Sold my Model S after 5.5 years...moving on

[InternetDude]

To me it's equivalent to a gasoline car manufacturer taking your car in for service and removing your V8 engine and putting it a V6 telling you that it's to reduce stresses on the drive line that are caused by the higher horsepower of the V8 So if we give you a V6 the rest of your driveline will last longer. Oh and we don't care that you bought a V8. We've determined that the V6 is better for you. And that's what you get.

I really like that analogy

 

[ArizonaP85]

View attachment 530848

To me it's equivalent to a gasoline car manufacturer taking your car in for service and removing your V8 engine and putting it a V6 telling you that it's to reduce stresses on the drive line that are caused by the higher horsepower of the V8 So if we give you a V6 the rest of your driveline will last longer. Oh and we don't care that you bought a V8. We've determined that the V6 is better for you. And that's what you get.

Don’t forget that they did it all WITHOUT permission: towed your V8 car away in the dead of night and brought it back with a V6, never asking if they could do that or even telling you what they were going to do.

 

[john5520]

"I'm sorry that I didn't cover your latest Faux News climate myth--I don't have time to deal with all of them."

I'm sorry, did you really say that the Vostok data is a Fox News myth? For someone so informed and full of links, you are not as informed as you think you are. This behavior falls under "religion" and OCD/ADD. The data you just dismissed was not gathered in a garden in California.

So I'll ask you again, please explain why the Vostok ice core data shows that warming preceded CO2 levels by 1,000 years.

For our interested readers not prone to bold type:

Historical Carbon Dioxide Record from the Vostok Ice Core

"Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate is Warming"

This is the NASA proclamation per you own link. As if, this is novel. Scientific consensus says the sun will rise in the east. I'm a scientist, did I get my grant?

It's not hard to find papers / articles that scientifically dispute the skeptics' assertion that the Vistok ice core proves C02 does not cause global warming:


Climate myths: Ice cores show CO2 increases lag behind temperature rises, disproving the link to global warming | New Scientist

Ice Core Data Help Solve a Global Warming Mystery

What does the Vostok ice core tell us?

What does the lag of CO<small>₂</small> behind temperature in ice cores tell us about global warming?

CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?

Debunking Joanne Nova's 'Skeptics Handbook' part 2: Yes, Global Warming is Real and it's Still Happening


This sentence from the first link sums it up nicely:



"By Michael Le Page and Catherine Brahic

Sometimes a house gets warmer even when the central heating is turned off. Does this prove that its central heating does not work? Of course not. Perhaps it’s a hot day outside, or the oven’s been left on for hours."

 

[Big Toys]

Thanks for the links. I never said nor took the position that Vostok is "proof". It is "evidence" that that CO2 and warming may not always temporally tied. Your quote actually supports Vostok findings, in that there may have been, and continue to be, other forces at work.

I think much of this debate is a load of navel gazing.

 

[john5520]

Thanks for the links. I never said nor took the position that Vostok is "proof". It is "evidence" that that CO2 and warming may not always temporally tied. Your quote actually supports Vostok findings, in that there may have been, and continue to be, other forces at work.

I think much of this debate is a load of navel gazing.

If you read the links above, you would find that no one disputes that there were other forces. However, the Physics that prove CO2 traps heat is sound. I won't go into any more details. It's all in there if anyone cares to read. And they're not totally one-sided.

 

[Big Toys]

And again, I do not dispute the physics. I dispute the religion that every weather event is proof of everything CO2. I lament bartenders with power making dire predictions, and that that the business model of global warming is an absolute no-brainer.

 

[john5520]

And again, I do not dispute the physics. I dispute the religion that every weather event is proof of everything CO2. I lament bartenders with power making dire predictions, and that that the business model of global warming is an absolute no-brainer.

I'm only responding to your Vostok post. The rest is a different debate. The people that I care to listen to are those that support their hypotheses with evidence. I take opinion pieces about global warming with a grain of salt. However, since you brought politics into the mix, I'll just say this: I'd rather see my tax dollars go to supporting renewable energy than put in the hands of some guy who thinks wind turbines cause cancer.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

Then accept the facts and move on.

It doesn't work that way. People are free to buy whatever they want.

Sure, you betcha.

People can go ahead and buy whatever they want, even cars and trucks that dump massive amounts of GHG's with each passing mile . . . for others to pay for.

Clue Issue: Do that for over a century and all that "free" dumping can ruin an entire planet.

What part of the science is wrong here? Obviously you must know some secret info about how it's all a left-wing scam to "take away our 'Merican freedoms!" or something since you keep writing that "people are free to buy whatever they want."

Or do you just think we can all have a group hug and make physics and chemistry go away?

Geesh, so many morons, so little time . . . .

 

[TSLA Pilot]

There are certain types who are taking such predictions as fact and promoting it as inevitable to those susceptible to such predictions, such as the nutjob above going off the deep end and loudmouth politicians who know a good story when they hear it with little downside to jump on the wagon. They are not alone in the doomsday scenarios.

It is quite relevant, as the guy pegged as the global warming champion and says he will stop the rise of the oceans just bought a 7,000 sq. ft. ocean front mansion on 29 acres 8 feet above sea level, a short walk to the water in his underwear. That's a bit of an eyebrow raising purchase, and not exactly true to the cause. Do you know how much dirty carbon it will take to mow that grass and maintain that property, not to mention the AC and heat bill? Yeah, but...Obama. He played you for gullible fools and got his. Good on him.

Hey Big Toys,

Just curious--you've made no comment about your degrees in any field of science whatsoever, nor any expertise in any field. Perhaps you might please enlighten us all with a list of sciential links supporting your jaw-dropping position that, yes, we CAN dump unlimited amounts of GHG's with nary a worry?

We'll be waiting, so please get on it.

Thanks!

 

[TSLA Pilot]

View attachment 530848

Well I would argue that I have no unrealistic expectation I knew what I was buying. However having a car wear out on its own or experience deterioration of performance based on age and mileage is one thing. Having it handcuffed overnight and it's capabilities reduced by the manufacturer in one felt swoop is different.

And of note I'm on my second battery pack (was replaced about 6 months before I bought the car. So it is still the original battery pack that I have always had to be clear, but the car itself is on its second battery pack.) I have a B series pack in my car which used to be capable of charging up to 120 KW. Until one day that was reduced to no more than about 50 to 53 kW sustained while supercharging.

To me it's equivalent to a gasoline car manufacturer taking your car in for service and removing your V8 engine and putting it a V6 telling you that it's to reduce stresses on the drive line that are caused by the higher horsepower of the V8 So if we give you a V6 the rest of your driveline will last longer. Oh and we don't care that you bought a V8. We've determined that the V6 is better for you. And that's what you get.

Wow, so we have a complaint about an original Signature MS, a car built before the first Supercharger ever saw the light of day, from someone who appears to have purchased it used . . . and who has never paid a dime to Supercharge, ever.

And he's still charging at nearly 200 mph on a cold battery.

For free.

Take your complaint to someone who might listen, perhaps your barber.

Just wow.

Here, try this: Find someone with an eight-year old Lexus, MBZ, BMW, or Audi and ask them, "Where do you go to get your free gas?"

 

[TSLA Pilot]

It is not misdirection.

First, global warming and cooling is inevitable and has been ongoing since long before man made a fire. No change in human behavior is going to change that. The attempt to alter that cycle is folly, because you and everyone on the planet would have to revert back to the stone age and give up essentially all manufacture and transport, which as any iphone-totin' virtue signaler will tell you, ain't happenin'. And, you can't change sunspot cycles, so that's that.

Second, the Vostok ice core data contradicts the CO2/warming sequence, as warming preceded CO2 rises by up to 1000 years. This is scholarly evidence ignored by everyone.

Third, Al Gore devised a brilliant business model of global calamity unless we buy carbon credits--from the firm where he is a Board Member. He made $100 million on his movie, and right or wrong, he'll be long dead in 50 years and still have $100 million+ in the bank. But it was a good message. Genius.

Fourth, there can be no dissent among "scientists" regarding AGW lest your academic career be ruined by the crusaders.

Fifth, there is no down side to being on the AGW train, and lots of benefits, right or wrong. A bettor's dream come true.

Sixth, who made Obama the global warming champion? He did:

“this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal ..."~~Barack Obama upon winning the Democratic nomination for presidency conveys his thinking of what that means ....for the world, Tuesday, JUNE 03, 2008”

So yeah, he's a hypocrite, and a wealthy one at that. I don't begrudge him his wealth or his house. I do credit him for knowing what suckers look like.

So, what to do about the inevitable?

Sigh.

In the pre-Internet age, only your family and friends would know you were a gullible fool.

Now, thanks to excellent forums like this, everyone can know:

Ice Core Data Help Solve a Global Warming Mystery

CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?

Big Toys, it's best to stay "on topic" in any thread. (This is especially true if you try to venture off into areas in which you know very, very little.)

In this case, the OP replaced a MS with an ICE vehicle. His "personal choice." as so many here call it, increases the risk to our only planet, and all life on it. It was short-sighted, wrong, and evil; we can hope he will see his error soon and buy another EV ASAP.

While a Tesla would be the best choice, he is free to buy a lesser, far less capable EV, while spending more money to do so. The important thing is: STOP BUYING ICE VEHICLES.

 

[Big Toys]

I'm only responding to your Vostok post. The rest is a different debate. The people that I care to listen to are those that support their hypotheses with evidence. I take opinion pieces about global warming with a grain of salt. However, since you brought politics into the mix, I'll just say this: I'd rather see my tax dollars go to supporting renewable energy than put in the hands of some guy who thinks wind turbines cause cancer.

Unfortunately, *this* science is inextricably linked to public policy, therefore the discussion is not just for science nerds. There are people with little to no science background that have the power to spend tax money. That "some guy" you refer to does not have that power. Congress alone has that power.

AWG is nto just for science nerds only. Like all good causes, it has become a business that makes a lot of people rich, and is an avenue to extract taxpayor money for all sorts of dubious remedies and "repairations".

I'd love to and do support renewable energy, but you have to first define what the goals are. Cleaner environment? Less dependency on foreign sources? Change the course of global climate? Now define your metric of success. Then define how much you are willing to spend to meet the metric. ROI, or should we have bought face masks, or put more into cancer research? As I mentioned earlier, unless everyone everywhere is willing to give up essentially everything modern science and industry has given us, it will be impossible to make any meaningfully change.

Windmills are great, except NIMBY and they kill the birds. Success? I'm not sure where that link between cancer and windmills came about, but I suspect he was referring to the link between exposure to electromagnetic fields and carcinogenesis, which is still inconclusive and a valid concern.

 

[Big Toys]

Hey Big Toys,

Just curious--you've made no comment about your degrees in any field of science whatsoever, nor any expertise in any field. Perhaps you might please enlighten us all with a list of sciential links supporting your jaw-dropping position that, yes, we CAN dump unlimited amounts of GHG's with nary a worry?

We'll be waiting, so please get on it.

Thanks!

I'm not going to support the crazy, however I do hold a doctorate in the sciences, and recognize ADHD/OCD, perhaps hypomania when I see it. Let's not devolve into a juvenile sword fight comparing CVs and diplomas on a wall.

It is not a matter of CAN we dump CO2, but SHOULD we. You'll have better luck convincing people they should breath better air and drink better water than telling them the road to death begins in 9 years. However, Al Gore did pretty well for himself. So, there's that data point.

 

[Uncle Paul]

Before getting too judgemental, we should take into consideration that about 98% of new car buyers are still choosing to go the gasoline/diesel route.

EVs are a disruptive force, but it will take some time until enough production capability is built to make more EVs and the EVs improve in pricing and capabilitiies to make them a more palitable choice. Longer range and faster charging will help change the tide.

 

[Big Toys]

Sigh.

In the pre-Internet age, only your family and friends would know you were a gullible fool.

Now, thanks to excellent forums like this, everyone can know:

Ice Core Data Help Solve a Global Warming Mystery

CO2 lags temperature - what does it mean?

Big Toys, it's best to stay "on topic" in any thread. (This is especially true if you try to venture off into areas in which you know very, very little.)

In this case, the OP replaced a MS with an ICE vehicle. His "personal choice." as so many here call it, increases the risk to our only planet, and all life on it. It was short-sighted, wrong, and evil; we can hope he will see his error soon and buy another EV ASAP.

While a Tesla would be the best choice, he is free to buy a lesser, far less capable EV, while spending more money to do so. The important thing is: STOP BUYING ICE VEHICLES.

I get your enthusiasm. I also get that you view anyone who disagrees with you as evil and stupid. I understand that is part of the neurosis and I will not engage a neurotic, but the OP has made his decision on principle and finances. The world will not end with one more ICE purchase, I promise. You wanna buy his EV for him? You'll sleep a good 3-4 hours knowing you did good.

I did read your "Ice Core Data Help..." link. Here's something that stood out:

"Snowpack becomes progressively denser from the surface down to around 100 meters, where it forms solid ice. Scientists use air trapped in the ice to determine the CO2 levels of past climates, whereas they use the ice itself to determine temperature. But because air diffuses rapidly through the ice pack, those air bubbles are younger than the ice surrounding them.

This is a striking statement. This states that young air diffuses in the ice pack. But how can air (less dense even when compressed) ) diffuse deep INTO a (more dense) substrate (ice)?

 

[robl45]

Wow, Seriously, its his fault that he bought a car for a not insignificant sum and expected it to work? Some people are willing to buy into anything. Probably the same that keep making excuses for why the FSD still doesn't work and god knows all the poor slobs that bought it in the beginning that will never ever make use of it.

What I’m surprised about is that people who had early versions of the car, are surprised that there are potential future unknowns.

There’s a reason why you were considered an “early adopter”. There are going to be unknowns over time. I have a 2017 S90D and so far so good. I have 45k miles on it in 3 years and that’s with it being stored for several months of the year in the winter. So I wonder how much time you really did spend at superchargers.

I do think Tesla should have been more open about the reduced supercharging speeds and maybe offered an incentive to buy a new version that is less likely to have those issues.

I’m keeping my Tesla until I no longer enjoy it. And if mine becomes an annoyance, I’ll simply buy another with more features and less cost. Why? Because when they work, there’s nothing else like them. Also to not have had autopilot, that is worth it right there to upgrade. I will also never buy a gas car again. I’m tired of being part of the problem. EVs are the best for this country and our lungs. Especially important with COVID. Big oil be damned.

 

[houstonian]

In this case, the OP replaced a MS with an ICE vehicle. His "personal choice." as so many here call it, increases the risk to our only planet, and all life on it. It was short-sighted, wrong, and evil; we can hope he will see his error soon and buy another EV ASAP.

I 'member back when "the anointed" intellectuals were screeching their head off about global cooling in the 70's.

Then it became global warming. [read: the anointed got it wrong but rather than admit their mistake, they doubled down]

Then it became "climate change". [read: the anointed got it wrong but rather than admit their mistake, they doubled down]

Now it's COVID and they're talking about mandatory vax papers and whispering about chip implants. [read: the anointed are still going to get it wrong but rather than admit their mistake, they demand more be taken from us under the guise of security.]

The common theme through all of this (they) always play up a crisis so [you] live in fear to give up more of your liberties and pay more in taxes.

 

[Bigdog9586]

the more i think about it, the more leasing seems to make sense for a tesla. Let it be someone else's problem at the end of the 4 years. Charge to 100% everyday on a supercharger, doesn't matter, not your car, doesn't change your tradein cost

I agree on leasing. I leased a Volt back in 2012 and the following year they dropped the retail price $5000. If I’d bought that I’d lost my butt on resale. I’ll never buy this type vehicle. Just think if someone figures out how to build batteries for 1/2 the price at twice the range. Yours would be near worthless to resell.

 

[CvB1]

the more i think about it, the more leasing seems to make sense for a tesla. Let it be someone else's problem at the end of the 4 years. Charge to 100% everyday on a supercharger, doesn't matter, not your car, doesn't change your tradein cost

That attitude is disgusting, screw someone else without any conscience about it, you sound like a real prick.

 

[Campflake]

I wonder what eye Surgons offer patients for a warrantee .... And when some surgeries do not go as planned or solutions do not last as long as expected, what would one post on the doctors forum.........