I don't see any floating. The Tesla is just much heavier and denser than those other cars, and can maintain traction with the ground. And no ICE to ingest water and die.

The question with global warming to me is, are we even capable of reducing emissions and would we still be able to afford to feed ourselves if we did to the level it would require to reverse it.

Can't stand to read much on it because it's usually non-quantified changes they tell everyone to make, and you have to wade through all the nuts discussing it on both sides. There's almost no "practicality-tempered view" in everything that comes out.

IE
If we all are expected to take public transport, are they going to build public transport, is it going to be so restrictive as to be worthless? Or so costly as to be useless?

If we all are expected to get electric cars, how will we pay for them? How long do current one's last? If it's less than 10 years, how is it cost effective in both the monetary and environmental sense to replace a car that often?

Why do we have manufacturing laws that allow companies to pump out stuff that breaks and is too costly to repair creating a system of replacing whatever every 1-3 years? I've had these microwaves, the POSes don't even last 5 years, where my grandmother had one from the 80s that still works today. Granted it takes forever to nuke something, but good lord, not even getting a 5 year average out of microwaves is piss. And then we have cell phones, those things get replaced more than underwear by some people. Computers have mostly slowed down, where you don't need a new computer every 3-5 years to do simple things.....but you know we got a load of tube monitors and old computers just sitting wherever or shipped wherever because there is nothing to be done with them in the US...charities won't even take OLD machines most the time.

And is the environment impact greater importing things from China or manufacturing them here so they travel less distance and hopefully have better environment protections and more efficiency in place? It's certainly more economically sound, in the short term at least, to ship everything from China. But if we're going to do global warming fixes and this is one.......it would be a huge boon to the US population to actually have an abundance of jobs return. PLUS they can hopefully be told they have to make no planned obsolete cheap-shit products to fill the junkyards and landfills and require a new one to be made like is currently going on.

Got a fridge a few years back, it is craptacular compared to the fridge it replaced that was like 10-15 years old. Sure it keeps food cold, but it's ice maker sucks, it's been "repaired" at least twice and it still sucks. And again, the grandmother's fridge...no ice maker, but it still works to this day and it's an 80s model.

None of this can be productive. Like cash for clunkers......was it really productive destroying that many cars when you'd just have to make new ones to fill that gap? And the people who have old cars and couldn't afford to get new ones?....they still have old cars, perhaps worse than if they had bought one of those clunkers. They were purposefully destroying the motors in those cash for clunker cars by running the motors without oil until they froze, that is not good for the environment and has no productive worth.

When they start to explain things in terms you can look at your own house and property and say, you know...that does need replaced and it'll be so much better because it's guaranteed to perform better and not need replacing for 5-10 years with regular maintenance due the new standards.

As I've heard it, it's always been said as "You can't prove a universal negative." I'm no expert on this subject, but I always took that to mean you can't prove statements that set no limits, else you will be forever investigating.

Claims of "X will never happen" also tend to fall into this hole, because never is a long time.

A simple negative of limited scope is clearly provable, ie "There are no ice cubes in my freezer."

But a claim such as "The Jersey Devil doesn't exist" can't be proven. There are dozens of reasons to believe it, but there's no way to prove it.

>> ^Issykitty:

They have other things to drink there, I'm sure @ant. Chocolate milk, sodas, water, water with ice, water without ice, water with lemon, iced tea, orange juice, apple juice, tomato juice, lemonade, club soda, virgin fruit drinks, iced tea/ lemonades (also known as arnold palmers), cherry cokes, shirley temples...


"And then?" Yep, I just drink water with no ice since it's free and good for my body. I just can't drink too much or else I will pee. Funny, I just went to TGIF today for lunch with my old Christian friends.

I should start fighting because I wanted frakkin water with no ice (stupid waiters and waitresses)!

You are FREE to tell them NO ICE. That's what Ayn Rand did.

>> ^blankfist:

Now I feel ripped off every time I ordered tea from Wendy's!

Now now guys, don't make me pull the sift over to the side of the road, or there will be no ice-cream for anyone.

That said, I'm fairly certain this is a dupe of the dead vid... I saw it more recently (want to say within the last year) and the content is pretty much what I remember.

Great, now the dog will associate loud airhorns with food, and no ice cream truck will be safe.

this may be a little off the subject of what you are talking about, but I am curious. I think I understand the freezing process well enough. What I don't understand is, once cells(let's say just simple single-celled organisms) are frozen without damage, no ice crystals etc., what makes the unfreezing process dangerous?

That's because there's no ice-cream kiosks