Grit dog
Black Diamond, WA
Senior Member
Joined: 05/06/2013
View Profile
 Offline
|
bikendan wrote:1320Fastback wrote:I am not sure if I am more shocked at the dismal range or the $92,700 price of the 1/2 ton truck.
Just saw an ad for a white F150 Lightning for $120k in stock, at the dealership I bought my used F150.
Yup, many of the EVs are just a way for the rich to spend or flaunt their money (with less bang for the buck than a comparable priced petro vehicle). Not unlike the big V12 cars of the early 20th century, except now they get to throw around words like environmentally responsible and think they’re continuing to look like jet setters. (And even Shelby and clan can’t argue this).
Cars like the P90 Plaid, E mustang, Lightning and Hummer are nothing more than a status symbol and in no way represent someone who’s trying to save the environment. They don’t show up at the enviro rallys. LOL
Even the “economical” EVs could be replaced by something more economical for someone trying to save money. Although I do see the benefit in reasonably priced EV commuters.
2016 Ram 2500, MotorOps.ca EFIlive tuned, 5” turbo back, 6" lift on 37s
2017 Heartland Torque T29 - Sold.
Couple of Arctic Fox TCs - Sold
|
Grit dog
Black Diamond, WA
Senior Member
Joined: 05/06/2013
View Profile
Offline
|
shelbyfv wrote:^^^Guess I'm missing your point. ![[emoticon]](https://forums.goodsamclub.com/sharedcontent/cfb/images/scratchead.gif "scratchead")
No, you’re not, but I wouldn’t expect you to admit that you do. It would contradict your flawed stance.
You might go find Yosemite and drag him in here to help you. Your team is getting a little thin and he’s good at spewing idealistic drivel.
|
ksss
Eastern Idaho
Senior Member
Joined: 02/19/2011
View Profile
Offline
|
An "Independent opinion" Good luck finding that. If you remember the prior term for "Climate change". It was global cooling due to increase in CO2, until it was determined that term didn't fit the agenda. **** data couldn't support the position. However, we call it climate change, ahh now there is a term that is much more flexible. So now everything from the recent floods in KY, hurricanes, drought in the West and anything else that can possibly be linked to Climate Change is used as fodder to fill the disinformation cannon. Worse thing is some people actual believe it. Only 10K years ago there was severe climate change with zero human influence. The change so abrupt that places that would be considered tropical, became covered in glaciers. If you remember high school earth science class they told you all about it.
Point being, human influence on the planet likely has some impact currently, but not nearly enough to justify the extreme position. It was happening way before human influence stepped in. The data to support the climate change agenda is weak at best and purposely deceptive at its worst. So now finding Independent Information not influenced by political opinion and personal bias seems impossible. The result is where we are now..."**** the torpedoes, full speed ahead" toward solving a problem (costing countless Trillions of dollars and untold pain and suffering) that may not exist.
The point about changing the column is spot on, wish we had a "like" button.
2020 Chevy 3500 CC 4X4 DRW D/A
2013 Fuzion 342
2011 RZR Desert Tan
2012 Sea Doo GTX 155
2018 Chevy 3500HD CC LB SRW 4X4 D/A
2015 Chevy Camaro ZL1
|
Grit dog
Black Diamond, WA
Senior Member
Joined: 05/06/2013
View Profile
Offline
|
PButler96 wrote:shelbyfv wrote:nickthehunter wrote:I went through every post on this thread - you’re the only one that mentioned climate change. Seems you’re the one pushing an agenda - and the agenda is “anyone who dares to have different opinion then you is ignorant”. I may be the only one who mentioned it specifically but wouldn't you agree climate change is the elephant in the corner? All the EV hate, but what's the alternative? If someone thinks ICEs are a viable alternative for the future, they either don't believe climate change is real or they just don't care. "Just don't care" is an honest though misanthropic position. "Don't believe" is ignorance, you won't find any informed support for it.
ROFLMAO.....
Well Greta, then you always have things such as this
Even Greta is realizing this now that she’s not 13 years old anymore. Probably matured a little now. She’s been keeping her yap shut recently.
Unless you meant Greta Van Fleet!
|
shelbyfv
TN
Senior Member
Joined: 02/18/2006
View Profile
|
ksss wrote:An "Independent opinion" Good luck finding that. If you remember the prior term for "Climate change". It was global cooling due to increase in CO2, until it was determined that term didn't fit the agenda. **** data couldn't support the position. However, we call it climate change, ahh now there is a term that is much more flexible. So now everything from the recent floods in KY, hurricanes, drought in the West and anything else that can possibly be linked to Climate Change is used as fodder to fill the disinformation cannon. Worse thing is some people actual believe it. Only 10K years ago there was severe climate change with zero human influence. The change so abrupt that places that would be considered tropical, became covered in glaciers. If you remember high school earth science class they told you all about it.
Point being, human influence on the planet likely has some impact currently, but not nearly enough to justify the extreme position. It was happening way before human influence stepped in. The data to support the climate change agenda is weak at best and purposely deceptive at its worst. So now finding Independent Information not influenced by political opinion and personal bias seems impossible. The result is where we are now..."**** the torpedoes, full speed ahead" toward solving a problem (costing countless Trillions of dollars and untold pain and suffering) that may not exist.
The point about changing the column is spot on, wish we had a "like" button. This is what I can't understand. You and I aren't in any position to even have access to this data, much less interpret it. The people who have the data and can understand it are in agreement. Do we listen to them or some TV commentator or politician? Folks should ask themselves who stands to gain from promoting this anti-science sentiment.
|
|
|
Huntindog
Phoenix AZ
Senior Member
Joined: 04/08/2002
View Profile
|
shelbyfv wrote:nickthehunter wrote:I went through every post on this thread - you’re the only one that mentioned climate change. Seems you’re the one pushing an agenda - and the agenda is “anyone who dares to have different opinion then you is ignorant”. I may be the only one who mentioned it specifically but wouldn't you agree climate change is the elephant in the corner? All the EV hate, but what's the alternative? If someone thinks ICEs are a viable alternative for the future, they either don't believe climate change is real or they just don't care. "Just don't care" is an honest though misanthropic position. "Don't believe" is ignorance, you won't find any informed support for it.
The problem is that everyone has to be on board....China (among others) with 1.4 billion people is not... Worse is we buy a lot of stuff from them, including so called green items....Which are not produced in a enviromentally friendly way. We seem to be OK with others polluting to supply us with items that we deem green.
Bottom line, fossil fuels will continue to be used, by other countries.
There really isn't much point in ruining our economy, and making those that don't like us much rich in the process.
Huntindog
100% boondocking
2021 Grand Design Momentum 398M
2 bathrooms, no waiting
104 gal grey, 104 black,158 fresh
FullBodyPaint, 3,8Kaxles, DiscBrakes
17.5LRH commercial tires
1860watts solar,800 AH Battleborn batterys
2020 Silverado HighCountry CC DA 4X4 DRW
|
FishOnOne
The Great State of Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 02/12/2011
View Profile
Offline
|
shelbyfv wrote:ksss wrote:An "Independent opinion" Good luck finding that. If you remember the prior term for "Climate change". It was global cooling due to increase in CO2, until it was determined that term didn't fit the agenda. **** data couldn't support the position. However, we call it climate change, ahh now there is a term that is much more flexible. So now everything from the recent floods in KY, hurricanes, drought in the West and anything else that can possibly be linked to Climate Change is used as fodder to fill the disinformation cannon. Worse thing is some people actual believe it. Only 10K years ago there was severe climate change with zero human influence. The change so abrupt that places that would be considered tropical, became covered in glaciers. If you remember high school earth science class they told you all about it.
Point being, human influence on the planet likely has some impact currently, but not nearly enough to justify the extreme position. It was happening way before human influence stepped in. The data to support the climate change agenda is weak at best and purposely deceptive at its worst. So now finding Independent Information not influenced by political opinion and personal bias seems impossible. The result is where we are now..."**** the torpedoes, full speed ahead" toward solving a problem (costing countless Trillions of dollars and untold pain and suffering) that may not exist.
The point about changing the column is spot on, wish we had a "like" button. This is what I can't understand. You and I aren't in any position to even have access to this data, much less interpret it. The people who have the data and can understand it are in agreement. Do we listen to them or some TV commentator or politician? Folks should ask themselves who stands to gain from promoting this anti-science sentiment.
Something tells me you're a Dr. Fauci fanboy!
'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs "270k Miles"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"
|
shelbyfv
TN
Senior Member
Joined: 02/18/2006
View Profile
|
FishOnOne wrote:Something tells me you're a Dr. Fauci fanboy! I have no problem taking advice from people who know more than I. Do you?
|
fj12ryder
Platte City, MO
Senior Member
Joined: 08/19/2003
View Profile
|
You do realize that many times in the past, very knowledgeable individuals, we didn't necessarily call them scientists at the time, have agreed on any number of things. And many times these "knowledgeable individuals" were dead wrong. Just because If all these scientists are reading from the same book, and that book is flawed, how reliable can their opinions be?
A theory, and Climate Change caused by human intervention, is a theory can be widely accepted by many people and still be wrong because of bad data. Personally I think human actions have definite consequences, but is Climate Change one of them? I think so, but certainly not dead certain.
Howard and Peggy
"Don't Panic"
|
way2roll
Wilmington NC
Senior Member
Joined: 10/05/2018
View Profile
Offline
|
Since we have already gotten way off topic, this planet has been heating and cooling without influence from humans for millions of years. It will happen again whether we are here or not. Do we have an influence, sure. How much, who knows. Enough maybe to shoot ourselves in the foot for a planet we can no longer survive on. Once we are gone, the planet will continue heating and cooling like it always does, in spite of the next self righteous parasite.
And as far as EV's being green, they aren't. Just listened to a report that deep sea mining is on the table for minerals for batteries because scientists forecast that the minerals required will be in short supply sooner than predicted. The massive ecological damage done and planned to be done to mine for materials for EV batteries isn't pretty. We've done no more than trade one set of problems for another. But it fits an agenda. BTW, I am not anti EV. I am however against lies and manipulating facts to force a product. But there are thousands of those.
2023 FR Sunseeker 2400B MBS
|
|
|
|
