The future of electric cars

On Friday, 17 June 2016 18:14:49 UTC+2, wrote:

You are. "Change your location," is advice that I am giving to a known hypocrite... YOU.

Get a life Snelly! Preferably a real one.
One that doesn't involve throwing virtual battery acid at the locals!

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 12:24:54 PM UTC-4, critter wrote:
On Friday, 17 June 2016 18:14:49 UTC+2, wsne... wrote:

You are. "Change your location," is advice that I am giving to a known hypocrite... YOU.

Get a life Snelly! Preferably a real one.
One that doesn't involve throwing virtual battery acid at the locals!

If peterson would only move to a city, he could cut his CO2 to levels more in keeping with his misplaced concern about what -others- are doing, or not doing, about AGW.

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 1:40:44 AM UTC-4, da'void wrote:
FredKartoffel:
VW is planning to sell 20% of their vehicles as pure electrics by 2020.
Here is one from their Porsche brand:

http://insideevs.com/wp-content/uplo...4b87-b5c0-635e
6befcfa6_teaser_700x395x1_5.jpg

StarDust:
Yes! I need one these road hugging electric cars , starting price $250K to
commute to my plummer's [sic] job!
I'll really going to save lot of money on gas! )o:
LOL!

Get real. If you're a plumber (from plumbum, the Latin name for lead,
which was the only durable metal that was soft enough to be shaped into
pipes in ancient times) you are probably already driving a Bentley and
a Tesla.

Obviously, you are unaware that most plumbers earn modest wages. One might also infer that you think they are overpaid. 0bama certainly does.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:06:42 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 9:01:00 AM UTC-4, peterson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:42:41 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

I would suggest that the natural rights to life, liberty and property are quite defensible. You?

And yet, you've never come close to managing a defense.

There is no reason to conclude that any human has more or fewer such natural rights as any other, therefore such natural rights are equal rights and must exist.

There is no reason to conclude that natural rights exist outside your
imagination. You've certainly not demonstrated that.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:12:27 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 9:01:49 AM UTC-4, peterson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:46:21 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

I don't want to live anyplace that requires mass transit.

What you meant to say was "I don't want to use mass transit."

Nope. I love using mass transit.

Then you should have no problem with using it in NYC.

I don't. And I have.

I do so whenever I'm someplace where
it's available.

It's available in Colorado Springs:

https://transit.coloradosprings.gov/...k/bus-services

So? I don't live in Colorado Springs. And in fact, the quality of the
public transportation system in Colorado Springs is so poor as to be
useless to most people.

Learn to read.

You wrote:

"I don't want to live anyplace that requires mass transit."

So name some places where mass transit is "required," peterson.

Cities.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:53:15 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 12:24:54 PM UTC-4, critter wrote:
On Friday, 17 June 2016 18:14:49 UTC+2, wsne... wrote:

You are. "Change your location," is advice that I am giving to a known hypocrite... YOU.

Get a life Snelly! Preferably a real one.
One that doesn't involve throwing virtual battery acid at the locals!

If peterson would only move to a city, he could cut his CO2 to levels more in keeping with his misplaced concern about what -others- are doing, or not doing, about AGW.

If I moved to the city, I'd hugely increase my CO2 levels. All that
driving to the country to ride and hike and operate my observatory and
to teach. All that dependence on fossil fuels for heating and cooling.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 10:01:19 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 1:40:44 AM UTC-4, da'void wrote:
FredKartoffel:
VW is planning to sell 20% of their vehicles as pure electrics by 2020.
Here is one from their Porsche brand:

http://insideevs.com/wp-content/uplo...4b87-b5c0-635e
6befcfa6_teaser_700x395x1_5.jpg

StarDust:
Yes! I need one these road hugging electric cars , starting price $250K to
commute to my plummer's [sic] job!
I'll really going to save lot of money on gas! )o:
LOL!

Get real. If you're a plumber (from plumbum, the Latin name for lead,
which was the only durable metal that was soft enough to be shaped into
pipes in ancient times) you are probably already driving a Bentley and
a Tesla.

Obviously, you are unaware that most plumbers earn modest wages. One might also infer that you think they are overpaid. 0bama certainly does.

Obviously you are unaware when your leg is being pulled.

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 7:27:46 PM UTC-4, peterson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:06:42 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 9:01:00 AM UTC-4, peterson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:42:41 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

I would suggest that the natural rights to life, liberty and property are quite defensible. You?

And yet, you've never come close to managing a defense.

There is no reason to conclude that any human has more or fewer such natural rights as any other, therefore such natural rights are equal rights and must exist.

There is no reason to conclude that natural rights exist outside your
imagination. You've certainly not demonstrated that.

In fact I have demonstrated that they exist. For example, people can speak, and should.

On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 17:16:30 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 7:27:46 PM UTC-4, peterson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:06:42 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 9:01:00 AM UTC-4, peterson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:42:41 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

I would suggest that the natural rights to life, liberty and property are quite defensible. You?

And yet, you've never come close to managing a defense.

There is no reason to conclude that any human has more or fewer such natural rights as any other, therefore such natural rights are equal rights and must exist.

There is no reason to conclude that natural rights exist outside your
imagination. You've certainly not demonstrated that.

In fact I have demonstrated that they exist. For example, people can speak, and should.

Ah, yes. "Fact." I had forgotten that you don't know what the word
means.

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 7:28:59 PM UTC-4, peterson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 09:12:27 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 9:01:49 AM UTC-4, peterson wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 01:46:21 -0700 (PDT), wsnell01 wrote:

I don't want to live anyplace that requires mass transit.

What you meant to say was "I don't want to use mass transit."

Nope. I love using mass transit.

Then you should have no problem with using it in NYC.

I don't. And I have.

NYC, Chicago, Denver, etc, don't "require" mass transit, so you should have no objection to living in such a place in order to reduce your CO2 footprint.

I do so whenever I'm someplace where
it's available.

It's available in Colorado Springs:

https://transit.coloradosprings.gov/...k/bus-services

So? I don't live in Colorado Springs. And in fact, the quality of the
public transportation system in Colorado Springs is so poor as to be
useless to most people.

That's probably because hypocrites such as you don't ride it. It's available and should be used, especially by those concerned by AGW.

If you moved to Colorado Springs, you could work to improve the transit system there, support the system by using it instead of driving your car and do your part to fight AGW.

Learn to read.

You wrote:

"I don't want to live anyplace that requires mass transit."

So name some places where mass transit is "required," peterson.

Cities.

Is there some kind of federal law requiring a city to have a mass transit system? Is there some kind of law requiring people to use mass transit? Do tell us about these laws, peterson.