The Iceage will SUCK

Topspin said:
At $4 gas you could have decent adoption rates for hybrids.
But if any of you have check, most electric cars are $40,000 plus (volt)
that's way above where economy buyers are at.
It totally doesn't make financial sense when you can get a better performing and handling civic or equivalent for under $20,000 and still get 35 mph hwy.
Click to expand...


Short term personal finiancial sense maybe not now, but gas will not stay at $4.
then there are security aspects to depending on foreign oil. Developing new tech to help the USA shine again, etc...
 
uscitizen said:
Short term personal finiancial sense maybe not now, but gas will not stay at $4.
then there are security aspects to depending on foreign oil. Developing new tech to help the USA shine again, etc...
Click to expand...

An important part of that may be the conversion kits that were in the news a while back. The cost plummeted fourfold within just two months as people began refining the technology. It should continue to drop for a while until it reaches a reasonable level to maximize demand.
 
LMAO... poor little dizie, such poor reading comprehension skills. We said that alt energy would make up 50%, that oil would be about 20% or less. There is NOTHING wrong with that statement dizie. You see we did not say that alt energy was 50% and fossil fuels would be under 20%. We said OIL dizie. That leaves the other 30% for coal, nat gas etc....
Click to expand...

My reading comprehension skills are fine, it is your basic understanding of the English language that is a problem. ALTERNATIVE ENERGY is a term to describe energy derived from sources that do not use up natural resources or harm the environment. Natural gas is a byproduct of oil refining, without oil production, natural gas supply would be limited. Coal is a natural resource, and is considerably more damaging to the environment than oil or natural gas. We're back to magic bunnies and the farts from your brain to make up that extra 30% you haven't explained!

Second, we never stated that this would happen in the next 15-20 years.... so if you truly believe your own ignorance, then kindly show us where we stated that.
Click to expand...

I never said you "stated" it, and I think most people are capable of reading the thread. You continue to spout examples that do not apply, like cell phones and computers, to imply that alternative energy will undoubtedly follow the same path. I've explained why your analysis is flawed, because cell phones and computers weren't replacing something completely the opposite in nature! There are a TON of examples of technologies which came along, that were an 'improvement' over what previously existed, and when that is the case, the public transforms rather quickly, depending on the level of improvement. Cars, microwave ovens, cell phones, computers... those are examples of things that came along, which made our lives easier and better, alternative fuels don't do that! They simply replace something that is already there, which people are accustomed to, and which offers no real tangible benefit to the consumer. You've yet to give an adequate example of this, and if you find one, you'll probably find commercial failure or reluctance to accept the 'new' thing.

Again.... so venture capitalists and entreprenuers are 'pinheads'? These are businiesses dizie. Not environmental groups.
Click to expand...

Some are! Especially those involved in alternative energy at this time. Environmentalism IS a business!

The above is complete idiocy. How can you fail to see the comparison. It was the same bullshit. Take a look at cell phones when they first came out. Popular sentiment at the time was that they were 'too big' 'too bulky' 'lacked range' blah blah blah... no way would they be able to make them smaller as chips were already as small as they could get.... blah blah blah. The point dear little dizzie is that people are almost always skeptical about new technologies and the ability of those technologies to become cost competitive. To pretend the situation is not the same just because you proclaim 'well cell phones aren't tied to energy needs'... again shows your ignorance on capitalism.
Click to expand...

Again, your comparison to cell phones is totally invalid! Cell phones didn't exist before cell phones existed! A cell phone provides a tangible benefit to the consumer which he didn't have before! We already have energy sources, they already exist, people are used to them! If no one had any energy source, and we heated our homes with fire, and lit our world with candles and lanterns, and you came along with alternative energy, THEN it would be a huge boon, as you are trying to compare here! That's just not the case!

Tell us ditzie... since when is government intervention required for capitalism?
Click to expand...

Since we started letting pinhead liberals control government and restrict capitalism!

Again moron, there are many successful alt energy companies out there. Your ignoring them, is not going to change that.
Click to expand...

No, there aren't many who have shown a profit at this point, most of them are losing money. I've not ignored a damn thing, I just made a valid and legitimate observation, and you disagree with it. That's all.

Fourth.... take your hick ass to a place like MIT, Colorado State University or any of the other institutions producing leading technology in alt energy. Take a tour of their facilities. Learn about the new products and ideas that are being developed. Then you might finally understand that we are on the brink of many new technologies coming to market. But we are currently at the equivalent of the PC universe in the mid 80's. Not where computers were five years ago.
Click to expand...

My "hick ass" has been all over this country, and all over this world, as a matter of fact. I am aware of the research being done on alternative energy, and I believe some of it does indeed have promise for the future. This debate is being consistently shoved into a corner from my perspective, you want to make out like I refute alternative energy completely and don't think it can offset fossil fuel energy in the least, and I have not said that! My point of contention has been, the people running the show for alternative energy... they are pinhead liberal environmentalists like you, who don't understand or believe in free market capitalism! THAT is why alternative energy will take more than half a century to catch on, because idiots are in charge!

Now, I read the thread, and I see you and the rest of your band of morons slobbering around with these inane analogies and examples, trying to convince me that alternative energy will be here before we know it, and it will completely eliminate man's need for oil! I don't buy that! I'm sorry, I just don't! I've given you my reasons why, and you want to refuse to listen and claim I am saying shit I haven't said, and that's fine pinhead, you go right ahead and be stubborn, it's what you do best! To me, just trying to 'objectively' step back and look at what is being argued here, you and the other idiot think it will take 40 years for alt energy to dominate, and I think it will take 50 years or more. Not really a whole fucking lot of difference there, if you ask me! Not enough to warrant all the name calling and relentless posting of the same stupidity over and over again. Bottom line, it will take a LONG FUCKING TIME for alternative energy to overtake oil and fossil fuels as our main source of energy.
 
"My reading comprehension skills are fine, it is your basic understanding of the English language that is a problem. ALTERNATIVE ENERGY is a term to describe energy derived from sources that do not use up natural resources or harm the environment. Natural gas is a byproduct of oil refining, without oil production, natural gas supply would be limited. Coal is a natural resource, and is considerably more damaging to the environment than oil or natural gas. We're back to magic bunnies and the farts from your brain to make up that extra 30% you haven't explained! "

ROFLMAO.... you truly are retarded. Again you poor mental midget....

We were talking about alt energy being about 50%
We said oil would be about 20%
Nat Gas and coal would make up the other 30%

The total for fossil fuels would thus be about 50% and alt energy 50% you fucking moron. But thank you again for providing us with a shining example of your stupidity.
 
"I never said you "stated" it, and I think most people are capable of reading the thread. You continue to spout examples that do not apply, like cell phones and computers, to imply that alternative energy will undoubtedly follow the same path. I've explained why your analysis is flawed, because cell phones and computers weren't replacing something completely the opposite in nature! There are a TON of examples of technologies which came along, that were an 'improvement' over what previously existed, and when that is the case, the public transforms rather quickly, depending on the level of improvement. Cars, microwave ovens, cell phones, computers... those are examples of things that came along, which made our lives easier and better, alternative fuels don't do that! They simply replace something that is already there, which people are accustomed to, and which offers no real tangible benefit to the consumer. You've yet to give an adequate example of this, and if you find one, you'll probably find commercial failure or reluctance to accept the 'new' thing. "

No dixie you poor pathetic moron.... the examples were to show toppy that it COULD happen. That it was not impossible to go from 7% today to 50% in 40 years. You moronic hick.
 
"Again, your comparison to cell phones is totally invalid! Cell phones didn't exist before cell phones existed! A cell phone provides a tangible benefit to the consumer which he didn't have before! We already have energy sources, they already exist, people are used to them! If no one had any energy source, and we heated our homes with fire, and lit our world with candles and lanterns, and you came along with alternative energy, THEN it would be a huge boon, as you are trying to compare here! That's just not the case! "

Poor ditzie... yes you idiot... it doesn't take a genius to understand that a product doesn't exist until it actually exists. You proved that in your ability to figure it out.

The point dipshit... is that phones existed. Pay phones existed. People were 'used' to those methods. People were used to using the postal service vs. emails. They were used to doing things manually rather than via computer. They were used to research being done at the library, rather than the internet.
 
"No, there aren't many who have shown a profit at this point, most of them are losing money. I've not ignored a damn thing, I just made a valid and legitimate observation, and you disagree with it. That's all. "

You poor demented little hick... I work in investments, there are many companies in alt energy that have been profitable. Like most sectors right now, many are posting negative profits due to the economy, not their business structure. But please, continue to pretend you have a clue. You are rather amusing.
 
"My "hick ass" has been all over this country, and all over this world, as a matter of fact. I am aware of the research being done on alternative energy, and I believe some of it does indeed have promise for the future. This debate is being consistently shoved into a corner from my perspective, you want to make out like I refute alternative energy completely and don't think it can offset fossil fuel energy in the least, and I have not said that! My point of contention has been, the people running the show for alternative energy... they are pinhead liberal environmentalists like you, who don't understand or believe in free market capitalism! THAT is why alternative energy will take more than half a century to catch on, because idiots are in charge!

Now, I read the thread, and I see you and the rest of your band of morons slobbering around with these inane analogies and examples, trying to convince me that alternative energy will be here before we know it, and it will completely eliminate man's need for oil! I don't buy that! I'm sorry, I just don't! I've given you my reasons why, and you want to refuse to listen and claim I am saying shit I haven't said, and that's fine pinhead, you go right ahead and be stubborn, it's what you do best! To me, just trying to 'objectively' step back and look at what is being argued here, you and the other idiot think it will take 40 years for alt energy to dominate, and I think it will take 50 years or more. Not really a whole fucking lot of difference there, if you ask me! Not enough to warrant all the name calling and relentless posting of the same stupidity over and over again. Bottom line, it will take a LONG FUCKING TIME for alternative energy to overtake oil and fossil fuels as our main source of energy. "

Now the above is perhaps your most comical moment ditzie....

1) The fact that you think I am a 'liberal' shows what a moron you truly are.

2) While I believe in reducing pollution as much as possible, I am not your definition of an environmentalist.

3) I am fully aware of capitalism you moron. I am the one that recognizes the hundreds of alt energy companies are part of the capitalistic system we have in the US. You on the other hand are too ignorant to comprehend that. you instead prefer us all to believe that they are all run by some nutjob environmentalists who are trying to stop capitalism. Which by the way... makes NO sense. Why would any environmentalist try to stop alt energy companies from being successful??? moron.

4) If you didn't think there was much of a difference between stating it would take 40 vs. 50 years, then why did you come on here acting like we were crazy for stating alt energy could reach 50% in 40 years? Please explain that too us you moronic hick.
 
The point *******... is that phones existed. Pay phones existed. People were 'used' to those methods. People were used to using the postal service vs. emails. They were used to doing things manually rather than via computer. They were used to research being done at the library, rather than the internet.
Click to expand...

Cell phones DIDN'T exist, computers DIDN'T exist! They introduced something that made our lives easier and more enriched. Alternative energy is not something new being introduced, we already have energy sources, it provides no tangible improvement! Now, if alternative energy was going to not only fuel our cars and heat our homes, but also give us head and stroke our egos, maybe you'd have something! It would then be introducing something new to make our lives easier and more enriched! As it stands, it simply replaces something we already have. I've been trying to think of a good example of comparison, and the only one I can think of is New Coke! We already had a Coke, people were fine with it... then New Coke was introduced, and it provided no new benefit or advantage, it just tasted different... look how well that turned out? Now granted, Coke wasn't $4 a gallon and rising, Coke wasn't a limited natural resource, and Coke didn't harm the environment to produce, and we could actually live without it. But it does illustrate the dichotomy of introducing something to the market that is already there.

Another good example we could look at is Newspapers. Way back when radio was first invented, I am sure some pinhead like you was claiming that Newspapers would only represent 20% of the media in 50 years! Then TV came along, and I'm sure even more pinheads predicted the demise of Newspapers, and then the Internet... but still, there are Newspapers, and they will probably be around a while longer, they weren't replaced in 50 years by "alternative media" because the alternative offered no real tangible advantage. Yes, eventually... Newspapers will die out, as will use of fossil fuels, but things like that don't happen in a few decades unless there is real tangible benefit and advantage to the consumer.
 
Dixie said:
Cell phones DIDN'T exist, computers DIDN'T exist! They introduced something that made our lives easier and more enriched. Alternative energy is not something new being introduced, we already have energy sources, it provides no tangible improvement! Now, if alternative energy was going to not only fuel our cars and heat our homes, but also give us head and stroke our egos, maybe you'd have something! It would then be introducing something new to make our lives easier and more enriched! As it stands, it simply replaces something we already have. I've been trying to think of a good example of comparison, and the only one I can think of is New Coke! We already had a Coke, people were fine with it... then New Coke was introduced, and it provided no new benefit or advantage, it just tasted different... look how well that turned out? Now granted, Coke wasn't $4 a gallon and rising, Coke wasn't a limited natural resource, and Coke didn't harm the environment to produce, and we could actually live without it. But it does illustrate the dichotomy of introducing something to the market that is already there.

Another good example we could look at is Newspapers. Way back when radio was first invented, I am sure some pinhead like you was claiming that Newspapers would only represent 20% of the media in 50 years! Then TV came along, and I'm sure even more pinheads predicted the demise of Newspapers, and then the Internet... but still, there are Newspapers, and they will probably be around a while longer, they weren't replaced in 50 years by "alternative media" because the alternative offered no real tangible advantage. Yes, eventually... Newspapers will die out, as will use of fossil fuels, but things like that don't happen in a few decades unless there is real tangible benefit and advantage to the consumer.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO.... dipshit... computers DID exist, phones did exist. Personal computers/laptops were new. Cell phones were new. There were alternatives for both. They both provided improvements to society.

Again, moron, yes energy sources already exist. Alt energy represents an IMPROVEMENT moron. It benefits our environement, our health and our national security. Idiot.

You seriously are a demented moron. I am truly shocked that you haven't become a Darwin award winner yet.
 
Superfreak said:
ROFLMAO.... *******... computers DID exist, phones did exist. Personal computers/laptops were new. Cell phones were new. There were alternatives for both. They both provided improvements to society.

Again, *****, yes energy sources already exist. Alt energy represents an IMPROVEMENT *****. It benefits our environement, our health and our national security. *****.

You seriously are a demented *****. I am truly shocked that you haven't become a Darwin award winner yet.
Click to expand...

No tangible "improvement" for the consumer. That was not the case with cell phones or personal computers. You have made my point for me, thanks!

I am now done with this discussion, since you obviously want to just hurl insults at me and repeat yourself like a retarded person. ...Damn if that ain't popular amongst the pinheads today, is it the cold weather?
 
I'm a little fuzzy on the whole "insult" thing; wouldn't "retarded person" and "pinhead" qualify, or am I being old fashioned?
 
Onceler said:
I'm a little fuzzy on the whole "insult" thing; wouldn't "retarded person" and "pinhead" qualify, or am I being old fashioned?
Click to expand...

Pinhead is not an insult, you should be honored to be a pinhead. In fact, I think I will actually stop referring to you as a pinhead, you're not intelligent enough to meet the qualifications. You may have a point on "retarded person", I think it is more appropriate to say "mentally disabled persons" so I will take that under consideration.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top