Great, it’s better if you link them where the claims were made though.

I hadn’t heard of earth.org so I looked them up: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/earth-org-bias/

Not too bad. Though I’m well versed in battery tech and industry, it’s an incredibly dirty industry, coming with cited, fair sources is paramount.

No, you claimed:

Production of batteries, handling discarded batteries, breaking of minerals FOR the batteries, and producing the electricity have all been shown to be worse for the environment than than the entire life of a traditional car

Furthermore, when asked about a source for these claims, you come out swinging with the ever popular “no, you” defense.

Again, link your sources (MIT study) please.

Not just tracking: https://medium.com/@danbuben/why-amp-is-bad-for-your-site-and-for-the-web-e4d060a4ff31

Fuck Google AMP.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I actually have a similar model for testing audio tubes. I have several 100 watt amplifier heads for my guitars and a few more home built amps for both guitar and listening audio. I even have several tube preamps I’ve designed with one or two tubes.

Such a cool era of technology to me.

Coincidentally, in addition to having a BS in EE and an MS in CompE, I was a senior engineer working on battery control systems for three seasons with a Formula E team in my previous job.

At no point did I ever even hint to being an engineer, my man

and

If you aren’t an engineer working with ev batteries or othe rechargeablebatteries, your opinion has no weight.

You’re right, I’m not stupid which is precisely why I haven’t “chimed in” on your unqualified opinions.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I didn’t propose a solution. I simply corrected wrong information presented by the other user. Trees sequester carbon, even if with volatility, as explained in the links.

New research, published in Nature Climate Change and available on Global Forest Watch, found that the world’s forests sequestered about twice as much carbon dioxide as they emitted between 2001 and 2019. In other words, forests provide a “carbon sink” that absorbs a net 7.6 billion metric tonnes of CO2 per year, 1.5 times more carbon than the United States emits annually.

I agree, it’s not a solution.

Uhhh, I think you’re confused on what carbon sequestration is.

Here’s how forestry is important for carbon sequestration.

My standards however will always remain on “No government has any business in private stuff.”

I never thought I’d see someone openly admit, even advocate, that they’re willing to host child sexual assault material on hardware they own. That’s a sad hill to die on.

I don’t really care about anything else you’ve written to justify your blanket standards either. All it takes is one example (CSAM) to show the depravity of your standards.

I’m all about privacy, even so far as to emigrate from the US to a country in the EU for privacy. But I have compassion and empathy and am also aware of ethical behavior, morality, and decency.

Privacy is not more valuable than protecting innocent human lives. If you can’t see that, you are lost. I’m sorry.