More "Verde" Hybrid Nonsense

Hat tip: WUWT

THE Times (Not one of the American ones) has an excellent article dissecting and dissing Honda's new Insight car model (a hybrid). The author, Mr Clarkson, also looks a little closer into the 'green' aspects of hybrids and electric cars. As cited by a commenter at WUWT, Mr Clarkson I believe gets particularly close the what the hub-bub about these so-called 'green' cars is really all about:

The nickel for the battery has to come from somewhere. Canada, usually. It has to be shipped to Japan, not on a sailing boat, I presume. And then it must be converted, not in a tree house, into a battery, and then that battery must be transported, not on an ox cart, to the Insight production plant in Suzuka. And when the finished car has to be shipped, not by Thor Heyerdahl, to Britain, where it can be transported, not by wind, to the home of a man with a beard who thinks he’s doing the world a favour.

(Emphasis mine).

I don't know if there was a 'beard' in this car or not, but the 'doing the world a favor' part definitely applied.

Post script: just drove the new (used) ride cross country: 27+ MPG @ 75-80 MPH. No hybrid under the hood, just a handbuilt AMG 3.2L supercharged engine driving a 5 speed autostick-- made the trip sooo much more fun. About 1500 miles and I only had two brain-dead 'smug' hybrid polluters pass me at those speeds. Yeah I burn premium, but I know those POSs weren't getting as good MPG highway as I was getting either.

Blogroll Change: Bye Bye LGF

Not that it will make a whit of difference to the world, but I've removed my Little Green Footballs link in the Blogroll.

I still pretty much agree with Charles Johnson on most things and will be visiting his site as always. I just think the site, while suitably ardent on most of Johnson's 'causes', is too overwrought on the Evolution vs. Creationism issue. I don't think I even materially disagree with Johnson on Evolution, but his postings on the subject seem to be taking on an ever-increasing 'religious' fervor on what should be discussed in terms that are serious, scientific, and calm. Today's strained and ill-considered parsing of what is best described as imprecise statements by Rush Limbaugh on Darwinism have pushed things over the top for me.

I think Mr Johnson's views on some things are ill-informed (Anthropogenic Global Warming for example), but honest disagreement isn't off-putting - unlike hyperventilating on one side of an issue about others hyperventilating on the other side of the same issue.

I would recommend to Mr Johnson. Prof. Laurence Principe's lecture series Science & Religion for a more reasoned critique of Creationism as a false science.

Update 05/20/09 @2120 Hrs:
Well gee whiz.... One day after LGF jumps all over El Rushbo for his pointing out that the big 'Fossil Evidence for Human Evolution' story as being basically little more than hype, some scientists reinforce Rush's point . Article at link complete with today's OTT (Over the Top) Google header reference.

NY Times Covers Up a Crime For "Their Guy"?

Aren't we lucky to have such an 'unbiased' press?

From Powerline:

"I am sorry," she wrote, "but I believe in Obama and did not want to help the Republicans."

Oh.

Well...I guess that makes it all right then?

Go. Read it all. Follow the link as well.

Hopefully (and I'm not a 'hope' kind of guy) every blog in America will soon have more readership than the NYT.

Jon Stewart Smackdown

As if you need another reason to kick Jon Stewart's a** if you ever see him outside his bubble, there's this.

The link takes you to a video of one of the most cogent decompositions of the 'Nukes Weren't Neccessary' revisionist bile ever delivered. Well done!