For the tree huggin ethanol people

[31_bandits]

Originally Posted by PhilD

It's just another leaf lickers slanted view of the World. Ultimately he blames "Detroit" and will no doubt not be happy until we all live in wind powered houses, cycle to work, and donate all our disposable income to help the unfortunate in 3rd World countries.

Well, probably not. They'd still find something to be mad about. The extreme element of enviro-concern is intrinsically simply unhappy. They will rail against something, whatever that is, probably always. What was once the worst thing evil men ever did to the world? Nuclear power. Now the same extreme fringe considers it the answer.

As with hummer haters in general, the extreme element of enviro-concern is emotionally driven and not rational. And the element of liberalism in America over the last 15-20 years (since i've been old enough to know politics existed) that is anti-american is born of personal discontent and cannot be quelled by changing america, as it has nothing to do with america, and everything to do with the people who have the feeling.

[Aubs]

Originally Posted by 31_bandits

Well, probably not. They'd still find something to be mad about. The extreme element of enviro-concern is intrinsically simply unhappy. They will rail against something, whatever that is, probably always. What was once the worst thing evil men ever did to the world? Nuclear power. Now the same extreme fringe considers it the answer.

As with hummer haters in general, the extreme element of enviro-concern is emotionally driven and not rational. And the element of liberalism in America over the last 15-20 years (since i've been old enough to know politics existed) is born of personal discontent and cannot be quelled by changing america, as it has nothing to do with america, and everything to do with thep eople who have the feeling.

I would agree with you on that 100%. From my time spent at UMass Amherst I got the same feeling. And when you actually have a moderated discussion, and break their unfactual position apart, they start crying... so the emotional attachment is very much a part of it. I debated a few people, and most got quite irrational, red faced, and one just started sobbing. It was fascinating. The profs are a little better, though they all drive hybrids and refuse to believe in the validity of the CNW study. They're in their own little liberal bizzaro world that is a total disconnect from reality -- exactly why I'd love to be a professor!

[31_bandits]

Originally Posted by Aubs

I would agree with you on that 100%. From my time spent at UMass Amherst I got the same feeling. And when you actually have a moderated discussion, and break their unfactual position apart, they start crying... so the emotional attachment is very much a part of it. I debated a few people, and most got quite irrational, red faced, and one just started sobbing. It was fascinating. The profs are a little better, though they all drive hybrids and refuse to believe in the validity of the CNW study. They're in their own little liberal bizzaro world that is a total disconnect from reality -- exactly why I'd love to be a professor!

Or stand up and openly yell at you. But, in general, the more extreme somebodies views are, the less they are able to defend them and the farther they deviate from verifiable reality.

The other day one of the most liberal people that finds his/her way to my social circle stood up from a chair and screamed at me, then later said they'd lost hours of sleep stewing about my craziness. My commentary was this:

-the democratic party should take some responsibility for having bush in office, because they failed to produce a remotely passable candidate to oppose him. instead they found gore and kerry, two of the perhaps freakiest buggers they could have found.

Obviously that guy is an "enviromentalist". Drives an "hour car" if you guys know what those are and everything. He vehemently opposed nuclear power years ago and yelled at me for my support of it then... he supports it now.

Extreme views are what give rise to hummer hate, and to alot of what gets publicized in america today, and they are basically just never thought through. They are closer to temper tantrums than to something born of sitting down and crunching numers.

There is, of course, an equally extreme view on the opposite side, and extreme conservative views aren't necessarily any better. The KKK isn't any better than the wild liberal left, just nutty in a different way. (and, it seems to me, the two extremes are about equally bigoted and biased and stereotyping and so forth, they just "hate" different groups of people).

I don't mean to soap-box, and i do apologize if my blabber bores anybody, but while i accept that H2s get crappy mileage and i'd be willing to fund a petition to GM to really try to improve that, the singling out of the H2 is essentially without merit (either by enviro's or offroad enthusiasts, as the truck is used by 36% of drivers offroad and as DRTY said the other day "isn't it funny how our trucks seem to handle all these "hardcore" trails that we throw them at", and its mileage isn't stunningly bad, just about as crappy as some far-more-common also crappy mileage vehicles that should all be improved). My pocketbook doesn't mind the gasp rices at all, but for the sake of public relations, GM should really try to bump the H2 up a notch or 3 in the mileage department.

[f5fstop]

Originally Posted by 31_bandits

GM should really try to bump the H2 up a notch or 3 in the mileage department.

And it will happen... Be patient

[DRTYFN]

Screw all of this hybrid/alternately fueled vehicle crapola!!! I want my George Jetson flying car!!!!

[deserth3]

I have a few problems with this article.

1. Starts out talking about corn and ends up talking grain. Makes no sense,

2. Grain is being grown in surplus. And what is surplus is NOT getting to many of the starving people anyway.

3. The corn used for making E85 is not fit for human consumption. It is mainly grown for feed for cattle and in excess. Which makes them fatter than cattle who are range fed. You know fat. The stuff you cut off the steak and don't eat anyway.

4. www.e85fuel.com

Another liberal twisting the truth.

[31_bandits]

the element of liberals (and this certainly isn't all liberals) that is anti-US / anti-American has a built-in loathing for E85 because GM and Ford have endorsed it. Make no mistake, if GM had released the Prius nobody would have wanted it.

If i was GM, i would focus on some permanent/real solution to the problem - like hydrogen cars - and leave the hybrid thing to 'yota and the gang.

And i'd throw every nugget of technology at the next H2 and Escalade and Tahoe... displacement on demand, aerodynamics, tranny & shift patterns, low-loss t-cases and diffs (if that's even possible)...

why? because people absolutely love them, and they are massively profitable, and it would ... it would be a huge strike back into the heart of the anti-GM sentiment from the extremist left.


Do you know something, Fstop?