In sci.environment David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
"Leroy N. Soetoro" <democrat-criminals@mail.house.gov> wrote in...
news:lnsB14AB5C1E25486F089P2473@0.0.0.2:
<snip>
It took years for gasoline stations to emerge that would enable long distance
travel. Why would the EV or BEV or whatever technology be buit up overnight
You can imagine some of these charcaters as buggy whip salesmen in the 1890s saying automobiles will never be a thing.
People have illogically argued that every new tech could never not be successful because it was new.
Conservative thinking only predicts the past. ;)
In sci.environment David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
"Leroy N. Soetoro" <democrat-criminals@mail.house.gov> wrote in...
news:lnsB14AB5C1E25486F089P2473@0.0.0.2:
<snip>
It took years for gasoline stations to emerge that would enable long
distance
travel. Why would the EV or BEV or whatever technology be buit up
overnight
You can imagine some of these charcaters as buggy whip salesmen in the
1890s
saying automobiles will never be a thing.
People have illogically argued that every new tech could never not be successful because it was new.
Conservative thinking only predicts the past. ;)
He's saying to let the free market work as it should.
with the automobile. I've yet to see any government run program
work as well or as cheaply as normal free market forces. Instead,
government programs tend to cost way to much, deliver way to
little and result in no end of problems
In sci.environment Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
...
"R Kym Horsell" <kymhorsell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uuodpp$p5t$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
In sci.environment David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
"Leroy N. Soetoro" <democrat-criminals@mail.house.gov> wrote in...
news:lnsB14AB5C1E25486F089P2473@0.0.0.2:
<snip>
It took years for gasoline stations to emerge that would enable long
distance
travel. Why would the EV or BEV or whatever technology be buit up
overnight
You can imagine some of these charcaters as buggy whip salesmen in the
1890s
saying automobiles will never be a thing.
People have illogically argued that every new tech could never not be
successful because it was new.
Conservative thinking only predicts the past. ;)
No, it would be as if governments were to seek banning horses before they
could be replaced, and fueling for those machines was virtually
non-existent.
It would be as if the US govt built all those roads that were missing
from 1900s America and pour trillions into supporting gas automobiles. Fortunately, that kind of thing never happens because the free market
does it all in Dreamland.
On June 29, 1956, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed legislation
funding the construction of the U.S. Interstate Highway
System (IHS)--something Americans had dreamed of since Detroit
starting building cars.
"R Kym Horsell" <kymhorsell@gmail.com> wrote in message news:uv115s$1n1d$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
In sci.environment Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
...
"R Kym Horsell" <kymhorsell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uuodpp$p5t$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
In sci.environment David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
"Leroy N. Soetoro" <democrat-criminals@mail.house.gov> wrote in...
news:lnsB14AB5C1E25486F089P2473@0.0.0.2:
<snip>
It took years for gasoline stations to emerge that would enable long >>>>> distance
travel. Why would the EV or BEV or whatever technology be buit up
overnight
You can imagine some of these charcaters as buggy whip salesmen in the >>>> 1890s
saying automobiles will never be a thing.
People have illogically argued that every new tech could never not be
successful because it was new.
Conservative thinking only predicts the past. ;)
No, it would be as if governments were to seek banning horses before they >>> could be replaced, and fueling for those machines was virtually
non-existent.
It would be as if the US govt built all those roads that were missing
from 1900s America and pour trillions into supporting gas automobiles.
Fortunately, that kind of thing never happens because the free market
does it all in Dreamland.
Yep, as cars were adopted people demanded better roads. What was suitable
for horse and wagon was no longer good enough.
On June 29, 1956, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed legislation
funding the construction of the U.S. Interstate Highway
System (IHS)--something Americans had dreamed of since Detroit
starting building cars.
Which was a natural extension given how much cars and trucking had been adopted by then.
As it is 95% of the people see no use for cars, but government is spending trillions and demanding people must buy these expensive replacements that don't even offer any significant advantage over current technology other
than some mistaken belief of cutting CO2.. despite the fact we don't have
the means to really produce a lot of electricity without carbon or nuclear, but we are certainly willing to export that pollution to China to make it appear we're being 'green'..
Did you know that China's expansion of their dirty coal power plant's is increasing CO2 emissions more than all reductions in such emissions being made by the rest of the world?
Why should government be mandating this technology. When it's ready,
actually ready, people will be more than willing to make the switch. The problem is, the tech isn't ready and what have is either too expensive or
too problematic for most people to accept.
"R Kym Horsell" <kymhorsell@gmail.com> wrote in message >news:uv115s$1n1d$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
In sci.environment Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
...
"R Kym Horsell" <kymhorsell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uuodpp$p5t$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
In sci.environment David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
"Leroy N. Soetoro" <democrat-criminals@mail.house.gov> wrote in...
news:lnsB14AB5C1E25486F089P2473@0.0.0.2:
<snip>
It took years for gasoline stations to emerge that would enable long >>>>> distance
travel. Why would the EV or BEV or whatever technology be buit up
overnight
You can imagine some of these charcaters as buggy whip salesmen in the >>>> 1890s
saying automobiles will never be a thing.
People have illogically argued that every new tech could never not be
successful because it was new.
Conservative thinking only predicts the past. ;)
No, it would be as if governments were to seek banning horses before they >>> could be replaced, and fueling for those machines was virtually
non-existent.
It would be as if the US govt built all those roads that were missing
from 1900s America and pour trillions into supporting gas automobiles.
Fortunately, that kind of thing never happens because the free market
does it all in Dreamland.
Yep, as cars were adopted people demanded better roads. What was suitable
for horse and wagon was no longer good enough.
On June 29, 1956, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed legislation
funding the construction of the U.S. Interstate Highway
System (IHS)--something Americans had dreamed of since Detroit
starting building cars.
Which was a natural extension given how much cars and trucking had been >adopted by then.
As it is 95% of the people see no use for cars, but government is spending >trillions and demanding people must buy these expensive replacements that >don't even offer any significant advantage over current technology other
than some mistaken belief of cutting CO2.. despite the fact we don't have
the means to really produce a lot of electricity without carbon or nuclear, >but we are certainly willing to export that pollution to China to make it >appear we're being 'green'..
Did you know that China's expansion of their dirty coal power plant's is >increasing CO2 emissions more than all reductions in such emissions being >made by the rest of the world?
Why should government be mandating this technology. When it's ready,
actually ready, people will be more than willing to make the switch. The >problem is, the tech isn't ready and what have is either too expensive or
too problematic for most people to accept.
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 20:32:43 -0000 (UTC), pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> wrote:
Exactly !
. . . wrong. Everything he said was wrong.
Swill
Scout wrote:
He's saying to let the free market work as it should.
We tired of waiting for the free market to stop killing our
children. You enjoy killing children.
with the automobile. I've yet to see any government run program
work as well or as cheaply as normal free market forces. Instead,
Government provides goods and service that are vital but unprofitable.
government programs tend to cost way to much, deliver way to
little and result in no end of problems
Late last year they had the temerity to close the street because
they claimed the government built street continues to degrade and
needs resurfacing every few decades.
In sci.environment Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
[whatabouttroll v2.0 boots up]
--
Whataboutism
encyclopedia.pub, 18 Nov 2022
Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu
quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position
by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or
disproving their argument.
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 14:29:53 -0400, "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
"R Kym Horsell" <kymhorsell@gmail.com> wrote in message >>news:uv115s$1n1d$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
In sci.environment Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
...
"R Kym Horsell" <kymhorsell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uuodpp$p5t$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
In sci.environment David LaRue <huey.dll@tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
"Leroy N. Soetoro" <democrat-criminals@mail.house.gov> wrote in...
news:lnsB14AB5C1E25486F089P2473@0.0.0.2:
<snip>
It took years for gasoline stations to emerge that would enable long >>>>>> distance
travel. Why would the EV or BEV or whatever technology be buit up >>>>>> overnight
You can imagine some of these charcaters as buggy whip salesmen in the >>>>> 1890s
saying automobiles will never be a thing.
People have illogically argued that every new tech could never not be >>>>> successful because it was new.
Conservative thinking only predicts the past. ;)
No, it would be as if governments were to seek banning horses before
they
could be replaced, and fueling for those machines was virtually
non-existent.
It would be as if the US govt built all those roads that were missing
from 1900s America and pour trillions into supporting gas automobiles.
Fortunately, that kind of thing never happens because the free market
does it all in Dreamland.
Yep, as cars were adopted people demanded better roads. What was suitable >>for horse and wagon was no longer good enough.
On June 29, 1956, President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed legislation
funding the construction of the U.S. Interstate Highway
System (IHS)--something Americans had dreamed of since Detroit
starting building cars.
Which was a natural extension given how much cars and trucking had been >>adopted by then.
As it is 95% of the people see no use for cars, but government is spending >>trillions and demanding people must buy these expensive replacements that >>don't even offer any significant advantage over current technology other >>than some mistaken belief of cutting CO2.. despite the fact we don't have >>the means to really produce a lot of electricity without carbon or
nuclear,
but we are certainly willing to export that pollution to China to make it >>appear we're being 'green'..
Did you know that China's expansion of their dirty coal power plant's is >>increasing CO2 emissions more than all reductions in such emissions being >>made by the rest of the world?
Why should government be mandating this technology. When it's ready, >>actually ready, people will be more than willing to make the switch. The >>problem is, the tech isn't ready and what have is either too expensive or >>too problematic for most people to accept.
You make too much sense. Don't expect to find too much in the way of intelligent responses because libs aren't capable of actual thought.
On Mon, 08 Apr 2024 23:34:00 -0400, Governor Swill
<governor.swill@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 20:32:43 -0000 (UTC), pothead <pothead@snakebite.com> >>wrote:
Exactly !
. . . wrong. Everything he said was wrong.
Swill
Of course Swilly had nothing to offer to counter except denial.
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 05:56:09 -0700, Siri Cruise
<chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:
Scout wrote:
He's saying to let the free market work as it should.
We tired of waiting for the free market to stop killing our
children. You enjoy killing children.
Look at you ignoring the child labor being used to produce batteries
for these worthless vehicles.
with the automobile. I've yet to see any government run program
work as well or as cheaply as normal free market forces. Instead,
Government provides goods and service that are vital but unprofitable.
Government "provides" nothing. They take from the taxpayers and pour
money down a hole. They do nothing in an efficient manner.
government programs tend to cost way to much, deliver way to
little and result in no end of problems
Late last year they had the temerity to close the street because
they claimed the government built street continues to degrade and
needs resurfacing every few decades.
And in true government fashion, the roadwork fails prematurely because
they hired incompetent people to do the job.
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 05:56:09 -0700, Siri Cruise
<chine.bleu@www.yahoo.com> wrote:
Scout wrote:
He's saying to let the free market work as it should.
We tired of waiting for the free market to stop killing our
children. You enjoy killing children.
Look at you ignoring the child labor being used to produce batteries
for these worthless vehicles.
with the automobile. I've yet to see any government run program
work as well or as cheaply as normal free market forces. Instead,
Government provides goods and service that are vital but unprofitable.
Government "provides" nothing. They take from the taxpayers and pour
money down a hole. They do nothing in an efficient manner.
government programs tend to cost way to much, deliver way to
little and result in no end of problems
Late last year they had the temerity to close the street because
they claimed the government built street continues to degrade and
needs resurfacing every few decades.
And in true government fashion, the roadwork fails prematurely because
they hired incompetent people to do the job.
In sci.environment Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
...
"R Kym Horsell" <kymhorsell@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:uv1mns$1kbs$1@nnrp.usenet.blueworldhosting.com...
In sci.environment Scout <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
[whatabouttroll v2.0 boots up]
--
Whataboutism
encyclopedia.pub, 18 Nov 2022
Whataboutism, also known as whataboutery, is a variant of the tu
quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position >>> by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or
disproving their argument.
^^^^^^^^
this being a perfect example of Whatabotism.
And that being a perfect example of "attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument"
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 546 |
Nodes: | 16 (1 / 15) |
Uptime: | 160:04:39 |
Calls: | 10,385 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 14,056 |
Messages: | 6,416,492 |