By "every couple of months" you mean every time I recharge the car and it takes 20-30 mins instead of 3?

But you've already lost; you're NOT trying to persuading according to the compelling objective advantages, now you're just quoting sacred creed. "SHAME! SINNER! ECO-SHAME!"

"more important than the environment." You misspelled "virtue signaling".

....and have been able to for a while. :|

I drive to Chicago from Mpls maybe twice every 3 months. Essentially 400 mi.

ABRT shows an EV makes a 6:30 drive over 8hr, almost 25% longer.

I even tried to rent an EV (Genesis GV60 from Avis, that was a clusterfuck) for a run last year and ended up just driving some shitty jeep because when I showed up they'd forgotten to plug the GV60 in and if I waited I'd have missed my meeting in Chicago.

That and I test drove a Volvo PHEV and a) it was kind of a shit ride, b) it has a 35-40 mi elec range* at best, c) despite them explaining when the electric would kick in, when I drove it around for 20 mins, IT NEVER DID...so what the fuck? Why would I pay for 2x powertrains and double the maintenance to (basically) drive an under-engined, overweight car?

*which sales admitted during MN winter coldest months would be more like 20-30 tops...I couldn't even GET TO WORK on that.

Look, I absolutely think eventually EVs will dominate. Right now they're for people who functionally could probably get by with a golf cart instead, virtue signalers, and religious zealots.

I think it's rsilvergun likes to lurk as AC
If you look, almost every one of my posts has this shit attached to it. Even if it isn't faintly political.

I have two sons and I can guarantee that "the system isn't skewed against you, look your older brother isn't a failure like you are" wouldn't exactly hit the way you probably intend.

... Are the modern equivalent of medieval indulgences "pay me money and you can go ahead and keep sinning".

And just as likely to be effective in a) stopping sinning an/or b) making you innocent.

Haven't you complained repeatedly about shit-wage jobs and Amazon as a soulless employer?

What do you think will compel them to meaningfully pay more and treat workers better than throttling away their legions of low wage no-questions-really-asked workers?

Maybe Amazon (and their ancestors in big box retail) will even start costing more and spur a renaissance in local retail? Yeah I know that's getting into fantasy...

I'm an ICE user, who just bought a new car and after carefully considering an ev or hybrid, chose ICE again because of a long litany of EV shortcomings for my context.
Nevertheless this range accomplishment is great news. I think that's really great.

Is it constructive to immediately assume anyone who disagrees with you is a zealot? Do you think that's convincing anyone to be more open minded?

Did anyone say that?

Yes because the disaster response by the feds pre Trump was brilliant. Just ask North Carolina, or the folks in Florida who were BY POLICY ignored because they had a Trump sign in their yard?

Since hair splitting is clearly your thing, the 1938 introduction of Superman has Clark Kent at age about 34.

That would put his adoption around 1902 or earlier, when the extant rules would clearly have made his adoption fully legal and him a citizen.

YDC.

1000% agree. I don't know if you expected I'd disagree, but absolutely: the idea of a $100 million plane (and what they don't tell you is that the quote to allies is +$400 million in life costs for the plane's operational span - this is a $half BILLION plane).

You could FILL THE SKY with crazy awesome drones and deploy a "can't miss" directed-energy weapon AA defense system for the cost of 1 stupid F35.

DoD exactly like NASA: the government needs to aggressively prune these programs.
We are $37 BILLION in debt.

There will be a wave of posts about how these Brave Senators are fighting the Nasty Orange Fascist Tyrant and his anti-Science agenda(tm).

When in fact, let's be clear:
- SLS is an hilariously borderline disaster. Behind by years, $billions beyond budget, tests constantly fail. And it basically doesn't work.
https://caseyhandmer.wordpress...
- Should we talk about how their original mandate was more or less just to REbuild the Saturn V/Apollo a little bigger with modern materials? You know, that system that had 17 launches with only one launch system (sort of) failure (Apollo 13) MORE THAN 50 years ago? The system that was largely designed by engineers, whose "computers" were 6-7 orders of magnitude less capable than the smartphone in your pocket? Does it help the argument to point out that NASA is basically trying to rebuild something their fathers built, this time with astonishing developments in CAD/CAM, design, and almost-magical accomplishments in material science...and we still haven't even gotten a working fucking SPACESUIT yet?
- Destin @ SmarterEveryDay is about as proNASA as they can be, it's in his blood, and he *tried* in the most polite way possible to tell them "look, we all know this is a mess, nobody's even done the basic math on some CRITICAL program items for Artemis and...nobody's talking about it" It's a good video, and a good talk from someone who is genuinely sympathetic to the engineers in that room.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... ...(crickets)
- Yes, some of these senators (mostly the Democrats, but there are neverTrumper GOPs that will pretend righteousness) will themselves claim this as a Pro Science Crusade. Maybe it is, sure, whatever. But what these senators are MOSTLY fighting for is their piece of the $50 BILLION spent in their states that's been spent so far with no real sign of completion. That's serious gravy-train money even in Senatorial scales.

NASA (& JPL) is an amazing organization. It really IS rocket science. They have made some astonishing accomplishments, even in recent years, such as JWST and Martian probes that run nearly forever. They are, bar none, the pre-eminent space exploration organization on earth.
To be clear, I'm not peddling an alternative - there is no easy answer now.
I'm fine with Musk constantly blowing up spaceships, it's his $, but NASA is supposed to be good at this. Frankly, I'd rather we have a government space program *AND* private-industry space programs, both!

Nevertheless, at some point *someone* in charge has to have the nuts to confront NASA when a program is a mess and DEMAND they either fix it or kill it. It can't just go on hemorrhaging money for nothing in return.

Yes, if you'd been following along I was identifying a SPECIFIC PERSON'S hypocrisy.
If I'm calling out one person as a tendentious hypocrite, what relevance would be articles by some Washington weekly, Vox*, or the "Bipartisan policy center"**?

*oops:
"Initially effective at increasing deportations, the Secure Communities program was short-lived. It faced blowback from primarily liberal jurisdictions, driving a revival of the movement to offer sanctuary to undocumented immigrants in the 2010s.
The concern among progressives was that it would reduce trust in law enforcement among immigrant communities and make everyone less safe because fewer people would report crimes. It also led to the deportation of people who had only committed minor offenses or had no criminal convictions.
In 2014, Obama rescinded the program in response."

** to their main question: why isn't Trump prioritizing the worst criminals? Well....they don't appear to really know, "it appears" "it seems" - when a quick perusal of the WH's own official statement repeatedly mentions prioritizing public safety. https://www.whitehouse.gov/pre...
FWIW, honestly, I don't care how they prioritize them. If they're caught, send them home, full stop. Bird in the hand is one that doesn't get to fly to some shitty "sanctuary city" and rob/rape/kill some innocent person there.

Is "inability to act like a functioning adult" really an excuse, though?