Very insightful. The authority keeps repeatedly getting it wrong, from amyloid plaques, to string theory, to mRNA jabs. More so, the long march through institutions by neo-Marxist made a mockery of scientific authority, when they tell you a man can become a woman, then you start wondering what else they tell you is ideological propaganda and not based on the actual science.

This is how science should work. In reality, a scientist like that would lose tenure track, grants, and would not this model published because peer review would not let it through.

Participate? Call it what it is - enabling rent seeding by private interests on all energy, shipping, and food costs. That is, you are asking everyone, including starving poor in third-world countries, to pay more for food so some connected technocrat can siphon money out of the system using some green-wash scheme.

We are trying to save the planet here! Logic and reason are not allowed.

No, I am not just asking questions. I outright don't believe the published literature, hockey stick and all that. Yes, it is getting warmer, no we are not going to suffer disaster, less extinction, because of that, and no this warming is not mainly caused by humans burning fossil fuels.

No, it demonstrates failure of how we practice science in some areas, where on some topics dissent from consensus is career-ending. Yet, some courageous individuals still do it. Climate "science" isn't science exactly because of this reason. There isn't strong evidence against anthropogenic climate change because scientists aren't allowed to look for it and ones that do are not able to publish.

I understand what you are saying, that large plug-in SUVs are not as efficient as advertised because of limitations to electric-only use cases), but with that said, 6.7 L/100 km is still good mileage for a large SUV. By comparison, my gasoline-only Toyota SUV (one of many vehicle I have) gets about 9 L /100 km.

It is dead simple when you have an idea what the outcomes going to be because you have done it before. Now think from the point of view of someone doing it for the first time, installer does not at all explain what these choices mean. It ought to at least show preview/screenshot of each available desktop environment for people that don't know that Gnome is absolute shit.

My understanding is that temperature-CO2 levels are related, the warmer average temperature, more CO2 gas will be present in the atmosphere. Many claim causation (i.e., it is warmer because of CO2), but I am not convinced by such single-cause explanation.

I like minimalist PixeL (default with PiOS), but having Gnome being default on so many distributions is insane and holding Linux adoption back. I was recently re-exposed to Gnome when I installed Debian 13 with all defaults. I was really shocked how bad it was (Gnome, not Debian). WTF.

While technically you are correct, do you think people attempting to migrate from Windows would care about this? Whatever default is, they will install, look at the UI, correctly decide that these people lost their minds and never give Linux another chance.

However, Linux desktop UI have been going off the deep end for years. I recently loaded Gnome and it won't even let me have desktop icons. Deeply, disturbingly anti-user mindset.

I store my classic cars, so I deal with ethanol and other fuel issues frequently. You actually want to keep the gas tank as full as possible, because if it is full it has very little air and there is less opportunities for condensation. Ethanol-free gasoline is great, if you can get it, but it is getting harder to get. More so, if they do not use dedicated pump, first half a gallon or so would be of whatever previous person used, so even if you buy ethanol-free gas, with a small tank or partial fill you can end up with quite a bit of it.

This is exactly about getting up to temperature to get rid of water condensation. It would not be the case for OP, as mostly electric driving results in infrequent and short generator usage.

The last time I checked, Toyota hybrids got much better gas mileage. That is, they are more fuel efficient even with the generator running. How is that not factored into calculation?