Stealing a Tesla in 30 seconds

[Cheeks]

You're the king, bro.  You got me.  Totally convinced now!

It's a simple question and a chance to save the planet....why wouldn't they want to put it to bed and release the model methodology and the data.  So selfish those planet savers...don't you think?

[martyconlonontherun]

Going to pretend this is a Tesla thread.......Why would anyone steal a Tesla? Wouldn't it be found almost immediately and the guys in the car would be caught?

[Jables1604]

It's a simple question and a chance to save the planet....why wouldn't they want to put it to bed and release the model methodology and the data.  So selfish those planet savers...don't you think?

I don't know but I would think the same argument applies to releasing tax returns.

[Hards Alumni]

I don't know but I would think the same argument applies to releasing tax returns.

rekt

[Cheeks]

I don't know but I would think the same argument applies to releasing tax returns.

Ok....I guess equating the climate guys with him is appropriate.  I like the comparison.  Lots of liars.

[rocket surgeon]

  climate change is the biggest money laundering scam out there.  when a group of people can be so wrong so many times and still have credibility is a fool me twice many times over.  according to the "experts" manhattan should be under water but according to some real estate records, martha's vineyard is safe. eyn'a?  just ask #44

oh, and some of the biggest alarmists will not give up their private jets?  say it ain't so...where is the love

oh, and buy tesla but put a better alarm on it

[Cheeks]

NASA rules out asteroid collision with earth......hours later it hits earth.   Story yesterday.  NASA.....lots of very smart people, but not infallible.


https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1174377/asteroid-collision-nasa-2019-impact-earth-space-2019-end-times-nasa-asteroids-news

[Hards Alumni]

  climate change is the biggest money laundering scam out there.  when a group of people can be so wrong so many times and still have credibility is a fool me twice many times over.  according to the "experts" manhattan should be under water but according to some real estate records, martha's vineyard is safe. eyn'a?  just ask #44

oh, and some of the biggest alarmists will not give up their private jets?  say it ain't so...where is the love

oh, and buy tesla but put a better alarm on it

I don't think you're half as smart as you think you are.

My evidence is that you seem to have no idea what money laundering is.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Who's getting rich on climate change???  This idea that there all these environmental scientists getting rich on this is funny.

Yet no one mentions the people clearly getting rich through denying it.

Weird.

[Cheeks]

Who's getting rich on climate change???  This idea that there all these environmental scientists getting rich on this is funny.

Yet no one mentions the people clearly getting rich through denying it.

Weird.

I see uncle bloody eye wants to eliminate all fossil fuels. What a wonderful idea that will crater the world economy, destroy ability to make medicines, and everyday products we all take for granted.  He pinky promised to do it earlier this week in national tv.  It's religion for these people, meanwhile they are the biggest hypocrites in the world using energy.

[Coleman]

Who's getting rich on climate change???  This idea that there all these environmental scientists getting rich on this is funny.

Yet no one mentions the people clearly getting rich through denying it.

Weird.

Right.

[Hards Alumni]

Ah, now this makes sense.  It is also the most pathetic attempt at trying to make fun of someone I've seen... ever.  Like, the joke is that I have had long hair and a beard?

Come on man, you can do better.

[Jockey]

I see uncle bloody eye wants to eliminate all fossil fuels.

Couldn't you find someone in a wheelchair to make fun of? Seems like that is your style.

[JWags85]

Gregg Allman loved CC Sabathia?

[Jon]

Gregg Allman loved CC Sabathia?

Naw. Just had a horse face for his squeeze.

[Cheeks]

Couldn't you find someone in a wheelchair to make fun of? Seems like that is your style.

Canada weather getting chilly about now?

[Hards Alumni]

Gregg Allman loved CC Sabathia?

This is just their collective group's attempt to make fun of me I guess.  They've run out of intelligent arguments and have resorted to trying to make fun of my appearance and that of my friends and family.

They're old bullies, really. 

If you've resorted to making fun of my appearance, at least have the stones to post a picture of yourself.  But they won't.  They're cowards.  They'll post something cryptic about my background in an attempt to silence me, or they'll move on to posting a meme, or saying they were trolling me.

You know, just what passes for the behavior of elderly males these days.

[Jon]

Canada weather getting chilly about now?

Barbra Streisand is still in Brentwood I believe

[Jon]

Who's getting rich on climate change???  This idea that there all these environmental scientists getting rich on this is funny.

Yet no one mentions the people clearly getting rich through denying it.

Weird.

I haven't read through the entire thread here but, addressing your comment, I would agree that scientists aren't necessarily getting rich on climate change. However, there is an entire cottage industry in academia geared to pumping out empiricism to support positions on both sides.

I was invited by the DOE to present recently at an global energy conference on hydrogen fuel systems and during the Q&A was challenged by an academic (from UW Madison, no less!) on the use of CH4 as a base fuel for power generation. His view is the burning any complex hydrocarbon is bad.

I asked if he flew or walked to the conference and if he walked from the airport.

The degree of hypocrisy among academics on global warming is staggering. And what was amazing is that when I spoke to this guy about EGR systems and how hydrogen is actually produced it was clear he had no real intelligence on the subject.

Instead, he resorted to spewing doom and gloom sound bites.

Human use of complex hydrocarbons has had an impact on climate but it is grossly overstated by many. And ask them if they are willing to sacrifice the advanced post-industrial lifestyle that is entirely the result of man harnessing the energy in hydrocarbons  and the hypocrisy is illuminated. 

A little more than 100 years ago the entirety of humankind was limited by the productive power of the horse. The advances in lifestyle, productivity, and scientific accomplishment since then is staggering.

One of my Brit colleagues looked up this guy's background and, of course, he has zero training in the sciences or engineering. He is some sort of "policy expert" who has made a living out of trying to scare people on science he does not understand.

To suggest that there isn't an industry built around academic research into global warming is naive.   

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Thanks for this response. I don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying. However I think there are a ton of people who are clearly ignorant of the people clearly getting rich off climate denial. It's not too hard to draw that line.

[Its DJOver]

I haven't read through the entire thread here but, addressing your comment, I would agree that scientists aren't necessarily getting rich on climate change. However, there is an entire cottage industry in academia geared to pumping out empiricism to support positions on both sides.

I was invited by the DOE to present recently at an global energy conference on hydrogen fuel systems and during the Q&A was challenged by an academic (from UW Madison, no less!) on the use of CH4 as a base fuel for power generation. His view is the burning any complex hydrocarbon is bad.

I asked if he flew or walked to the conference and if he walked from the airport.

The degree of hypocrisy among academics on global warming is staggering. And what was amazing is that when I spoke to this guy about EGR systems and how hydrogen is actually produced it was clear he had no real intelligence on the subject.

Instead, he resorted to spewing doom and gloom sound bites.

Human use of complex hydrocarbons has had an impact on climate but it is grossly overstated by many. And ask them if they are willing to sacrifice the advanced post-industrial lifestyle that is entirely the result of man harnessing the energy in hydrocarbons  and the hypocrisy is illuminated. 

A little more than 100 years ago the entirety of humankind was limited by the productive power of the horse. The advances in lifestyle, productivity, and scientific accomplishment since then is staggering.

One of my Brit colleagues looked up this guy's background and, of course, he has zero training in the sciences or engineering. He is some sort of "policy expert" who has made a living out of trying to scare people on science he does not understand.

To suggest that there isn't an industry built around academic research into global warming is naive.

Like you, I haven't read this entire thread but regarding the bolded, why would these ideas be mutually exclusive?  Isn't the goal of many scientists to reduce the carbon footprint without compromising the luxuries that we are able to enjoy today because of hydrocarbons?

[rocket surgeon]

Like you, I haven't read this entire thread but regarding the bolded, why would these ideas be mutually exclusive?  Isn't the goal of many scientists to reduce the carbon footprint without compromising the luxuries that we are able to enjoy today because of hydrocarbons?

yes, and the global warming alarmists paying the "scientists" trying to find a (horse hockey)solution to justify not giving up their private jets, mega homes, SUV's etc.

[Its DJOver]

yes, and the global warming alarmists paying the "scientists" trying to find a (horse hockey)solution to justify not giving up their private jets, mega homes, SUV's etc.

If a viable solution can be discovered to something that is pretty universally accepted as happening, then does it matter where the funding originated from?

[Jon]

Thanks for this response. I don't disagree with a lot of what you are saying. However I think there are a ton of people who are clearly ignorant of the people clearly getting rich off climate denial. It's not too hard to draw that line.

We are focused on making the generation of power and consumption of energy more efficient through innovative engineered solutions. Power generation requires a smorgasbord of sources. And for intermittent renewables to become efficient one needs to integrate stored energy systems into the equation. 

It is unrealistic to demand that we stop burning complex hydrocarbons.

I know that we have impacted the earth in doing so but who is willing to give up the benefits?

Like so much in contemporary society, there is a lot of yelling about the problem but precious little effort in solution-definition.

[Jon]

Like you, I haven't read this entire thread but regarding the bolded, why would these ideas be mutually exclusive?  Isn't the goal of many scientists to reduce the carbon footprint without compromising the luxuries that we are able to enjoy today because of hydrocarbons?

Read my reply to fluffy (that sounds odd in the reading of the words but humor me).

If we want the benefits of a post-industrial society which is based on exploiting the energy potentiality of complex hydrocarbons we need to improve the efficiency of combustion and intermittent renewables while reducing the release of harmful emissions.

We are part of a community of scientists and engineers working to make those efficiencies happen and our fund is now supporting projects on 5 continents.

I hate to say it but we invest in developing evidence-based solutions and not ideologues who demand that we stop burning things for power.

By the way, I love how people thunder and rage about burning hydrocarbons but then throw wood into the fireplace or sit around the fire pit. If they only knew what they were breathing in...