Another conspiracy theory, this time it's proven
Look at this Powerpoint file here, and then think about the amount of time and money that has gone into the destruction of the electric car. I just don't understand it, if the car companies went to the effort to create these cars who has enough money to bribe them to destroy them. In other words why create something just to tear it down? Where's the business case in that?
6 comments:
I don't get it either... Also, a convicted arsonist is probably not the best martyr.
Ben.
There is an excellent video, Who Killed The Electric Car, available for purchase or rent. The KPR School Board has it in the LRC. You can rent it from there. It may even be at the Cobourg Public Library.
Here's some info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car
Another comment:
We have an excellent DVD called "Who Killed the Electric Car" at the LRC library.
The car companies killed it through peer pressure from the oil companies in the late 90's and early 2000's. Just like the oil companies finally lowered their oil prices this year after the car companies got into the worst trouble in years.
Whatever anybody says, they are both sleeping together because they need each other to make money off the world.
Rent the movie. It's very enlightening.
The PowerPoint presentation is exceedingly sophomoronic. Spelling errors throughout; for Allah's sake, the first page asserts: "...in some cities around the world such as Los Angeles, Mexico City and China." Where is that city?
The arsonist, Jeffrey Luers, had his sentence reduced from 22 years, 8 months to 10 years, but to put that into the PowerPoint presentation would diminish its alarmist impact.
At his sentencing hearing, Jeffrey Luers justified his arson: "We are witnessing a mass extinction event taking place in our life times. The world's top scientists are warning that by the middle of this century, 30 to 50 percent of all living species could be extinct. There are predictions of 250 million people, or more, dying for lack of water and food."
That, of course, is hyperbolic hype.
Interestingly, these uber-environmentalistas never conduct an environmental impact study on their own actions -- what toxic particles were released into the atmosphere by their acts of arson? What safety measures did they take to ensure the arson did not spread?
The EV1 was subsidized to the tune of $13,000 by state and federal government. If the taxpayers, via their elected officials, decline to continue such subsidization, why would a company continue to produce an unprofitable vehicle?
"Another conspiracy theory, this time it's proven" It absolutely is not proven. There is a wide difference between an assertion and proof. Mr Burd might find it advantageous to spend time in a court of law. There is such a thing as "burden of proof" and it is certainly not met by this PowerPoint presentation.
There is zero proof that a "bribe" has been made.
Insofar as electric cars are concerned, I'm all for their development. I have never owned or leased a car; I use a bike. I have lived in an urban enviroment (city, small city, small town) and had no need for a car. I have a jumbo basket on front and two fold-out baskets on the rear of the bike and it can hold well over a $100 worth of groceries. So what if it takes two trips.
I have used a taxi 3 or 4 times a year, transit whenever the weather was inclement, train if I want to travel out of town, and yes, I ride my bike in the winter.
Ben Burd has driven a car for how many years? Polluting the air we all breathe for how many years? It is about time Ben Burd put his butt on a two wheeler (or three) and apologized for his contamination of the air I breathe.
Actually Wally, if you spent some time in Cobourg, instead of commenting from afar,I don't get to the big smoke to breathe the same air as you; you would see me walking and biking around town. The bike's in the garage right now waiting for the good weather, otherwise it's shoe leather right now.
As you know from previous posts I am not the apologetic type, so you criticise I can take it!
You'll have to settle for a statement that tells you I do get out of my car.
Twice in my life I have been offered a car, free, and both times I turned it down. I had no need for such a thing. My contamination of the atmosphere is a fraction of the load you have dumped into it.
I spent my first 25 years in Cobourg -- NOT driving a polluting vehicle. Over subsequent decades, I've dropped into Cobourg continuously -- NOT driving a polluting vehicle.
I wouldn't expect a polluter like you to apologize; after all, it's the OTHERS that you admonish.
All too often the major crusaders against pollution, are major polluters themselves. Do as I say, not as I do.
But I extend a kudo and half for your use of the bike and leather. (Is your car a hybrid?)
Post a Comment