About those fuel prices…

[dogofwar]

I found no shortage of political nonsense claiming that that President is going to end fossil fuels. And lots saying that we eventually - 2035? - need to shift away from fossil fuels because of climate change. But an actual transcript of a speech or position paper or executive order stating that he himself will end use of fossil fuels. Not so much

Hello; interesting that you can find so many links and quotes to post and somehow cannot find the videos of him talking about ending fossil fuels. Also of interest is how you keep trying to imply that I am listening to some spin from a TV talking head with an agenda. Again videos exist with words out of the man's own mouth.

Last thing is I have been burned on this site before. There have been the favored and the out of favor in years past. Same scenario in that you may get away with posting some content while I cannot. In fact I was placed on probation while not having broken any site or posting rules. I had opinions not in favor of some at the time. Besides as evidenced by your posts you are a true believer not to be swayed. For years and especially the last 18 months or so this information has been presented many times, must be you just do not want to see.

 

[skjl47]

I found no shortage of political nonsense claiming that that President is going to end fossil fuels. And lots saying that we eventually - 2035? - need to shift away from fossil fuels because of climate change. But an actual transcript of a speech or position paper or executive order stating that he himself will end use of fossil fuels. Not so much

Hello; I just sent some links to you in a private message.

 

[dogofwar]

Yes - lots of out-of-context, gotcha short clips from "MAGA-NATION" kind of nonsense. And conflation of the needed "transition" away from fossil fuels and/or the end or reduction of *subsidies* to fossil fuel corporations (true) with the end or reduction of *fossil fuels* (false).

What's funny (ironic) is that the part cut out of the clip of the Democratic primary debate was the part where Biden was getting beat up for being AGAINST ending fracking.

You're going to believe what you're going to believe. That doesn't make it true

 

[skjl47]

Yes - lots of out-of-context, gotcha short clips from "MAGA-NATION" kind of nonsense. And conflation of the needed "transition" away from fossil fuels and/or the end or reduction of *subsidies* to fossil fuel corporations (true) with the end or reduction of *fossil fuels* (false).

What's funny (ironic) is that the part cut out of the clip of the Democratic primary debate was the part where Biden was getting beat up for being AGAINST ending fracking.

You're going to believe what you're going to believe. That doesn't make it true

Hello; Nice try. At least two of the links were to videos supplying direct evidence you asked for. In the spin comments above you did not say that the words did not come from the man's own mouth. Can you at least admit the truth which is the man actually said the words???

EDIT - yes one of the videos was from the democratic primary debate. So, by your convoluted reasoning content from the democratic primary debate is equal to what you call " "MAGA-NATION" kind of nonsense".
Thing is we have not been discussing fracking the last few posts. You have challenged the notion of him wanting to end fossil fuels. I provided proof of him speaking the very words out of his own mouth. Now you come back with the above gobbely-gook comments. Nice try but no points awarded.

 

[dogofwar]

So here's the transcript from the debate from which the Youtube excerpt that you sent me came: https://www.rev.com/blog/transcript...den-final-presidential-debate-transcript-2020

Trump, of course, keeps cutting Biden off and finally Biden gets a few seconds to say something without interruption, he says this to counter the false narrative that Trump was trying to establish that Biden would "close down the oil industry":

Well if you let me finish the statement, because it has to be replaced by renewable energy over time, over time, and I’d stopped giving to the oil industry, I’d stop giving them federal subsidies. You won’t get federal subsidies to the gas, oh, excuse me to solar and wind.

Trump repeated this false narrative -one that you're parroting - and a well-documented, non-partisan fact-checker found it to be FALSE: https://www.politifact.com/factchec...hecking-trumps-claim-biden-said-he-would-abo/

Fact-checking Trump’s claim that Biden said he would ‘abolish the entire U.S. oil industry’ - FALSE

Trump’s characterization of Biden’s position is vastly oversimplified, and he’s suggesting Biden doubled down on a stance he never took in the first place.

Biden wants to reduce the country’s reliance on oil by investing heavily in renewable energy, and he plans to pay for part of that investment by ending federal subsidies for oil companies. He doesn’t want to wipe out the oil industry as Trump claimed.

Some oil executives have even cheered Biden’s support for the development of technology that captures greenhouse gas emissions before they reach the atmosphere, allowing companies to safely burn fossil fuel for years to come.

And here's the section of dialogue from the debate.
Donald Trump: (23:10)
Would you close down the oil industry?

Joe Biden: (23:12)
By the way, I have a transition from the old industry, yes.

Donald Trump: (23:15)
Oh, that’s a big statement.

Joe Biden: (23:15)
I will transition. It is a big statement.

Donald Trump: (23:17)
That’s a big statement.

Joe Biden: (23:18)
Because I would stop.

Kristen Welker: (23:19)
Why would you do that?

Joe Biden: (23:21)
Because the oil industry pollutes, significantly.

Donald Trump: (23:24)
Oh, I see. Okay.

Joe Biden: (23:24)
Here’s the deal-

Donald Trump: (23:25)
That’s a big statement.

Joe Biden: (23:26)
Well if you let me finish the statement, because it has to be replaced by renewable energy over time, over time, and I’d stopped giving to the oil industry, I’d stop giving them federal subsidies. You won’t get federal subsidies to the gas, oh, excuse me to solar and wind.

Donald Trump: (23:45)
Yeah.

Joe Biden: (23:46)
Why are we giving it to oil industry?

Donald Trump: (23:47)
We actually give it to solar and wind. That’s maybe the biggest statement. In terms of business, that’s the biggest statement.

Kristen Welker: (23:53)
Okay.

Donald Trump: (23:53)
Because basically what he’s saying is-

Kristen Welker: (23:55)
We have one final question, Mr. President.

Donald Trump: (23:55)
… he is going to destroy the oil industry. Will you remember that Texas? Will you remember that Pennsylvania, Oklahoma?

Kristen Welker: (24:03)
Okay, Vice President Biden, let me give you 10 seconds.

Kristen Welker: (24:03)
Okay.

Donald Trump: (24:03)
Remember that Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, is-

Kristen Welker: (24:03)
Vice President Biden, let me give you 10 seconds to respond-

Donald Trump: (24:04)
Ohio.

Kristen Welker: (24:05)
… and then I have to get to the final question. Vice President Biden.

Joe Biden: (24:07)
He takes everything out of context, but the point is, look, we have to move toward net zero emissions. The first place to do that by the year 2035 is in energy production, by 2050 totally.

Kristen Welker: (24:21)
All right. One final question to both of you-

Donald Trump: (24:22)
Is he going to get China to do it?

Kristen Welker: (24:23)
No, we’re finished with this-

Donald Trump: (24:23)
Is he going to get China to do it?

Kristen Welker: (24:24)
We have to move onto our final question.

Joe Biden: (24:25)
No, I’m going to rejoin Paris Accord and make China abide by what they agreed to.

 

[dogofwar]

You seem to forget that links other than excerpts of the debates are from "GOP War Room" and "Americans for Tax Reform"... hardly non-partisan

But that misses the point: Ending federal subsidies for the oil industry (i.e. giving our tax dollars to fossil fuel corporations) is far different than "ending the oil industry." The former IS Biden's policy. That latter is not. Misstating it endlessly won't make it true. But a significant number of people will believe the falsehood because they want to believe the falsehood.

By the way, gas prices are lower in the last couple of days: filled up for $4.86 yesterday. Under $50 to go about 500 miles.

Hello; Nice try. At least two of the links were to videos supplying direct evidence you asked for. In the spin comments above you did not say that the words did not come from the man's own mouth. Can you at least admit the truth which is the man actually said the words???

EDIT - yes one of the videos was from the democratic primary debate. So, by your convoluted reasoning content from the democratic primary debate is equal to what you call " "MAGA-NATION" kind of nonsense".
Thing is we have not been discussing fracking the last few posts. You have challenged the notion of him wanting to end fossil fuels. I provided proof of him speaking the very words out of his own mouth. Now you come back with the above gobbely-gook comments. Nice try but no points awarded.

 

[skjl47]

So here's the transcript from the debate from which the Youtube excerpt that you sent me came: https://www.rev.com/blog/transcript...den-final-presidential-debate-transcript-2020

Trump, of course, keeps cutting Biden off and finally Biden gets a few seconds to say something without interruption, he says this to counter the false narrative that Trump was trying to establish that Biden would "close down the oil industry":

Well if you let me finish the statement, because it has to be replaced by renewable energy over time, over time, and I’d stopped giving to the oil industry, I’d stop giving them federal subsidies. You won’t get federal subsidies to the gas, oh, excuse me to solar and wind.

Trump repeated this false narrative -one that you're parroting - and a well-documented, non-partisan fact-checker found it to be FALSE: https://www.politifact.com/factchec...hecking-trumps-claim-biden-said-he-would-abo/

Fact-checking Trump’s claim that Biden said he would ‘abolish the entire U.S. oil industry’ - FALSE

Trump’s characterization of Biden’s position is vastly oversimplified, and he’s suggesting Biden doubled down on a stance he never took in the first place.

Biden wants to reduce the country’s reliance on oil by investing heavily in renewable energy, and he plans to pay for part of that investment by ending federal subsidies for oil companies. He doesn’t want to wipe out the oil industry as Trump claimed.

Some oil executives have even cheered Biden’s support for the development of technology that captures greenhouse gas emissions before they reach the atmosphere, allowing companies to safely burn fossil fuel for years to come.

And here's the section of dialogue from the debate.
Donald Trump: (23:10)
Would you close down the oil industry?

Joe Biden: (23:12)
By the way, I have a transition from the old industry, yes.

Donald Trump: (23:15)
Oh, that’s a big statement.

Joe Biden: (23:15)
I will transition. It is a big statement.

Donald Trump: (23:17)
That’s a big statement.

Joe Biden: (23:18)
Because I would stop.

Kristen Welker: (23:19)
Why would you do that?

Joe Biden: (23:21)
Because the oil industry pollutes, significantly.

Donald Trump: (23:24)
Oh, I see. Okay.

Joe Biden: (23:24)
Here’s the deal-

Donald Trump: (23:25)
That’s a big statement.

Joe Biden: (23:26)
Well if you let me finish the statement, because it has to be replaced by renewable energy over time, over time, and I’d stopped giving to the oil industry, I’d stop giving them federal subsidies. You won’t get federal subsidies to the gas, oh, excuse me to solar and wind.

Donald Trump: (23:45)
Yeah.

Joe Biden: (23:46)
Why are we giving it to oil industry?

Donald Trump: (23:47)
We actually give it to solar and wind. That’s maybe the biggest statement. In terms of business, that’s the biggest statement.

Kristen Welker: (23:53)
Okay.

Donald Trump: (23:53)
Because basically what he’s saying is-

Kristen Welker: (23:55)
We have one final question, Mr. President.

Donald Trump: (23:55)
… he is going to destroy the oil industry. Will you remember that Texas? Will you remember that Pennsylvania, Oklahoma?

Kristen Welker: (24:03)
Okay, Vice President Biden, let me give you 10 seconds.

Kristen Welker: (24:03)
Okay.

Donald Trump: (24:03)
Remember that Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, is-

Kristen Welker: (24:03)
Vice President Biden, let me give you 10 seconds to respond-

Donald Trump: (24:04)
Ohio.

Kristen Welker: (24:05)
… and then I have to get to the final question. Vice President Biden.

Joe Biden: (24:07)
He takes everything out of context, but the point is, look, we have to move toward net zero emissions. The first place to do that by the year 2035 is in energy production, by 2050 totally.

Kristen Welker: (24:21)
All right. One final question to both of you-

Donald Trump: (24:22)
Is he going to get China to do it?

Kristen Welker: (24:23)
No, we’re finished with this-

Donald Trump: (24:23)
Is he going to get China to do it?

Kristen Welker: (24:24)
We have to move onto our final question.

Joe Biden: (24:25)
No, I’m going to rejoin Paris Accord and make China abide by what they agreed to.

Hello; fascinating that you went to all that trouble to spin the truth . You did not address the other video in which he was more direct. The one where he speaks directly to a young woman. In a way i hope you continue with this approach. It is a waste of time since as i have already stated these videos have been shown many times on some news and talk show TV programs. TV shows with the highest ratings meaning very many millions have seen them.

It is interesting that you somehow feel you can double talk this out of existence. I get there are true believers around who will swallow any of the hype. However there are plenty of us who can see thru most of it. Especially when a top person in a movement makes a public statement. Carry on.

 

[Ogertron3000]

We should start a betting pool to see how much longer this thread goes on before the mods shut it down.
I reckon you have 36 hours left.

 

[skjl47]

You seem to forget that links other than excerpts of the debates are from "GOP War Room" and "Americans for Tax Reform"... hardly non-partisan

But that misses the point: Ending federal subsidies for the oil industry (i.e. giving our tax dollars to fossil fuel corporations) is far different than "ending the oil industry." The former IS Biden's policy. That latter is not. Misstating it endlessly won't make it true. But a significant number of people will believe the falsehood because they want to believe the falsehood.

By the way, gas prices are lower in the last couple of days: filled up for $4.86 yesterday. Under $50 to go about 500 miles.

Hello; A basic fact is some times the source which is showing the videos does not matter if the video is truthful. I get that a portion of the media will not be seeking out and will not be showing these videos of the man speaking the words. Those same media have kept quiet about a number of important issues in the same way. The deck is stacked to a large extent in terms of news/media. That there are fewer outlets willing to show some of this repressed information is a shame.
However there are media willing to put the stuff out. For a large part it can be left to the sort of spin you practice so well. One side tries to spin one way while another side spins a different way. I am more in the middle in that I would not be truly accepted by either camp. Thing is sometimes one of the principals makes a raw statement such as the videos which say what they say and the spin does not matter.

 

[skjl47]

We should start a betting pool to see how much longer this thread goes on before the mods shut it down.
I reckon you have 36 hours left.

Hello; Could very well be. Such has been the case in the past. Usually when a favored side is losing points in a discussion. The blame game about fuel prices makes a difference to everyday folks. An open discussion ought to be possible. That society may move to green energy and EV transportation is acceptable if done well. Currently the grid, the EV's, the battery recycling, the mining of rare earth minerals are not ready for prime time. To try to destroy an in place and working energy/transportation system before the replacement is ready does not make good sense.
Here is a way to look at it. Say I go out and buy an EV to replace my ICE vehicles. First they are expensive. Not long ago it was reported that a large number of folks could not come up with $500 for an emergency. Next is just over a week ago my power company as part of the TVA asked us to reduce electricity use during a hot spell. These grid shortages are happening already before the added load of more EV's. The grid is a critical part of an EV transportation system.

I will skip to a last point which is the notion that an EV transportation system is "clean". As things currently exist not so much. I will post a couple of links about the car company Volvo. Let me preface by saying Volvo has as a company has embraced the EV big time. Volvo has farmed out the production of ICE engines for the few remaining years they will need to use them and plan to go all EV. Volvo no longer will make it's own ICE.



Volvo says manufacturing an EV generates 70% more emissions than its ICE counterpart - AutoBuzz.my

Volvo_carbonfootprintreport.pdf (volvocars.com)

One link is a Volvo study. The other is an article about the study. Basically my take is the EV has to be driven around 68,000 miles to break even in terms of being clean/emissions with a similar ICE. After the 68,000 miles it starts to do better. The study does not get into the end of battery pack life and recycling however if memory serves.