The tube couldn't travel at c, only very close to c. If you were in the tube, and propelled yourself within the tube by whatever means, you wouldn't notice anything particularly odd. To you, it might take 5 minutes to traverse the length of the tube. But to an outside observer, it would take **FAR** longer. Say, a thousand years, for the same action (the closer to c, the longer it it would take from the viewpoint of an outside observer). The faster you tried to move in the tube, the more time dilation you would experience.

That dyson fan does have blades, they're just hidden inside the base: http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix... The same would not work for power generation.

Usually the cars that are meant to come with HID headlights will not blind you, because the reflector is designed to cut off the beam above headlight level. The cars that blind you are almost always cars that were made for halogen, but have HIDs installed.

The filament in a halogen bulb isn't the same size and shape as the incandescent gas in an HID bulb. The reflector would need to be redesigned in order to use an HID buib without causing glare. It is pretty much never a good idea to use an HID bulb in a halogen fixture.

But you don't fill the engine and passenger compartment with saltwater.

And its nearly 100% likely that it exploded upon tipping over.

True, but it can be damaged enough to prevent healing. There are also chemicals it doesn't know how to deal with, so they just build up in the liver until it can't function. Also, it's suprisingly easy to overdose on acetaminophen. Particularly if you consume alcohol while taking it. An overdose can easily result in total liver failure.

Even with a very effective vaccine, your body could still be overwhelmed by a virus. There are only so many antibodies in your body for a particular virus at one time. If you are exposed to a huge quantity of virus all at once, it could overwhelm the ability of your immune system to fight it. You probably wouldn't get as sick as someone who was unvaccinated, but you could still get sick.

The point is that facts should not be debatable, but that is what has generally been occurring. People don't want to talk about potentially costly solutions, so they are instead trying to discredit the facts that "create"* the problem, at least until the facts are so obvious that it's unavoidable.

* I say "create" because, obviously, the problem exists whether we choose to recognize it or not.

Why would it be too much? We have more than one manufacturer and they would all be competing with each other on price in a much more direct way than they do today. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy a specific make/model.
Also, If you're getting it for less than someone else, then they are subsidizing your lower price. Why should I or anyone else subsidize the cost of your car?

Really? I would love to be able to shop for a car and know that no matter where I shopped I was getting the exact same price. I absolutely HATE having to negotiate on the price, and the popularity of services like truecar suggest that a huge number of people agree with me.

Why? Tesla sees dealers for the unnecessary middle men that they are. They've already shown that they would rather not enter a market than open a franchised dealership. I don't see any reason that this would change.

A brake job at the dealer for just about any luxury car is going to run around $600.

Local hidden variable theories were dis-proven, but why would a pilot wave be considered local to the particle? It's a property of space-time, not the particle itself.

So, AGW is false if the people that advocate for doing something about it don't want to build nuclear power plants? How is that logical? They are two completely different things. One of them is the reality of whether humans are having an effect on the climate. The other one is what to do about that. The vast majority of "deniers" seem to have a problem with the latter, not the former, but have a difficulty separating the two.

I can't help but notice that the reasons you give for being skeptical of AGW are the character of some prominent people pushing for actions to counter AGW, the cost of said actions, the fact that other countries aren't being forced to take action, and that our current weather models aren't perfect.

NONE of that has anything to do with whether humans are responsible for climate change. All of your skepticism is around what do to about it and the extant of the warming.