Tedkidd
Member
Julien, looks like you have us all supporting you. Are you up for a revision? One that follows the outline proposed by BSD:
And consider this quote as you edit. John F. Kennedy said:
People in comfortable jobs, passionless or out of their depth due to Peter principle, simply can't see what you see. Stupid and incompetent is both too common in government and is not a crime. But rubbing stupids nose in his own incompetence may not get momentum headed in the direction we all want.
The best academic papers, the ones referenced for years, clearly separate their data from analysis, and then separately draw conclusions. It means your data can live on, even when new data is found that repudiates your analysis and conclusions. It means people can disagree with your conclusions but still use your data and analysis. It mean you can point naysayers to to your data and ask for them to provide better numbers with sources.
You had two theses: that there is a conflict of interest, and that FCVs are not the clean-emissions solution portrayed. The conflict of interest is only pertinent to California; it's not something I'd want to forward to the Minister of Industry or the Minister of the Environment. The FCV analysis is pertinent much more broadly.
And consider this quote as you edit. John F. Kennedy said:
The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived and dishonest--but the myth--persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. Too often we hold fast to the cliches of our forebears. We subject all facts to a prefabricated set of interpretations. We enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.
People in comfortable jobs, passionless or out of their depth due to Peter principle, simply can't see what you see. Stupid and incompetent is both too common in government and is not a crime. But rubbing stupids nose in his own incompetence may not get momentum headed in the direction we all want.
Last edited: