Will this be tomorrow's transportation?

[vvanders]

We aren't talking about who's paying for it, you specifically said:

> and battery production is very dirty, so dirty it can't legally be made in USA.

So are you saying that they can't legally build there or that they can and what you said before isn't true?

On the NASA front, have any papers or nasa.gov links that back up your claims? The links I posted above is straight from NASA and I think you'd be hard pressed to find a large body of evidence from them that contradicts it.

 

[vvanders]

Uf da
proof nasa lied about global warming - Google Search

I can post a link to Google results on how to make a million dollars in a day, doesn't make it true . Currently 97% of scientists involved in the investigation of global warming agree that it's man made: http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ I generally prefer to get my science from NASA instead of some random site from Google.

 

[houstonscott]

I can post a link to Google results on how to make a million dollars in a day, doesn't make it true . Currently 97% of scientists involved in the investigation of global warming agree that it's man made: http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ I generally prefer to get my science from NASA instead of some random site from Google.

97% is bogus. It's 8 scientists. Lol. HS

 

[houstonscott]

I can post a link to Google results on how to make a million dollars in a day, doesn't make it true . Currently 97% of scientists involved in the investigation of global warming agree that it's man made: Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet: Scientific Consensus I generally prefer to get my science from NASA instead of some random site from Google.

Can you link the proof of man made global warming. HS

 

[/pine]

I can post a link to Google results on how to make a million dollars in a day, doesn't make it true . Currently 97% of scientists involved in the investigation of global warming agree that it's man made: http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ I generally prefer to get my science from NASA instead of some random site from Google.

Naivety and gullibility are two prerequisites of the AGW peanut gallery...
I posted a search result just on the outside chance you might possibly have a few working brain cells that might possibly be open to other possibilities...but I guess not...since the election the element of real hope has been overflowing into areas it has no business...

Einstein was way ahead of his time...I'm sure he had a premonition about GW fanatics (including NASA) when he said "if the facts don't fit the theory...change the facts"
Hopefully the stunning blow the election dealt to a majority of the AGW zealots will prepare them for the second shoe to drop when a congressional investigation exposes the fraud for the fact it is...The "shoe is on a different foot now and it won't be the so called "deniers" that face the threats of legal action...!

 

[houstonscott]

Climate Change: No, It’s Not a 97 Percent Consensus | National Review Please no more 97% number... It's totally bogus, just like warming and CO2 crap. HS

 

[turnkey4099]

It's a lot like propane and LOX. Standard gas laws apply as per that famous mick Chemist Mr. Boyle.

If you ignore the need for cryogenics with hydrogen. That's a whole other ball park.

 

[turnkey4099]

Elon Musk isn't building anything, the American tax payers are..... They have tried everything to prove CO2 is a so called greenhouse gas and every one of the brightest minds have been wrong for over 40 years now, so, no so bright in my book. Those brilliant ones are still looking for the heat, can't find it, might be the deep ocean is the latest excuse. It's very simple if the sun warms the earth warms, if the sun cools the earth cools, if the sun is closer to earth it warms, if it moves away it cools. Nothing else matters. Oh, by the way a NASA scientist to me this.... HS

CO2 has been known to be a greenhouse gas for at least 80 years. I was taught that in my science classes in HS way back in the 50s. It ain't something that was just dreamed up when GW came along.

 

[turnkey4099]

Can you link the proof of man made global warming. HS

It's been in every newspaper for the past 20 years. One doesn't even have to get into scientific papers to see it, just follow all "warmest ever" reports and reports of species migrating to the north (in the Northern Hamisphere). Burying your head in the sand and denying know facts doesn't make them go away.

 

[Egon]

Climate Change: No, It痴 Not a 97 Percent Consensus | National Review Please no more 97% number... It's totally bogus, just like warming and CO2 crap. HS

Could you perhaps explain the reasons for "bogus" so some of us peanut brains can understand it?

Folks talking about validity but not giving any details leads to confusion for some.

 

[Egon]

Naivety and gullibility are two prerequisites of the AGW peanut gallery...
I posted a search result just on the outside chance you might possibly have a few working brain cells that might possibly be open to other possibilities...but I guess not...since the election the element of real hope has been overflowing into areas it has no business...

Einstein was way ahead of his time...I'm sure he had a premonition about GW fanatics (including NASA) when he said "if the facts don't fit the theory...change the facts"
Hopefully the stunning blow the election dealt to a majority of the AGW zealots will prepare them for the second shoe to drop when a congressional investigation exposes the fraud for the fact it is...The "shoe is on a different foot now and it won't be the so called "deniers" that face the threats of legal action...!

We had a fellar in Canada that didn't believe in global warming. He also thought the world was six thousand years old. Seems he also determined the Scientific Communities could only communicate with his Minions.

 

[Egon]

The Battery:



[video]https://cleantechnica.com/2016/04/20/top-lithium-ion-battery-producers-2014-country-ranking/[/video]

 

[houstonscott]

CO2 has been known to be a greenhouse gas for at least 80 years. I was taught that in my science classes in HS way back in the 50s. It ain't something that was just dreamed up when GW came along.

To bad its effects are not that of warming, a warming gas that doesn't warm, except in a computer model that says it does....And has never been right. HS

 

[houstonscott]

It's been in every newspaper for the past 20 years. One doesn't even have to get into scientific papers to see it, just follow all "warmest ever" reports and reports of species migrating to the north (in the Northern Hamisphere). Burying your head in the sand and denying know facts doesn't make them go away.

So no proof, just observations, and no proof CO2 is cause and certainly no proof man activities makes a difference. It's a computer model that's always wrong. There is no proof. HS

 

[buickanddeere]

Uf da, so many things wrong with all you've said there.

CO2 is definitely a greenhouse gas and has been shown to be contributing to increasing temperatures. We're not talking about some random institution but some of the brightest minds at NASA http://climate.nasa.gov/causes/ . The rest of the world understands this and it still floors me that this lie is pervasive in the US. Unless you want to tell me that NASA, you know the guys who put man on the moon have no clue what they're talking about.

With respect to battery production, have multiple sources for that? Someone might want to tell Elon Musk considering they're already building one of the biggest battery factories in the world in Nevada.

Do some research on the various green house gasses and how much each retain heat. You will find that CO2 makes no appreciable difference . How did the earth have ice ages with CO2 over 3000ppm ?
Take away Musk's tax breaks and grants . He would have been broke and gone years ago.

 

[buickanddeere]

Can you link the proof of man made global warming. HS

Retired scientists and researchers have a different view of global warming than the official line they stated while on payroll and mindfull of keeping their jobs and position.

When questioned the global warming believers have no answer for the Medeval Warming Trend nor the Little Ice Age.

 

[/pine]

Cool, nice personal attack.

Since you're both interested in dodging questions(HS you never did get back on the legality of battery production) rather than having a discussion I don't really know if there's much value in continuing. Shouting past each other isn't going to change anyone's mind and certainly doesn't do this forum any favors.

My take on this is yes, there's a very small chance things might not go completely pear-shaped with respect to Global Warming. However look at it this way, if we invest in clean energy and technology and nothing goes wrong, we've got a bunch of great independent energy sources. There's also a very high chance that we invent new economic industries, possibly completely tangential to clean energy. No one in the telephone industry expected to revolutionize the world with the computer. Yet Bell Labs was the one who invented the transistor and all the trillions of dollars worth of industry it affected. Out of the Manhattan project things like the CCTV and other inventions that were needed for problems not yet experienced. Those are the types of things that happen when you invest in basic research, otherwise you're just reselling something other people control and produce.

If it turns out Global Warming is right, then we've averted a massive disaster on an epic scale. Probably not something we're going to experience in our lifetime but our children and their children will definitely feel the impacts of.

That's my stance and I'm happy to put my $$$ where my mouth is. If anyone is ever coming through SW Washington I'm happy to meet and talk EVs, energy and any other topics. However if you want to continue your echo chamber here be my guest, I'm out.

The only "personal attack" was a reiteration or your own comment "Uf da"...everything else was merely a keen observation...!

As for innovations in technology etc...Almost every advancement can be related to the space program...and many of those innovations came from the development of battery technology i.e., cell phones, cordless tools, microprocessors etc., etc...

As far as AGW being right or wrong...there is NO proof or even substantial evidence...merely opinions based on convoluted and misconstrued data...IMO the opinions of the so called experts are no different that the opinions of the pollsters that got it wrong with the election...
Richard Feynman said: "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts"...IMO AGW is nothing but "Cargo-Cult Science"

Never Yet Melted >> “Science is the Belief in the Ignorance of Experts”

The Difference between 'True Science' and 'Cargo-Cult Science' | PJ Media

 

[turnkey4099]

To bad its effects are not that of warming, a warming gas that doesn't warm, except in a computer model that says it does....And has never been right. HS

Denial doesn't make it go away...or if you think it does, try it the next time you have a toothache.