-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Articles re Tesla—Fact or Fiction?
- Thread starter Robert.Boston
- Start date
Phil Seastrand
Member
NewCow
Member
The BI article linked here for part of the argument is actually my article from February. We syndicate through BI, but they tweak it a little bit, such as the headline and images and they removed a table with some sales data. If anyone is interested, original is here (again, I don't get compensated on traffic so I'm not just pushing for page views):
Tesla's Model 3 Market Opportunity Is Bigger Than You Think -- The Motley Fool
Thanks for suggesting that... but, I don't quite know what that means. Is it simply sending a tweet with the link and including @elonmusk in the text?
chickensevil
Active Member
I present you with the most awesome response I have seen regarding fake papers:
http://aperito.org/uploads/pdf/ANFTOA-2-106.pdf
This was a slam against fake Nutrition information being spread around, but the root of the issue is the same. To prove that this particular journal would publish, literally anything, they took the show script for the episode of Adam Ruins Everything (great show by the way) and published it in the paper. So now you can cite some random paper being published as your statement that something must be true because it is published!
Reddit posting on this subject as well:
Adam Ruins Everything published the script for the health episode in the journal Advances in Nutrition and Food Technology to prove they'll publish anything • /r/television
anyway, yeah, without peer review, the published work is meaningless as far as being scientifically sound.
chickensevil
Active Member
pretext it with a period (.) but yes so:
I don't tweet, so feel free to post it like that, or make your own. Assuming that comes under the character limit once twitter auto shrinks the link. The important thing is the period (.). That is the social equivalent of standing in the middle of a crowded room and you are telling Elon something, but shouting it so loud that the whole room can hear you. It has the benefit of making the room as large as anyone who happens to be following Elon. Enjoy!
The paper you linked is sure a fun thing to read lol.
JEP the journal seems to be a reputable one, I see Acemoglu recently published there too. But it seems like a forum for opinions instead of a platform for rigorous science exchanges.
Last edited:
chickensevil
Active Member
yeah, I think TrueTV has the episodes on demand and a lot of them are on YouTube in pieces as well. Because in the middle of the episode he brings this up.
Back on the subject of the article we were actually talking about, if it is for an opinion sharing form, then people need to actually realize this and be honest with this if they are going to try and put out a news article on the issue. But you know, I'm assuming a lot there, like, journalism with integrity... and people caring about the truth... both of which appears to be in short supply these days...
ev-enthusiast
Active Member
Nice review from Motor Trend (posted in the short term thread as well):
Tesla Model X P90D is the Quickest SUV We’ve Ever Tested
Well done Tesla Motors Team (and thank's Motor Trend)!
Tesla Model X P90D is the Quickest SUV We’ve Ever Tested
Well done Tesla Motors Team (and thank's Motor Trend)!
Investopedia article Tesla Stock Reverses Amid Executive Exodus (TSLA) | Investopedia is a bit of a hit piece. The thing that most got me, though, was
"Abruptly"? He announced his pending retirement at least two quarters before he left...
"Abruptly"? He announced his pending retirement at least two quarters before he left...
The Wall Street Journal:
Also Levy did not cut his price target to $155 as stated by the author. Levy kept his price target at $155, which implies that Levy missed the current rally.
This is another example of a lazy journalist not checking with original sources and just repeating or altering material that has been garbled on the internet in the manner of the children's telephone game.
Also Levy did not cut his price target to $155 as stated by the author. Levy kept his price target at $155, which implies that Levy missed the current rally.
This is another example of a lazy journalist not checking with original sources and just repeating or altering material that has been garbled on the internet in the manner of the children's telephone game.
chickensevil
Active Member
That comment thread though... Man, we clearly have a long way to go to rid ourselves of all this hate... What gives?
Unfortunately Tesla finds itself at the center of some issues that are highly charged, politically speaking. It's been alluded to in this forum...there's a certain segment of the population that simply cannot compute the fact that EVs are legitimate and fundamentally superior than ICEs because anything remotely "green" is ipso facto inferior / fraudulent (e.g. Solyndra) / only for naive hippie greenies or big-government socialists pushing a climate-change hoax. Anything "green" necessarily comes at the expense of economic growth and the free market. I believe a HUGE number of TSLA permabears / shorts fall in this category. You can see this sort of bias in right-leaning publications (e.g. Wall Street Journal) as well. And I'd venture a guess that much of Motor Trend's readership falls into this camp.
On a subconscious level, I think they believe admission of Tesla's brilliance gives legitimacy to the broader green movement. This is practically a culture war type thing in America right now. Because of this, the cognitive dissonance will simply not allow them to see Tesla for what it is--a disruptive tech company with a fundamentally superior product that merely happens to be good for the environment. It's something that has baffled me for quite some time. I've had right-leaning family members--who are otherwise highly intelligent and live in Southern California--scoff in my face when I've started talking about EVs, how they are the future and how they are fundamentally superior from a technological point of view.
Last edited:
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
This is a longer way to say something similar to what dha said.
I've been trying to understand EV haters since about 2009. Just to be clear, I am NOT talking about:
It is a curious phenomenon. Why would they hate EVs so much? It is clearly an emotional reaction to something. And while people may not care that much about the environment or may be suspicious of environmentalists, they surely don't want to pollute the earth, or put soldiers in harm's way, or see the US dependent on OPEC, or see the economy keep struggling because of petroleum payments and the trade deficit, or see US taxpayers keep subsidizing oil companies. And surely don't want to pay more than they have to for fuel. Yet they'd MUCH rather have all that than...the alternative. So what is so bad about the alternative that makes them so angry?
I am still not sure of the answer. Here are some things I have observed about them:
It is an interesting theory that can explain a lot of things I can't explain otherwise. Other theories welcome.
I've been trying to understand EV haters since about 2009. Just to be clear, I am NOT talking about:
- people that EVs don't work for yet - people too poor to buy a car, people without charging at home, people not near Superchargers, etc.
- people that are skeptical of EVs because they are missing information and have misconceptions; they often change when they get new data
- stock shorts that are willing to lie (not all of them do that, I'm just talking about the ones that do) to drive TSLA down for personal gain; they are at least easy to understand if not people I particularly respect
It is a curious phenomenon. Why would they hate EVs so much? It is clearly an emotional reaction to something. And while people may not care that much about the environment or may be suspicious of environmentalists, they surely don't want to pollute the earth, or put soldiers in harm's way, or see the US dependent on OPEC, or see the economy keep struggling because of petroleum payments and the trade deficit, or see US taxpayers keep subsidizing oil companies. And surely don't want to pay more than they have to for fuel. Yet they'd MUCH rather have all that than...the alternative. So what is so bad about the alternative that makes them so angry?
I am still not sure of the answer. Here are some things I have observed about them:
- these people are EVERYWHERE online, yet I have almost never run in to them in real life even though I have talked to about 20,000 people about EVs. I suspect there are not very many of them, but they find it important to be very vocal. This is not just something they don't like, but something they are compelled to fight
- they are not worried about losing social reputation points for being against numerous things that are good for everybody; there is something that is much more important to them
- they don't have a well-considered argument, and they don't ask any questions; it's just untrue tidbits and invective. When corrected, they never apologize or reconsider - they just move on to something else. It's not about facts; there is something emotionally upsetting to them that has to be avoided. The person they are talking to is the enemy, and they are never polite (the other groups usually are; not always at first but will come around if you are polite)
- not always, but often they will throw out bonus invective about the government even when it hadn't been brought up before. Or say how they don't want to be forced to give up their car, even though no such proposal has been made. There seems to be some concern about the availability of EVs somehow causing a loss of freedom
- no matter what they are responding to, if the conversation goes on for a while they will almost always call the people they are arguing with "greenies" or "treehuggers" or something like that - even when the environment was not previously mentioned by anybody. (I usually studiously avoid bringing it up; there are plenty of other EV benefits to talk about). Back around 2009 they would often get around to saying how much they hated Al Gore. These days they are more likely to say how much they hate Obama. That at least gives us some insight as to who/what they are fighting
It is an interesting theory that can explain a lot of things I can't explain otherwise. Other theories welcome.
Last edited:
chickensevil
Active Member
Lol! I am aware this population exists. I think I was just expecting more from the MT reader base... Note I expect the pro-ICE crowd but so of those comments as not just pro-ICE, but very anti-EV to the extreme.
That said, Chad, I believe what is more likely is two things:
1: Noone is ever wrong on the internet. This is the first big issue that has really started to annoy me more and more as of late. They would rather continue to dig themselves into a hole than admit that what they posted might be wrong. And this applies to any subject. I'm not talking about things that are morally ambiguous or up for debate. I'm talking about true or false, black or white type things. You can present them with all the facts in the world, and they won't admit to it because the internet... Shrugs...
2: People are more prone to respond to their true nature when they feel protected behind a computer screen. Even if you KNOW the person (cause I see it on Facebook all the time) they will still say things I would never hear them debate or contest as hard in public. And when you go full anonymous... Psssshhhh I'll say whatever I want because you don't know who I am at all. -is how they act.
I say this, because I have two people I have talked to. One is a good friend of mine and the other is my Brother in law both of whom are die hard gear heads and love their gas powered cars. While they won't completely come after me for driving and having this car to my face, I can tell that they are none too pleased with EVs like it is going to ruin their livelihood or some such. I have seen a transition in both of them as time goes by, but it's almost a self defence response. It will take time to win these people over... But I suspect that if you ran into either of them online I could see them being one of these people we all see.
The only way to win these types over is through personal relationship... As pointless internet bickering isn't going to do anything for them.
That said, Chad, I believe what is more likely is two things:
1: Noone is ever wrong on the internet. This is the first big issue that has really started to annoy me more and more as of late. They would rather continue to dig themselves into a hole than admit that what they posted might be wrong. And this applies to any subject. I'm not talking about things that are morally ambiguous or up for debate. I'm talking about true or false, black or white type things. You can present them with all the facts in the world, and they won't admit to it because the internet... Shrugs...
2: People are more prone to respond to their true nature when they feel protected behind a computer screen. Even if you KNOW the person (cause I see it on Facebook all the time) they will still say things I would never hear them debate or contest as hard in public. And when you go full anonymous... Psssshhhh I'll say whatever I want because you don't know who I am at all. -is how they act.
I say this, because I have two people I have talked to. One is a good friend of mine and the other is my Brother in law both of whom are die hard gear heads and love their gas powered cars. While they won't completely come after me for driving and having this car to my face, I can tell that they are none too pleased with EVs like it is going to ruin their livelihood or some such. I have seen a transition in both of them as time goes by, but it's almost a self defence response. It will take time to win these people over... But I suspect that if you ran into either of them online I could see them being one of these people we all see.
The only way to win these types over is through personal relationship... As pointless internet bickering isn't going to do anything for them.
ChadS
Last tank of gas: March 2009
YES IT WILL!!!1! That's the dumbest thing I've ever read!
Similar threads
