BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
BIMMERPOST Universal Forums Off-Topic Discussions Board Politics/Religion I think Tesla will be gone in ten years

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      04-02-2020, 06:46 PM   #3653
KRS_SN
Captain
614
Rep
710
Posts

Drives: F15,F30, F34, E91.
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Glasgow

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jmg View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRS_SN View Post
studies show 2 parent father + mother families most beneficial for children's success - no funding as unpalatable to the left.
no evidence
scientific community doesn't endorse

studies show single parent family is better than or equal to 2 parent family- plenty of funding
100 peer reviewed articles
scientific community endorses

scientific community stems from universities that are breeding grounds for left wing propoganda. These environments are primed to weed out moderates or right wingers or anyone who questions and that's the place from where evidence comes nowadays.
What about same sex parents? Any studies on those?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KRS_SN View Post
These environments are primed to weed out moderates or right wingers or anyone who questions and that's the place from where evidence comes nowadays.
Funny, religious beliefs are not questioned... just followed based on blind faith.


What about same sex parents? Any studies on those?

WMD territory but i have no problems there and the focus and pressure on them is so huge that they are likely to do a far better job bringing the kids up than hetero parents.

Religion..yes its shite hate it. Hate my own and hate everyone elses too so impartial there
Appreciate 1
jmg8545.50

      04-02-2020, 06:59 PM   #3654
jmg
Major General
jmg's Avatar
United_States
8546
Rep
9,664
Posts

Drives: F80 M3 CS, I01 i3 REx LCI
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Orange County, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRS_SN View Post
i like your commitment to the i3 will wait to see if they release the i3 gran coupe 4 door(hopefully with a small grille (and then may give it a try as long as it doesn't look like a model 3 or x im ok.
I've had 3 and loved them, but the i3 is toast. No more i3 after this generation. The i4 or whatever they call it looks promising. I don't care about the grill. The i3 is ugly... why would a large grill bother me?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KRS_SN View Post
adaptive cruise control??
what wizardry is that. I thought driving was done by humans ? Its got a satnav a steering and 4 wheels and cruise control (that i don't use as i like mashing the pedal)thats fine by me.
Inner city traffic is where many people abandon humanity. I like to "drive" when the roads are open and curvy like in the canyons or on the track. Leave that commuting to the car and let me relax.
__________________
2018 F80 ///M3 CS - Lime Rock Grey Metallic | MPHAS | GC Camber Plates
2019 I01 i3 BEV - Giga World
Previous: F80 M3 | I01 i3 Rex LCI | I01 i3 REx | F30 340i M Sport ZTR | F30 328i Sport | Audi B7 S4 25Quattro #33 of 250 | E21 320i
Appreciate 0
      04-02-2020, 10:35 PM   #3655
ynguldyn
Colonel
3771
Rep
2,686
Posts

Drives: battery powered tv on wheels
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

What's funny is just a couple of days ago I got a pushback in a neighboring thread when I said that religion is anti-science. Apparently all I needed to get good examples was just wait a little.
Appreciate 0
      04-02-2020, 11:40 PM   #3656
jmg
Major General
jmg's Avatar
United_States
8546
Rep
9,664
Posts

Drives: F80 M3 CS, I01 i3 REx LCI
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Orange County, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by ynguldyn View Post
What's funny is just a couple of days ago I got a pushback in a neighboring thread when I said that religion is anti-science. Apparently all I needed to get good examples was just wait a little.
Bad religion (not the band, I love that band) is anti-science. Good religion recognizes that the spiritual functions despite science, often within its bounds. Outside of it's bounds only makes "miracles" only more miraculous.

Edit: left out "n" in "band"
__________________
2018 F80 ///M3 CS - Lime Rock Grey Metallic | MPHAS | GC Camber Plates
2019 I01 i3 BEV - Giga World
Previous: F80 M3 | I01 i3 Rex LCI | I01 i3 REx | F30 340i M Sport ZTR | F30 328i Sport | Audi B7 S4 25Quattro #33 of 250 | E21 320i
Appreciate 0
      04-03-2020, 01:17 AM   #3657
chris719
Brigadier General
3294
Rep
3,673
Posts

Drives: '08 M Roadster
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: NJ

iTrader: (0)

Political arguments aside, Tesla will definitely be here in 10 years. Everyone I know that has one just won't STFU about how much they love them. EVs are the future, but the automotive experience will be increasingly defined by software, which the rest of the auto industry fails miserably at. Their model of outsource everything to suppliers doesn't work if you want to make a truly excellent product.
Appreciate 3
GrussGott9045.50
GabeS1123.50

      04-03-2020, 02:01 AM   #3658
GrussGott
Major General
GrussGott's Avatar
United_States
9046
Rep
7,470
Posts

Drives: 2018 M4 Comp Indv
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newport Beach

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2011 E93 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris719 View Post
Political arguments aside, Tesla will definitely be here in 10 years. Everyone I know that has one just won't STFU about how much they love them. EVs are the future, but the automotive experience will be increasingly defined by software, which the rest of the auto industry fails miserably at. Their model of outsource everything to suppliers doesn't work if you want to make a truly excellent product.
Yup, you nailed it - though i'm still not convinced TSLA can make it through CV19, so we'll need more time on that ... but, if I had to guess, I'd say ICE auto manufacturers are getting set up for a bigass Bear Trap:

* Low oil prices
* Recession / Depression
* Incomplete EV projects
* Loosening air quality regulation

The temptation will be for ICE companies to abandon their BEV projects / launches (thus halting any return on that sunk capital) and to keep doing what they know, ICE, which will mean tooling back up for that and all the switchback SG&A costs. And it'll be mighty tempting because they know ICE and there'll be a temporary growing market for it.

The thing is, if TSLA and Rivian survive, they'll keep getting better, keep innovating, keep improving energy density, keep building super chargers, keep building home solar, and keep chipping away at market share. Now we're back to Clay Christianson classic Innovator's Dilemma stuff: ICE waits too long and ends up too far behind to pivot back to BEV and they're Barnes & Noble having ignored the new tech until it was too late for them catch up.

So I think we're about to see who the smart ICE CEOs are - if I had to bet, I'd say VW stays the BEV course, Ford does, GM doesn't, Benz doesn't, BMW? ... not sure what they'll do.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
I thought the next M4 was going to be a flying car powered by bloomin' onions and a teaspoon of mayonnaise. At least that's what I read on the internet @ BimmerPoop.org.

Last edited by GrussGott; 04-03-2020 at 02:09 AM..
Appreciate 0
      04-03-2020, 09:48 AM   #3659
ynguldyn
Colonel
3771
Rep
2,686
Posts

Drives: battery powered tv on wheels
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
Because even children even know how to count to 4 using their fingers.
Exactly. And even children can see that they can no longer go skiing as often as they used to.
Appreciate 1
chris7193294.00

      04-03-2020, 10:27 AM   #3660
ynguldyn
Colonel
3771
Rep
2,686
Posts

Drives: battery powered tv on wheels
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
Well that is their parent's fault for having them in the first place. Every child adds to globalwarmingclimatechange regardless if they ride to the ski slopes in Tesla Model X.
Considering the worldviews of their parents, these children are actually the planet's last hope.
Appreciate 1
chris7193294.00

      04-03-2020, 11:00 AM   #3661
ynguldyn
Colonel
3771
Rep
2,686
Posts

Drives: battery powered tv on wheels
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
So from a globalwarmingclimatechange perspective, snow skiing is really an unnecessary activity that adds to the greenhouse effect. There is carbon released in all sorts of manner: extra breathing from the exercise, the running of associated equipment such as snow making machines, ski lifts, snow cats for rescues, heaters, lights, etc. So if one were really concerned about man's impact on the climate, shouldn't we ban snow skiing? People travel by jet aircraft to go to ski resorts. Millions of cubic feet of housing is built that goes unused most of the year. It is a completely unnecessary activity.

As are most things that make life enjoyable. Huge yachts owned by some of the biggest proponents of stopping climate change. The people who own those yachts usually fly to their port on private GA aircraft. And those yachts are docked near their owners 2nd or 3rd vacation mansions. Eh, but I'm wrapping around back to the likes of Al Gore. Shit!

Their stinking spoiled kids shouldn't be skiing in the first place. If their kids can't go snow skiing as much, shouldn't they be happy about it? If they are all little Greta Thunderbergs, shouldn't they be protesting snow skiing?
I think I'll just tag stuff like that with the type of logical fallacy employed.

This one is called "appeal to extremes".
Appreciate 0
      04-03-2020, 11:22 AM   #3662
ynguldyn
Colonel
3771
Rep
2,686
Posts

Drives: battery powered tv on wheels
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
No. It's following logic.
Yup, you got it: appeal to extremes is following a logical argument to the point where that argument no longer applies and claiming the argument itself must be false.
Appreciate 0
      04-03-2020, 02:12 PM   #3663
ynguldyn
Colonel
3771
Rep
2,686
Posts

Drives: battery powered tv on wheels
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
The argument does apply. If you truly believe the planet is soon to reach a point where the climate change trajectory hits a point of no return in just over a decade from now, then no effort to curb carbon emissions to change the trajectory is too great.
There are effective ways of dealing with it and then there are stupid ways. Your play here is to offer something obviously stupid and suggest that since we're not going to do this stupid thing, we're hypocrites and no one should do anything at all.

If this were a conversation about islamic terrorism, and I suggested that we should kill all terrorist leaders and try to work on fixing the lives of young men so they don't become jihadis, your response equivalent to the above would be "Are you going to nuke all muslim countries? No? Why not? No effort is too great!"
Appreciate 0
      04-03-2020, 02:27 PM   #3664
GrussGott
Major General
GrussGott's Avatar
United_States
9046
Rep
7,470
Posts

Drives: 2018 M4 Comp Indv
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newport Beach

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2011 E93 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
Surely all things such as this can be calculated via modeling, but it's still in the end, makebelieve.
Here's why you're wrong and why your argument isn't science:

I could use many examples, but i'll choose earth sciences, and I could pick many phenomena, but i'll pick earthquakes or lightening. What they all have in common is, the sum total of all that we know about them is by which I mean to say we're not predictive. We can't say when, where, or how strong an earthquake or lightning strike will be.

This is point where climate deniers quit: "welp i guess we don't get it so it's out of our control. let's quit."

Well, get-shit-done engineers and scientists realize something: while we're not smart enough to be predictive, we CAN forecast with confidence intervals and even control negative human impact by monitoring correlative phenomena. So, for example, with lightning we know about positive streamers and stepped jumpers so we can protect homes, buildings, etc from lightning strikes with grounding. e..g, in silicon valley I've not heard thunder in 10 years, but all the buildings have lightning rods.

And with earthquakes, we know about p-waves and s-waves and we can warn about tsunamis, build to more expensive construction standards, and we have advanced (and expensive) warning systems.

With climate change we know from simple ice core analysis there's a direct correlation between industrialization and global warming, and we know industrialization creates greenhouse gases and we know those trap heat not only here on earth but on other rocky planets like Venus (which has runaway global warming). Further we can test that correlation by looking various periods of Earth's climate, and it checks out.

It's pretty much a duh that get-shit-done engineers are looking for ways to minimize the impact to humans.

Most ironically, those get-shit-done engineers know of an easy way to stop producing greenhouse gases that not only won't have a cost, it'll be one of the greatest wealth creators in the history of human economics: the electric energy revolution. And because of that last part, it's going to happen.

So your arguments aren't science, they're just a robust defense of quitting.
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
I thought the next M4 was going to be a flying car powered by bloomin' onions and a teaspoon of mayonnaise. At least that's what I read on the internet @ BimmerPoop.org.
Appreciate 2
chris7193294.00
jmg8545.50

      04-03-2020, 02:50 PM   #3665
ynguldyn
Colonel
3771
Rep
2,686
Posts

Drives: battery powered tv on wheels
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
All of them have said vote for Trump and humans will no longer inhabit the Earth
You're still doing the same thing - literally no one has said this.
Appreciate 1
jmg8545.50

      04-03-2020, 04:05 PM   #3666
ynguldyn
Colonel
3771
Rep
2,686
Posts

Drives: battery powered tv on wheels
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Boston

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
Bernie, Biden, and Warren are on record as saying if the new green deal is not enacted we have 12 years before there is a point of no return from losing the planet. This comes from the IPCC 2018 report. AOC has even said "we will die". One can suppose that if Trump is reelected, the GND will not be implemented; inferring his reelection with lead to disasterous climate change.
"Disastrous."

Compare the above to "humans will no longer inhabit the Earth"
Quote:
Again, the site?
Nope, not doing your due diligence for you.
Appreciate 1
jmg8545.50

      04-03-2020, 06:54 PM   #3667
530iDriver
Colonel
530iDriver's Avatar
United_States
1385
Rep
2,206
Posts

Drives: 2017 BMW 530i
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Florida

iTrader: (0)

People, step away from your keyboards and get out of your basements. Go for a walk. Take some fresh air. It helps a lot!
__________________
2017 BMW 530i, Sport Line,Alpine White, Canberra Beige Sensatec, 19 inch V-Spoke wheels, basic plain Jane build with no options whatsoever..... "Less is more".

Before: 2011 BMW 328i E90 sedan, Platinum Bronze Metallic, Dakota Brown leather, 17 inch wheels, 6-speed auto, N52 6 Cyl inline N/A goodness....
Appreciate 2
lakefront266.50
mkoesel5720.00

      04-04-2020, 12:52 AM   #3668
GabeS
Crazy!
GabeS's Avatar
1124
Rep
1,368
Posts

Drives: E93 M3/S14 SRT 10 viper swap
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Las Vegas

iTrader: (1)

Time to change the thread name to Tesla isn't going anywhere ...
__________________
First "real" widebody M3 ever thread.http://www.m3post.com/forums/showthr...1#post17461963
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2020, 03:31 PM   #3669
jmg
Major General
jmg's Avatar
United_States
8546
Rep
9,664
Posts

Drives: F80 M3 CS, I01 i3 REx LCI
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Orange County, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmg View Post
Yup, we have real problem solvers working on the frontlines of human progress and these quitters aka the obsolete and their obsolete way of thinking get to tell them how stupid they are. It's tragic and sad, but that's kind of how it's been throughout history. These are the same people who said smoking was healthy, lead isn't harmful, asbestos is fine, Trump will be a good president, and New Coke is better than old coke. History paints fools with the same brush.
Again with the stupid analogies. Effects of lead, asbestos, and smoking all can be measured within tissues of a study group's lifetime. The affects of change greenhouse gas emissions are modeled, then predictions of the results are estimated. The results of the modeling are not validated within a lifetime.

Calling people stupid. LOL
I didn't cal anyone stupid if that's what you are insinuating.

Read my post again, I said the "quitters" are calling everyone else stupid and now your calling my analogies stupid. So really you are just proving my point.

You keep saying lifetime as if that's the longest valid period of observation and measurement. Why must it be validated only within one lifetime? What's up with that? That's not right at all.

Yes yes yes, this is what all the deniers said in the past about smoking, lead, asbestos, etc. it's the same song and dance. History repeats itself and I'd rather be on the side that is open minded and learns from the past rather than being stuck in the past.
__________________
2018 F80 ///M3 CS - Lime Rock Grey Metallic | MPHAS | GC Camber Plates
2019 I01 i3 BEV - Giga World
Previous: F80 M3 | I01 i3 Rex LCI | I01 i3 REx | F30 340i M Sport ZTR | F30 328i Sport | Audi B7 S4 25Quattro #33 of 250 | E21 320i
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2020, 07:59 PM   #3670
GrussGott
Major General
GrussGott's Avatar
United_States
9046
Rep
7,470
Posts

Drives: 2018 M4 Comp Indv
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Newport Beach

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
2011 E93 M3  [0.00]
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmg View Post
Yup, we have real problem solvers working on the frontlines of human progress and these quitters aka the obsolete and their obsolete way of thinking get to tell them how stupid they are. It's tragic and sad, but that's kind of how it's been throughout history. History paints fools with the same brush.
As long as the thread is off-business, let's talk about the stupidest deathcult religious argument: Climate change realists who fly and drive ICE are hypocrites!!

I'm a climate change realist (it's happening, let's insure against negative human impact), but I also drive an M4 Comp ('vert no less) and fly all the fucking time. So why aren't I a hypocrite? Here's why: (SPOILER ALERT! math)

Let's use an analogy to step through and demonstrate the common sense principle first which is obviously elusive for some:

(1.) Since the 1990s I've owned/leased a new expensive german import, sometimes a few at a time (which, granted, was dumb), that I sport drive for fun because burnin dino is awesome
(2.) Since forever, I've saved some of every pay chunk and invested it, trying really hard to only use it for emergencies.

(3.) My goal has always been to be financially independent as soon as I can, some call it FIRE.

So Hypocrite Question: because I choose to pay for an unnecessarily expensive conveyance (and take vacations, etc), am I a hypocritical FIRE saver?
Answer: of course not - as long as I'm making meaningful progress to FIRE that's not overly hobbled by unnecessary spending, it makes me a strategic saver, not a hypocrite because savings,cars,trips=quality-of-life, the desired outcome; as long as I reach the desired outcome within a similar timespan, I've made the right choices.

Said differently, as long as non-savings spending is only marginally changing my time-to-FIRE, then I've achieved quality-of-life, my desired outcome so no hypocrisy there.


Ok, so let's get specific - Elon Musk's Private Jet "buh-buh-buh private jet!" "hypocrite!" My lord, what a pile of steamy religious horseshit!

Let's do the math!

* No idea what kind of jet Elon has, but let's go with a fancy Gulfstream G650 which burns about 2400 lbs of jet fuel / hour and cruises upper bound at about 690 mi/hr
* Musk flies about 150,000 miles/yr according to WaPo, so let's go with that
*Jet fuel emits about 21.1 lbs/gallon of CO2
* Rough estimates, Musk is burning 521,739 lbs of jet fuel / year, so 77,832 gallons, so 1,643,089 lbs of CO2 (check my math!)
* According to this, the average American's carbon footprint is 16 tons, so Elon's private jet travel is about 51 American's carbon load. (note: the global citizen's average carbon footprint is way lower, so it'd be more people)

So, on to the Elon private jet hypocrisy question! First, let's just take 2019, the simple case:
Factoring in the carbon savings of every Tesla on the road (US, Europe, China) and all solar installations including the Australian power plant, do you believe the savings outweighs 51 people's carbon footprint? If so, Elon's hitting his desired outcome, lower global carbon footprint, and not a hypocrite. If not, then he isn't, but please show us all your math!

Or, said differently, Elon electrified 5% of the car market, what's that worth in carbon savings? Likely a hell of a lot more than 51 people's.
Of course there's an even more complex case: past, present, and future
Does the math show over the last decade, and within reasonable assumptions for the next decade, that Elon's global impact is less than an average of 51 people / year? The answer is a highly likely yes.

TLDR: Neither me nor Elon are hypocrites because math. Also because english language: "carbon footprint" = everything, lower is better.

(EDIT - math also works for Al Gore or Greta Thunberg because math is objective: e.g., did Al Gore inspire > 200 people to cut their footprint by 25%? Then he's +)
__________________

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkoesel View Post
I thought the next M4 was going to be a flying car powered by bloomin' onions and a teaspoon of mayonnaise. At least that's what I read on the internet @ BimmerPoop.org.

Last edited by GrussGott; 04-04-2020 at 09:22 PM..
Appreciate 4
chris7193294.00
MFNATIK1497.50
jmg8545.50

      04-05-2020, 07:19 AM   #3671
Murf993
Lieutenant
Murf993's Avatar
1978
Rep
497
Posts

Drives: Porsche 911
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
I posted a few months ago that you were starting to convince me that Tesla wasn't going to fold like a house of cards, because your presentation for information is somewhat impressive. I'll be honest that I really don't care about the topic of Tesla too much, so I've never taken the time to fact check your stuff, and won't in the future; I've got more interesting (to me at least) things to do with my time. But after this post and your comical post about how Elon Musk and his private jet mathematically are not hypocritical because his net carbon footprint is cancelled out by his followers reducing their collective carbon footprints and thus saving the planet, I realized you just post here with BS for some self-enjoyment purpose. Just a few counter points, you left out Elon's Space-X rocket exhaust carbon footprint, and all the carbon used to build his industrial base, so your math leaves out some stuff.

But when you infer I'm some non-get-shit-done obsolete-thinking-quitter, I start to pay attention to your diatribe a bit closer. All I can say really is, FU. Without disclosing what I actually do, since my company has corporate policies regarding social media use, all I can say is for the past decade plus a few more years, I have been directly involved with improving air traffic control via a replacement technology. One of the goals of the effort is to reduce air traffic congestion and correspondingly reduce commercial aircraft fuel consumption, which lowers carbon emissions. So count me in on Elon's save the planet crusade. But in reality, it's just a cool job and I really don't do it to reduce jet aircraft carbon emissions. I really do it to improve flight safety in the NAS; integrating unmanned drone traffic into the NAS is the most interesting challenge now. I deal with science and predictive modeling for real on a daily basis and have to help sell such ideas to our Customer. The work I do improves the safety of my fellow Americans and the flying public in general, now, here, today. So when I discuss modeling, it's not some theoretical crap about the climate 100 years from now, it's about keeping aircraft from hitting each other in real time; you know, the whole gravity thing. But we validate our modelling with real live testing and collect real data. That's the "lifetime" part I speak of. Validation through observation.

So I can assure you, I'm quite the opposite of your ignorant inference.

Your exalted climate do-shit-engineers-and-scientists work on solving a problem they say exists. They say the Earth has warmed over the past few centuries since the industrial revolution. They have measured data to prove it. And yes, I agree they have measured it, but their inference as to what the warming means in the context of the Earth's 4+ billion year existence is where I take issue.

It's a great job to have when you say you have discovered an invisible force and say that force is going to act badly upon humanity. Even better is to say that you've studied the matter intensely, and have figured out the solution. Even better to say, here's all the cool math I've done that proves it; and oh and it's been peer-reviewed by like-minded people (you like that part the most I bet). And it's even better to say, the invisible force is going to ruin the only place you can live! Politicians and advocates say "It's settled science" (errr... mathematically proven in a model - even to match ice core data), yet it's been stated on this Forum that "no true scientist would state he's 100% sure about anything" (see the thread on the coronavirus), which with I agree.

And you and jmg keep using unrelated analogies like earth quakes, garages, tobacco, lead, and now a sister planet that has a completely different set of physical circumstances than the Earth; it's far closer to the sun and has a less-elliptical orbit in addition to a smaller mass. Solar radiation and planet mass have a lot to do with retaining a "livable" atmosphere.

And finally, I'm not anti-EV and never have been. What I am is against the Government telling me I have to buy one to save the planet. If EV become a viable transportation product then great, another choice; but, to use political policy to ban ICE, that is a different and serious discussion.
Thank you, I agree whole heartedly and couldn't have said it better myself. The one think I'd add is the Elon And Gruss are hypocrites and here is why. Anyone who says they are of the belief that we are changing the climate with carbon emissions and doesn't do everything they can to reduce their output is a hypocrite. Gruss drives an M4, and fly's "a lot" (his words), then does he really care, or is it lip service?

Gruss's own words:
I'm a climate change realist (it's happening, let's insure against negative human impact), but I also drive an M4 Comp ('vert no less) and fly all the fucking time. So why aren't I a hypocrite? Here's why: (SPOILER ALERT! math)

Let's use an analogy to step through and demonstrate the common sense principle first which is obviously elusive for some:

(1.) Since the 1990s I've owned/leased a new expensive german import, sometimes a few at a time

Meriam Webster:

hypocrite noun
Save Word
To save this word, you'll need to log in.
Log In
hyp·​o·​crite | \ ˈhi-pə-ˌkrit \
Definition of hypocrite
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings

Last edited by Murf993; 04-05-2020 at 07:27 AM..
Appreciate 2
Efthreeoh6955.50
KRS_SN613.50

      04-05-2020, 09:05 AM   #3672
Murf993
Lieutenant
Murf993's Avatar
1978
Rep
497
Posts

Drives: Porsche 911
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Canada

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
This is exactly the point I was making a while back with yngdulyn and snow skiing. He labeled it as "logic fallacy" because there is no go counter argument to what you stated and I espoused via my discussion on skiing. If you are a person who is serious about his "carbon footprint" (a made up term by environmentalists) then he would act in his utmost capacity to not exhaust unnecessary carbon dioxide. I say "unnecessary" because merely breathing releases carbon dioxide. Being and advocate of life, I'll let people pass on their breathing carbon footprint and various methane releases, but I expect them to curtail all other forms of unnecessary carbon emissions. Snow skiing is a major unnecessary carbon emission release.

Globalwarmingclimatechange advocates want me to stop driving ICE, I want them to stop snow skiing. All is fair in love and war.
It's the whole do as I say not as I do, and the dismissal of the less enlightened's pursuits that don't fit their agenda.

Last edited by Murf993; 04-05-2020 at 09:22 AM..
Appreciate 4
      04-05-2020, 12:12 PM   #3673
jmg
Major General
jmg's Avatar
United_States
8546
Rep
9,664
Posts

Drives: F80 M3 CS, I01 i3 REx LCI
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Orange County, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrussGott View Post
Here's why you're wrong and why your argument isn't science:

I could use many examples, but i'll choose earth sciences, and I could pick many phenomena, but i'll pick earthquakes or lightening. What they all have in common is, the sum total of all that we know about them is by which I mean to say we're not predictive. We can't say when, where, or how strong an earthquake or lightning strike will be.

This is point where climate deniers quit: "welp i guess we don't get it so it's out of our control. let's quit."

Well, get-shit-done engineers and scientists realize something: while we're not smart enough to be predictive, we CAN forecast with confidence intervals and even control negative human impact by monitoring correlative phenomena. So, for example, with lightning we know about positive streamers and stepped jumpers so we can protect homes, buildings, etc from lightning strikes with grounding. e..g, in silicon valley I've not heard thunder in 10 years, but all the buildings have lightning rods.

And with earthquakes, we know about p-waves and s-waves and we can warn about tsunamis, build to more expensive construction standards, and we have advanced (and expensive) warning systems.

With climate change we know from simple ice core analysis there's a direct correlation between industrialization and global warming, and we know industrialization creates greenhouse gases and we know those trap heat not only here on earth but on other rocky planets like Venus (which has runaway global warming). Further we can test that correlation by looking various periods of Earth's climate, and it checks out.

It's pretty much a duh that get-shit-done engineers are looking for ways to minimize the impact to humans.

Most ironically, those get-shit-done engineers know of an easy way to stop producing greenhouse gases that not only won't have a cost, it'll be one of the greatest wealth creators in the history of human economics: the electric energy revolution. And because of that last part, it's going to happen.

So your arguments aren't science, they're just a robust defense of quitting.
I posted a few months ago that you were starting to convince me that Tesla wasn't going to fold like a house of cards because your presentation for information is somewhat impressive. I'll be honest in that I really don't care about the topic of Tesla survivability too much, so I've never taken the time to fact check your stuff, and won't in the future; I've got more interesting (to me at least) things to do with my time. But after this post and your comical post about how Elon Musk and his private jet mathematically are not hypocritical because his net carbon footprint is cancelled out by his followers reducing their collective carbon footprints and thus saving the planet, I realized you just post here with BS for some self-enjoyment purpose. Just a few counter points, you left out Elon's Space-X rocket exhaust carbon footprint, and all the carbon used to build his industrial base, so your math leaves out some stuff.

But when you infer I'm some non-get-shit-done obsolete-thinking-quitter, I start to pay attention to your diatribe a bit closer. All I can say really is, FU. Without disclosing what I actually do, since my company has corporate policies regarding social media use, all I can say is for the past decade plus a few more years, I have been directly involved with improving air traffic control via a replacement technology. One of the goals of the effort is to reduce air traffic congestion and correspondingly reduce commercial aircraft fuel consumption, which lowers carbon emissions. So count me in on Elon's save the planet crusade. But in reality, it's just a cool job and I really don't do it to reduce jet aircraft carbon emissions. I really do it to improve flight safety in the NAS; integrating unmanned drone traffic into the NAS is the most interesting challenge now. I deal with science and predictive modeling for real on a daily basis and have to help sell such ideas to our Customer. The work I do improves the safety of my fellow Americans and the flying public in general, now, here, today. So when I discuss modeling, it's not some theoretical crap about the climate 100 years from now, it's about keeping aircraft from hitting each other in real time; you know, the whole gravity thing. But we validate our modelling with real live testing and collect real data. That's the "lifetime" part I speak of. Validation through direct observation.

So I can assure you, I'm quite the opposite of your ignorant inference.

Your exalted climate do-shit-engineers-and-scientists work on solving a problem they say exists. They say the Earth has warmed over the past few centuries since the industrial revolution. They have measured data to prove it. And yes, I agree they have measured it, but their inference as to what the warming means in the context of the Earth's 4+ billion year existence is where I take issue.

It's a great job to have when you say you have discovered an invisible force and say that force is going to act badly upon humanity. Even better is to say that you've studied the matter intensely, and have figured out the solution. Even better to say, here's all the cool math I've done that proves it; and oh and it's been peer-reviewed by like-minded people (you like that part the most I bet). And it's even better to say, the invisible force is going to ruin the only place you can live! Politicians and advocates say "It's settled science" (errr... mathematically proven in a model - even to match ice core data), yet it's been stated on this Forum that "no true scientist would state he's 100% sure about anything" (see the thread on the coronavirus), which with I agree.

And you and jmg keep using unrelated analogies like earth quakes, garages, tobacco, lead, and now a sister planet that has a completely different set of physical circumstances than the Earth; it's far closer to the sun and has a less-elliptical orbit in addition to a smaller mass. Solar radiation and planet mass have a lot to do with retaining a "livable" atmosphere.

And finally, I'm not anti-EV and never have been. What I am is against the Government telling me I have to buy one to save the planet. If EV become a viable transportation product then great, another choice; but, to use political policy to ban ICE, that is a different and serious discussion.
I don't know how to do your job. It's very specialized and takes years of experience and is highly technical. How much of a fool would I be to tell you that I don't think there is a problem with air traffic and aircraft fuel consumption? I look up at the sky and there's a lot of room. You're making up a problem that doesn't exist.

Keep doing what your doing. You are likely good at it. But you are not a climatologist.
__________________
2018 F80 ///M3 CS - Lime Rock Grey Metallic | MPHAS | GC Camber Plates
2019 I01 i3 BEV - Giga World
Previous: F80 M3 | I01 i3 Rex LCI | I01 i3 REx | F30 340i M Sport ZTR | F30 328i Sport | Audi B7 S4 25Quattro #33 of 250 | E21 320i
Appreciate 0
      04-05-2020, 12:32 PM   #3674
jmg
Major General
jmg's Avatar
United_States
8546
Rep
9,664
Posts

Drives: F80 M3 CS, I01 i3 REx LCI
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Orange County, CA

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Efthreeoh View Post
What I am is against the Government telling me I have to buy one to save the planet. If EV become a viable transportation product then great, another choice; but, to use political policy to ban ICE, that is a different and serious discussion.
You choose to not believe in science with regards to the ecosystem because that would mean you would have to accept that you would have to comply with legislation backed by democrats to drive an EV.

This isn't political AT ALL /s
__________________
2018 F80 ///M3 CS - Lime Rock Grey Metallic | MPHAS | GC Camber Plates
2019 I01 i3 BEV - Giga World
Previous: F80 M3 | I01 i3 Rex LCI | I01 i3 REx | F30 340i M Sport ZTR | F30 328i Sport | Audi B7 S4 25Quattro #33 of 250 | E21 320i
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:59 PM.




bmw
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST