Goebbels would be gobsmacked

[spacesailor]

A nurse needs a reliable car .

That is more a necessary transport with ' call outs ' at any hour, day & night .

And still have to pay ' parking fees ' to the hospital,  she has been ' summoned '

To .

spacesailor

[old man emu]

OK. I am posting this as an example of propaganda that is misleading. I am concentrating on the misuse of percentage values in making comparisons.

 

The example comes from a report about EV sales. If you would like to comment, PLEASE, don't reel in the red herring of the right or wrong of EVs. There are other threads where we can debate that.

 

This video gives an example of how propagandists misuse statistical analysis to fool a population that is, in the main, mathematically illiterate. A population which does not understand that a very small change in numerical data can be quoted as a very large percentage change, while the change in itself is insignificant.

 

There is another video produced by John Cadigan, whom I acknowledge that a lot of you hate, and for that reason I will not include a link, in which he shows how false the Australian Government's propaganda about the net zero results of restrictions on ICE fuel efficiency really is. Once again the propaganda is based on utilising the population's mathematical illiteracy, as well as the failure to provide data which would allow a comparison of the CO2 saved by the mandated fuel efficiency levels with the amount of CO2 the burning of the coal and gas we export.

 

One thing he points out is the Government's estimate of the monetary savings people would make up to 2050. That estimate is based on the average pump price whenever the figure was calculated. As we all know, the pump price is as stable as a jelly on a plate. What will be the price of a litre of petrol in 2025, let alone over the long period to 2050?

 

So here's the video:

 

 

 

[octave]

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

OK. I am posting this as an example of propaganda that is misleading. I am concentrating on the misuse of percentage values in making comparisons.

 

The example comes from a report about EV sales. If you would like to comment, PLEASE, don't reel in the red herring of the right or wrong of EVs. There are other threads where we can debate that.

 

This video gives an example of how propagandists misuse statistical analysis to fool a population that is, in the main, mathematically illiterate. A population which does not understand that a very small change in numerical data can be quoted as a very large percentage change, while the change in itself is insignificant.

 

There is another video produced by John Cadigan, whom I acknowledge that a lot of you hate, and for that reason I will not include a link, in which he shows how false the Australian Government's propaganda about the net zero results of restrictions on ICE fuel efficiency really is. Once again the propaganda is based on utilising the population's mathematical illiteracy, as well as the failure to provide data which would allow a comparison of the CO2 saved by the mandated fuel efficiency levels with the amount of CO2 the burning of the coal and gas we export.

 

One thing he points out is the Government's estimate of the monetary savings people would make up to 2050. That estimate is based on the average pump price whenever the figure was calculated. As we all know, the pump price is as stable as a jelly on a plate. What will be the price of a litre of petrol in 2025, let alone over the long period to 2050?

 

So here's the video:

 

 

 

 

Isn't this evidence that your claim that we are unthinkingly barrelling towards 100% EVs is a bit of nonsense?   EVs are not as popular as people would have us believe AND  that the adoption of EVs is going way too fast.    As he said in the YouTube clip the figures are not wrong but are expressed most advantageously. I think it is a given that any company wants to portray their product in the best light, hopefully without lying.  Some companies have actually lied.

 

Hyundai, Kia Overstated Fuel Economy Claims

 

Mitsubishi says overstated mileage for more vehicle models

 

GM overstated m.p.g. on more vehicles, Consumer Reports suggests

 

 

  Dont think EVs are any good, don't buy one. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 1 by octave

[nomadpete]

I'll let the foregoing two posts go through to the keeper.

 

Moving on to topic, I  suggest Goebbels WOULD be gobsmacked if he read the Wiki explantion of the history of T rump M edia and Tech G roup.

 

I found it most interesting, and went down the rabbit hole of also looking up the names mentioned therein.

 

One piece of trivia:

I think I would be delighted if I  had an accountant who managed to reduce my tax to about $200, when a company I have 62% ownership of, posts a turnover of nearly 60 million but less than 40 people on the payroll.

Edited June 1 by nomadpete

[facthunter]

I can't see any great pressure being applied to buy one. Some companies are pushing hybrids on false  hopes of performance. With no external charge options  and very limited Battery range.   Hydrocarbon fuels are not likely to get cheaper. They could easily go to 3 times todays price. Most modern ICE vehicles are pretty fuel efficient compared with say the 1960's. The utter simplicity of an EV should be a part of the appeal of them.. It would be possible to arrange for them to receive charge while still moving by Induction..  Nev

[octave]

1 hour ago, old man emu said:

OK. I am posting this as an example of propaganda that is misleading. I am concentrating on the misuse of percentage values in making comparisons.

 

The example comes from a report about EV sales. If you would like to comment, PLEASE, don't reel in the red herring of the right or wrong of EVs. There are other threads where we can debate that.

 

This video gives an example of how propagandists misuse statistical analysis to fool a population that is, in the main, mathematically illiterate. A population which does not understand that a very small change in numerical data can be quoted as a very large percentage change, while the change in itself is insignificant.

 

There is another video produced by John Cadigan, whom I acknowledge that a lot of you hate, and for that reason I will not include a link, in which he shows how false the Australian Government's propaganda about the net zero results of restrictions on ICE fuel efficiency really is. Once again the propaganda is based on utilising the population's mathematical illiteracy, as well as the failure to provide data which would allow a comparison of the CO2 saved by the mandated fuel efficiency levels with the amount of CO2 the burning of the coal and gas we export.

 

One thing he points out is the Government's estimate of the monetary savings people would make up to 2050. That estimate is based on the average pump price whenever the figure was calculated. As we all know, the pump price is as stable as a jelly on a plate. What will be the price of a litre of petrol in 2025, let alone over the long period to 2050?

 

So here's the video:

 

 

 

 

I think this guy is a tad disingenuous.   Here is a video about an electric fire truck where he omits many important facts.

 

My first criticism is that he uses the word "woke" To me this gives the appearance of a political argument rather than a factual one.

 

He talks of the huge expense but does not quantify it.  These figures are easily searchable.  He does not acknowledge that the upfront cost needs weighed against the lifetime cost with regard to running expenses.

 

He scoffs at the fact that the truck is or was out of service due to a leaky water tank but he does not explain why this is related to it being electric. I would imagine that in a new firetruck of any type, this would not be an unusual occurrence.

 

He refers to it as all-electric but I believe it does have a built diesel generator as a backup. I read an article that stated a fire truck the same as this at another fire brigade only used 20 gallons of diesel in one year.  All of that is omitted from his critique.

 

He scoffs at the environmental benefits.  Whilst in terms of CO2, by itself it will make buggar all difference he does not mention the effects of diesel on the firefighters.  Diesel is a known carcinogen and traditional fire trucks need to be kept idling during the operation of pumps etc.  Also, a benefit I believe is the quieter environment in which firefighters have to think and make complex decisions and plans.

 

I think that the proposition that this guy is 100%  logical and not at all emotional is BS

 

He wants you to think  this vehicles return to the manufacturer was BECAUSE it was an EV

He wants you to think that it is pure electric and has no backup.

He wants you to think firetrucks regularly travel more than 100KM 

He wants you to only think of the sticker price and not the lifetime cost.

He dasn't you to not think about firefighters working in around diesel fumes (especially when backing trucks back into the station.

He doesn't want you to realize that this is not the first electric fire truck and that there are many around the world even in Australia.

 

 

 

[nomadpete]

OME's propaganda  issue seems to be about his interpretation of media statements regarding vehicle motors.

Particularly his thoughts about excessive promotion of EV's and also the new fuel efficiency standards of ICE's.

 

My impression differs from his. I do not see massive swings towards EV's. I do notice new cars on the road. But I  don't see a majority of EV's. Further, when I talk to new car owners they all seem pretty happy with their new car compared to their old one - whether it's ICE or EV. I don't see much propaganda about it. Unless you call all the new car ads 'propaganda'.

 

As for the new fuel efficiency standards, I  think our weak new rules show up our weak willed government.

 

It makes sense to make the best use of a finite resource (petroleum), it makes sense to cut down the many poisonous exhaust gasses. It's not just about CO2.

We are still have one of the world's worst standards for vehicle pollution. But I didn't notice much propaganda about it, either way.

 

Edited June 1 by nomadpete

[facthunter]

I thought the better quality fuel thing had been decided fairly recently.   Nev

[nomadpete]

4 minutes ago, facthunter said:

I thought the better quality fuel thing had been decided fairly recently.   Nev

Yes, but I was disappointed to see that we watered down the standard, way poorer than the european standards, to lower than the USofA standards.

 

Do Australians have more robust cardiovascular systems than European's?

Is it OK for us to have dirtier air than Americans are entitled to?

[facthunter]

There's plenty of places worse. i hadn't heard it was lower. Have you got a reference?.    Nev

[old man emu]

4 hours ago, nomadpete said:

OME's propaganda  issue seems to be about his interpretation of media statements regarding vehicle motors.

Particularly his thoughts about excessive promotion of EV's and also the new fuel efficiency standards of ICE's.

For Sod's sake. How much more clearer do I need to be? I bloody well stated at the beginning that I wasn't trying to deal with the EV bullshit. It just so happened that the video provided and example of how "the figures don't lie, but liars use figures.

 

Next time I post something that I think needs to be preceded by a caveat, I'm going to write the caveat out in BIG LETTERS  and in RED INK.

[octave]

58 minutes ago, old man emu said:

the video provided and example of how "the figures don't lie, but liars use figures.

 

Using the figures this man presents we have:

 

Tesla Q1 23 161630 - Q1 24 140187 A 13.3% drop - does this indicate a collapse in EV sales or just a reduction

Ford  Q1 23 10 866  - Q1 24 20 223 an 81% increase.

Rivian Q1 23 8558 -  Q1 24 13588 a 58% increase

Hyundai Q1 23  7824 -  Q1 24 12290 a 57% decreases

Mercedes Q1 23 7341 -  Q1 24 12250

BMW Q1 23 6588  - Q2 10713 a 62% increase.

 

Even if the proposition that the percentages presented by Bloomberg are overly optimistic (but not technically incorrect) the notion that EV sales have collapsed is also rubbish. Am I missing something here? 

 

 

[old man emu]

Let me say this once again.

 

IN THIS THREAD I DO NOT GIVE A RAT'S ARSE ABOUT EVs. THE THREAD IS ABOUT THE PROPAGANDA GOVERNMENTS AND CORPORATIONS ARE SPEWING OUT ON ALL MANNER OF SUBJECTS.

 

I SIMPLY USED AN AVAILABLE EXAMPLE TO ILLUSTRAGE MY POINT. THE SOURCE OF THE FIGURES, WHETHER IT BE SALES OF SOME TYPE OF MOTOR VEHICLE OR TEH SALE OF LEFT-HAND THREADED WIGWAMS FOR GOOSE'S BRIDLES DOES NOT MATTER.

[octave]

OME this video critiques Bloombergs stats. I accept that whilst the Bloomberg stats are technically correct they are presented in a way that sounds overly optimistic view.   Do you admit that using the figures the fellow in the video presented sales have not suffered a catastrophic collapse? Again if I am missing something. please help me understand what exactly I am missing.  My questions is do you accept that there is as much if not more propaganda amongst the anti-EV folks?

[old man emu]

2 hours ago, octave said:

My questions is do you accept that

But do you accept that, in this particular thread, I don't give a damn about EVs?  

[octave]

14 minutes ago, old man emu said:

But do you accept that, in this particular thread, I don't give a damn about EVs?  

 

I am guessing you are talking about the use of statistics - yes?   You posted a video called The media cant cope with the end of the EV boom and I questioned the interpretation of the figures he presented. If you are not talking about EVs then why post that video?

[old man emu]

12 hours ago, octave said:

If you are not talking about EVs then why post that video?

I SIMPLY USED AN AVAILABLE EXAMPLE TO ILLUSTRATE MY POINT.

The point is that the General Public, which has a low level of mathematical literacy, is constantly being hoodwinked by people who take advantage of that illiteracy. 

 

[facthunter]

Shouting is rude, Mr Moderator. .   Nev

[old man emu]

1 hour ago, facthunter said:

Shouting is rude, Mr Moderator. .   Nev

Didn't he say elsewhere that he had hearing problems?

[spacesailor]

I agree ! .

I have a definite deficiency in maths .

It was allways hard to do sums mentally. 

And , when I was getting just a little better, those

" Dastardly " French  changed everything,  

Now I can't even Tally-up my shopping lists. 

( not an age problem ) .

spacesailor

[nomadpete]

2 hours ago, spacesailor said:

 

Now I can't even Tally-up my shopping lists. 

( not an age problem ) .

spacesailor

C'mon Spacy, your shopping lists are not all in scientific notation (Metric)

 

[facthunter]

Being an ex Pom, he's anti Francaise.. It's taken for granted.   Nev

[spacesailor]

True , " anti-French " when degaul made the English word " LORRY " illegal. 

" Camion " sounds horrid . To close to ' dead things ' .

And they never tried to help those thousands of English 

' RAIL WORKERS ' that were ordered to fix the French railways. 

Just left them , to be shot as spies .

I would be more open to the German " Dauchland Industrial Number " ( DIN ) system .

At least I had used it in ' photography ' .

One pint = 600 millilitres .

French 6 Decilitres ,  or Demilitres

Aussie 60 Centilitres .

spacesailor

 

Il est parti bore un biere

Just doesn't work for me

 

[facthunter]

What about the Vin mon ami. or do the Pommes whine enough already?  Australians HAVE TO let it be known WE are NOT English. , then it's different. Only a tiny part of England was OCCUPIED so there's a lot they wouldn't know.   Nev

[Litespeed]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

What about the Vin mon ami. or do the Pommes whine enough already?  Australians HAVE TO let it be known WE are NOT English. , then it's different. Only a tiny part of England was OCCUPIED so there's a lot they wouldn't know.   Nev

I agree,  only a few English have their head occupied by brain cells.