rob Plant

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

8 hours ago, Rob Plant said:

No you didnt challenge me on anything. I challenged your statement that there was no alternative to ICE which I believe I have resoundingly  proven to be false.

I'll agree with you that large parts of the US there is no alternative to ICE, but thats because you have no infrastructure and are lagging behind the rest of the Western world.

Anyway try researching before you post! Your challenge is accepted and debunked below.

Having surpassed an electric vehicle share of 50 percent in 2020, the wealthy Scandinavian country continued its transition to e-mobility last year. According to the Norwegian Road Federation (OFV), electric cars accounted for 79 percent of new passenger car registrations in 2022, and 87 percent when including plug-in hybrids. To put things in perspective, a look across the pond yields an entirely different picture: in the United States, electric vehicles excluding hybrids accounted for just 2.6 percent of passenger car sales in 2021.

https://www.statista.com/chart/23863/electric-car-share-in-norway/

So back in 2020 the total market share was 50% which will certainly be significantly higher now as 80% of new cars since then have been EV's. If you've ever been to Norway you'll know that an ICE vehicle is a rare sight these days.

 

That is not reflected in gasoline sales where Norway has increased MoM and YoY.

I challenged you to show rolling stock numbers which you ducked. ICE still dominate the fleet in Norway,

And gasoline sales are up in Germany, in France and in Britain! Hooray for British gasoline vehicles.

Edited August 11, 2023 by Ecocharger

[bloodman33 + 22]

Okay oil company shills on this board denying that CO2 is screwing us all.

Oakridge laboratory in the US.  I dare you to watch this from the Royal Institution.  The greatest platform for explaining science to the world.  Learn or display your lies and ignorance if you actually watch this.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MvqY2NcBWI8

 

 

 

[bloodman33 + 22]

That said: Buy VLO, MPC, DINO, STNG, DHT, RIVN SFL, MTDR!!!!!!  Make me rich and give to AOC!

[Ron Wagner + 709]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IWGgcYy1bs

Where are oil prices headed?

Biden is destroying the production of oil and natural gas by the USA. He has not even refilled our petroleum reserves! 

I just got back from a 6,000 mile trip around the American West. We saw a small percentage of Teslas in California and one Porsche EV that my Democrat sister has. The other 14 states we traveled through have virtually no EVs. 

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

3 hours ago, Ron Wagner said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IWGgcYy1bs

Where are oil prices headed?

Biden is destroying the production of oil and natural gas by the USA. He has not even refilled our petroleum reserves! 

I just got back from a 6,000 mile trip around the American West. We saw a small percentage of Teslas in California and one Porsche EV that my Democrat sister has. The other 14 states we traveled through have virtually no EVs. 

We have been fed limitless propaganda by the promoters of Green Revolution that everyone is just dying to purchase an EV...the reality is that EVs are piling up on the sales lots, no one really wants to buy an EV.

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

On 8/11/2023 at 10:36 AM, Rob Plant said:

Or maybe lets look at Germany, does this show a country with a viable alternative to ICE?

Yes, yes it does!

EWS you might want to tell that friend of yours before he asks!

https://impakter.com/top-electric-cars-in-germany-a-complete-buyers-guide-for-2023/

The growth in electric car sales: a long trend.

Last October, 67,845 new passenger plug-in electric cars were registered in Germany. It is a 25% increase compared to 2021, bringing the market share up to 32.5%. In November, the sales of full-electric vehicles increased by 44% reaching a total of 57,980 for a 22.3% market share.

December was the best month for car sales with a 55.4% growth. Full electric cars made up 33.2% of sales, while plugin hybrids made up 22.2%. Plugless hybrids accounted for 12.8% of sales, leaving just a third of sales for combustion-only autos (31.8%).

 

In 2022, BMW sold more battery-electric cars worldwide than Audi, Mercedes-Benz, and Porsche combined. Tesla outsold globally the German premium luxury brands combined in terms of electric cars sold. Porsche had the highest percentage of electric cars in its global sales mix but sold fewer BEVs in 2022 than in 2021. This actually shows a trend: in Germany, local car brands tended to have a smaller share of electric cars in their sales volume compared to foreign carmakers.

Brand	All Cars	BEV	% BEV	% 22/21 BEV	% 22/21 All Sales
Audi	1,614,200	118,200	7.3	44.3	-3.9
BMW	2,100,692	172,000	8.2	107.7	-5.1
Mercedes-Benz	2,043,900	117,800	5.7	124.0	-1.0
Porsche	309,900	34,800	11.2	-15.7	2.6
Volkswagen	4,563,300	325,100	7.1	23.6	-6.8
Tesla	1,313,851	1,313,851	100.0	–	40.3

The trend toward a mindless carbon-free society is running out of gas.

There is now a political backlash against the Green Revolution in Europe as the enormous and crippling costs of going carbon-free begin to bite the average household.

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/greenlash-fuels-fears-europes-environmental-ambitions-2023-08-10/

"...as policymakers seek to translate net-zero targets into measures that extend beyond power generation to areas such as buildings and transport, they face increasing resistance as citizens struggle with a cost of living crisis.

Angst over a law to phase out oil and gas heating brought Germany's ruling coalition close to breaking point, while in the Netherlands, anger at plans to cut nitrogen pollution led to a shock poll win for a new farmers' protest party."

"...officials say it is getting harder to pass green laws, with some EU governments resisting new emissions limits for cars and seeking to weaken pollution controls for livestock farms. A proposal to improve the energy efficiency of buildings faces pushback from countries worried by the cost.

Poland's government, which faces October elections, is even suing Brussels over climate policies.

"Does the EU want to make authoritarian decisions about what kind of vehicles Poles will drive?" its Minister of Climate and Environment Anna Moskwa asked last month."

Edited August 13, 2023 by Ecocharger

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

On 8/11/2023 at 10:22 AM, Ecocharger said:

That is not reflected in gasoline sales where Norway has increased MoM and YoY.

I challenged you to show rolling stock numbers which you ducked. ICE still dominate the fleet in Norway,

And gasoline sales are up in Germany, in France and in Britain! Hooray for British gasoline vehicles.

The stench behind the Green Revolution is becoming transparent...

Norway Is China’s Great Electric Car Proving Ground

More than a dozen Chinese automakers are or will soon be exporting EVs to Europe and the U.S., and most and see the Nordic country as a key test market.

ExplainerWhy Chinese electric car start-ups NIO, Xpeng are making a beeline for Norway

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-15/electric-cars-china-fills-norway-with-evs-ahead-of-global-push

 

 

https://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/3132514/why-chinese-electric-car-start-ups-nio-xpeng-are-making-beeline

Edited August 13, 2023 by Eyes Wide Open

[turbguy + 1,544]

On 8/9/2023 at 2:43 PM, Old-Ruffneck said:

I am not a believer in what you, the goverment, and climate change folks predicting 2050 levels of the seas. In 7 years we could actually go into an several year extreme "cold" snap.......my prediction is as sound as yours. Goverment "stoked" fear to raise the price of goods and services is not a new concept and some such as yourself bought it hook line and sinker. Noah constructed an ark and the world was under water. There is proof and hopefully your a believer. And here we are maybe at a point where it'll totally flood again. I have a feeling your not the kind of person who believes what is written in the "Good Book" aka the "Bible." I am ready, have had a decent life and raised my kids to best of my ability and my grand-children all have faith. My condolences if you're not a "believer" in the scriptures. 

 

I tend to avoid meme's but this one is so applicable.

That said, The Bible is indeed a great read, and worth the effort.

 

Edited August 13, 2023 by turbguy

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

37 minutes ago, turbguy said:

I tend to avoid meme's but this one is so applicable.

That said, The Bible is indeed a great read, and worth the effort.

 

Now now now...has anyone been prosecuted for a meme?. LMAO 

 

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

1 hour ago, turbguy said:

I tend to avoid meme's but this one is so applicable.

That said, The Bible is indeed a great read, and worth the effort.

 

Scientists: REAL Scientists adhere to the Scientific method: So: According to REAL scientists

#0 Rate of glacial collapse is slowing compared to witness accounts and data taken all around the world, so by that metric temperature increases is SLOWING down.. not speeding up

#1 even the temperature data which has been HIGHLY tampered with, its rate of increase is CONSTANT or a small fraction of that claimed by computer modelers, and

#2 ALL glacier data shows CO2 lagging, not leading temperature rise... its almost as if warmer water holds less CO2... yea don't say... even though CO2 into the air is NOT linear from man. 

#3 The computer models cannot predict past weather patterns from DATA WE ALREADY HAVE and therefore anything predicted from them is BOGUS via the SCIENTIFIC method.  This makes ANYONE adhering to these models a RELIGIOUS CULT of man made CO2 climate change as their ideology by the scientific method!!!  Cannot even predict temperatures from PAST data and therefore they are NOT scientific as they violate the SCIENTIFIC METHOD!!!

So, #4, we Evangelicals hope and pray, the corrupt fraudsters BECOME scientists

So, here is hoping and praying YOU start adhere to SCIENCE

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

22 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

#0 Rate of glacial collapse is slowing

#1 its rate of increase is CONSTANT

#3 The computer models cannot predict past weather patterns from DATA WE ALREADY HAVE and therefore anything predicted from them is BOGUS via the SCIENTIFIC method.

#4, we Evangelicals hope and pray

So you admit glacial collapse is happening (just slower).

You admit the planet is warming (just slower)

Weather is not climate.  However, If you want to talk about weather you would have noticed record setting heat waves this year. 

Then you bring up religion in a science discussion.  How has "thoughts and prayers" worked out at reducing school shootings?

Try again, fail again denialist. 

Edited August 13, 2023 by TailingsPond

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

27 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

So you admit glacial collapse is happening (just slower).

You admit the planet is warming (just slower)

Weather is not climate.  However, If you want to talk about weather you would have noticed record setting heat waves this year. 

Then you bring up religion in a science discussion.  How has "thoughts and prayers" worked out at reducing school shootings?

Try again, fail again denialist. 

Cannot even predict temperatures from PAST data and therefore they are NOT scientific as they violate the SCIENTIFIC METHOD!!!

So, #4, we Evangelicals hope and pray, the corrupt fraudsters BECOME scientists

So, here is hoping and praying YOU start adhere to SCIENCE

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

30 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

So you admit glacial collapse is happening (just slower).

You admit the planet is warming (just slower)

Weather is not climate.  However, If you want to talk about weather you would have noticed record setting heat waves this year. 

Then you bring up religion in a science discussion.  How has "thoughts and prayers" worked out at reducing school shootings?

Try again, fail again denialist. 

Odd thought process, a question if I may. Would the environment be static or dynamic in its nature?...asking for a friend of course.

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

18 minutes ago, Eyes Wide Open said:

Odd thought process, a question if I may. Would the environment be static or dynamic in its nature?...asking for a friend of course.

You are attempting to use a logical fallacy in a discussion.  Obviously everything changes, if I said that things were static that would be absurd, and you would try to use that absurdity as an argument that all change is normal, when it is not. 

Every action has a reaction, so to suggest we are not changing the planet by our actions is also absurd.

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

56 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

You are attempting to use a logical fallacy in a discussion.  Obviously everything changes, if I said that things were static that would be absurd, and you would try to use that absurdity as an argument that all change is normal, when it is not. 

Every action has a reaction, so to suggest we are not changing the planet by our actions is also absurd.

I have attempted to prove nothing, only a curious inquiry as to how you arrive at such narrow conclusions. 

I must say a open mind is quite extraordinary, actually a blessing in today's society.

 

Edited August 14, 2023 by Eyes Wide Open

[AlBub + 14]

\

3 hours ago, TailingsPond said:

So you admit glacial collapse is happening (just slower).

You admit the planet is warming (just slower)

Weather is not climate.  However, If you want to talk about weather you would have noticed record setting heat waves this year. 

Then you bring up religion in a science discussion.  How has "thoughts and prayers" worked out at reducing school shootings?

Try again, fail again denialist. 

If you were really so on top of things, perhaps you should mention the undersea volcano blowing up last year and vaporizing incredibly large amounts of water into water vapor that actually is a greenhouse gas.

 

Glacial collapse always happens right along with their growth. It is seasonal, Otherwise we would be calling it an ice age.

 

If we had more prayer and less pushing of violence in an effort to take away our ability to protect ourselves from criminals, we wouldn't have so many murders of any kind.

 

Most of the greenhouse effect of CO2 is making plants green by being a food they desperately need. Kind of like the oxygen that photosynthesis produces to help keep you from turning blue.

[surrept33 + 609]

14 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Scientists: REAL Scientists adhere to the Scientific method: So: According to REAL scientists

There isn't a single "scientific method". Comparing the cultural habits across various sciences might surprise you. However, in contemporary times, reproducibility and variants of the Common Task Framework have become the gold standard. It's noteworthy that this framework is known by various names and terminologies in different fields:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10618600.2017.1384734#s0006

Its mainstream adoption can be observed here: https://stats285.github.io/2018/assets/lectures18/Lecture-01-20180925.pdf

The CTF method significantly improves transparency, lowers barriers to entry, and hastens scientific progress. Furthermore, it counteracts the stagnation and resultant confusion (often referred to as 'perplexity') that previously impeded the advancement of knowledge — a core objective of science. This is most evident in the swift developments of modern AI and the breakthroughs witnessed during the pandemic.

Edited August 14, 2023 by surrept33

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

3 hours ago, surrept33 said:

However, in contemporary times, reproducibility and variants of the Common Task Framework have become the gold standard.

Oh do tell, a gold standard that can held accountable for the destabilization of world order? "Common Task Framework" 

Covid might be a shining example I might say..Let us see how Common Task Framework plays out in that shiny example.

The great tragedy of life is not that people set their sights too high and fail to achieve their goals but that they set their sights too low and do. (Michelangelo)

Edited August 14, 2023 by Eyes Wide Open

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

8 hours ago, surrept33 said:

There isn't a single "scientific method". Comparing the cultural habits across various sciences might surprise you. However, in contemporary times, reproducibility and variants of the Common Task Framework have become the gold standard. It's noteworthy that this framework is known by various names and terminologies in different fields:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10618600.2017.1384734#s0006

Its mainstream adoption can be observed here: https://stats285.github.io/2018/assets/lectures18/Lecture-01-20180925.pdf

The CTF method significantly improves transparency, lowers barriers to entry, and hastens scientific progress. Furthermore, it counteracts the stagnation and resultant confusion (often referred to as 'perplexity') that previously impeded the advancement of knowledge — a core objective of science. This is most evident in the swift developments of modern AI and the breakthroughs witnessed during the pandemic.

The bottom line of science progress never changes...the absolute necessity to reduce barriers to new science concepts which challenge existing paradigms. The need to overcome defensive arrangements which shelter the existing sacred cows of science and preserve privileged positions within the science establishment.

There are career motivations to preserve the existing sacred cows which provide the positions of prestige within the trade. That usually involves attempts to monopolize positions of control and to exclude challenges to sacred cows in the science professions which give scientists their status in society and government. This also involves attempts to control the publishing venues to exclude and restrict challenges to existing sacred cows, and vetting of university and government positions to ensure alignment with the accepted paradigms which govern the science trade.

The requirements of careerism often override the public need for objective science information.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_cow_(idiom)

https://www.theidioms.com/sacred-cow/

Edited August 14, 2023 by Ecocharger

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

6 hours ago, surrept33 said:

There isn't a single "scientific method". Comparing the cultural habits across various sciences might surprise you. However, in contemporary times, reproducibility and variants of the Common Task Framework have become the gold standard. It's noteworthy that this framework is known by various names and terminologies in different fields:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10618600.2017.1384734#s0006

Its mainstream adoption can be observed here: https://stats285.github.io/2018/assets/lectures18/Lecture-01-20180925.pdf

The CTF method significantly improves transparency, lowers barriers to entry, and hastens scientific progress. Furthermore, it counteracts the stagnation and resultant confusion (often referred to as 'perplexity') that previously impeded the advancement of knowledge — a core objective of science. This is most evident in the swift developments of modern AI and the breakthroughs witnessed during the pandemic.

So, No, CTF is not science, rather it is a framework for "refereeing" because of corruption, honorless lying turds in ivory towers of power.  Sorry, no, that is not science, nor a "gold standard".  That is trying to force a moral framework around immoral lying honorless asshats who REFUSE to adhere to the scientific method.  Let me show you how CTF is NOT science...

Lets take you back to Jr. High dear child: And teach you that NO, science has nothing to do with morals or "fremework" trying to force someone to be a moral person with honor.

Scientific Method:

Observe(collect data)  Open to ANYONE who wants it to use( in climate "science" this is not available, you have to BEG for single data points)

Hypothesis

Test:  Without testing you have NO scientific method... How can we test, well with historic data is how...

Analyze: Does the test invalidate the hypothesis?  Not YOUR analysis, but OTHERS analysis where ANYONE(not those currated by you and your buddies) can clearly see EVERY step you did and REPLICATE it.  If your models and tests are not free to the public, this is not a test..... Oh wait, computer model climate boys refuse to publish and have NEVER done so.  The ONLY ones who have done so to my knowledge are the Satellite guys. 

Test some more

Add more data

Test more

CO2 religious nut jobs NEVER test their computer models against past data or let others see their models... at this point they should ALL be thrown out and never be allowed to hold a job in science ever again.  In fact they should be pilloried.  pillory

 

 

[surrept33 + 609]

1 hour ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Oh wait, computer model climate boys refuse to publish and have NEVER done so.  The ONLY ones who have done so to my knowledge are the Satellite guys. 

wat? Here is the Oak Ridge National Labs/DOE's model, which is about as frontier as one can get:

https://github.com/E3SM-Project

It sounds like you are misinformed.

CTF is all about publishing open data, open source, and public grand challenges, not statistical summaries. It's the norm in Computer Science and any Computational Sciences. 

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

2 hours ago, Ecocharger said:

This also involves attempts to control the publishing venues to exclude and restrict challenges to existing sacred cows, and vetting of university and government positions to ensure alignment with the accepted paradigms which govern the science trade.

Climate science spans numerous public and private institutions spread across several nations.

All of the governments, and all of the universities, and all of the private industry, everywhere, are wrong according to you...

So you suggest a conspiracy theory about people controlling the science narrative. The problem with that is conspiracies are secretive, by definition, you can't have global coverage without a lot of people knowing about it.

Who is doing all this vetting, in your imaginary world?

Edited August 14, 2023 by TailingsPond

[Ecocharger + 1,474]

19 minutes ago, TailingsPond said:

Climate science spans numerous public and private institutions spread across several nations.

All of the governments, and all of the universities, and all of the private industry, everywhere, are wrong according to you...

So you suggest a conspiracy theory about people controlling the science narrative. The problem with that is conspiracies are secretive, by definition, you can't have global coverage without a lot of people knowing about it.

Who is doing all this vetting, in your imaginary world?

There is a personal interest in current science leadership in excluding any challenges to the sacred cows of the profession.

The positions of power and influence which allow scientists to monopolize positions of prestige as science advisors to government and to academic institutions require the defense of the sacred cows themselves. That provides the motivation to exclude challenges from published journals and from public discussion. There is also a common interest among participating academics in excluding any mention of dissenting scientific opinion, which leaves those acolytes of the sacred cow such as yourself vulnerable to ignorance and apparently unaware of any dissenting scientific opinion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_cow_(idiom)

https://www.theidioms.com/sacred-cow/

Edited August 14, 2023 by Ecocharger

[TailingsPond + 1,008]

17 minutes ago, Ecocharger said:

 That provides the motivation to exclude challenges from published journals and from public discussion.

You are assuming there are many scientists out there attempting to publish climate change denial.  Consider the possibility that there are few to none attempting to do so.