redmed wrote:"Relying on personal interpretations and experience clouds one from the objectiveness of reality and truth. This is why the scientific method puts zero value on one's own experience or views and requires the objective reproduction by others to validate a claim."
You're belief in that your "Scientific data":
"I looked up major contributing factors, the data, read up on specific models and why the automaker developed them, researched the laws enacted, and read up on how they were implemented."
is pure and not clouded by personal & political interpretation? Is (I don't want to be rude) quite naive. Then discount others who directly experienced these events. Gives me pause thinking of times I have I have had discussions of historical events I have researched then discussed with elders that lived at that time. When their experiences contradicted what I had read, I corrected them. Thinking that they only experienced a small part of the big picture and the scholarly publications I had read had a higher level view. I now wish I could revisit some of those discussions.
I think you need to revisit my posts. I have provided much more explanations and facts than just anecdotes, recollections, and interpretations. Sure, I enjoy them and use them too but don't count on them as the crux of my position and then try to claim authority due to personal experience. There is a difference between subjective and objective observations and narratives and the appropriate value to place on each. The discussion here was about government involvement in the popularity of certain vehicles. You vaguely referenced laws with an interpretation on their effect. I looked up the specific laws (CAFE) to see how they were implemented (MPG averages the automaker had to meet over time) and why they were implemented (Oil Embargo Crisis). You offered a subjective interpretation while I sought out a more objective and historically-accurate explanation. The objective explanation provided by my sources didn't align with your views which even included a claim that the government invented the Ford Explorer and other SUVs. In essence, your interpretation has some validity claims. When I pointed that out, you basically claimed you experienced it and I didn't which is yet again another argumentative flaw.
I absolutely agree but likely in a different regard than most active members of this thread. I'm not too concerned about safety standards my car needs to meet. In terms of government intrusions and accountability, I'm far more concerned about terrible public policies and political ramifications coming about in the form of power-hungry executive orders, appointments of under-qualified individuals, mass resignations, and pathetically, uneducated and factually incorrect tweets on social media. Let's not forget the rampant corruption and scandals and the deliberate interference of a proper judicial process. Yet, I'm supposed to be mad at the government for TPMS?
TPMS (as one example of bureaucracy run amok) has a far bigger effect on your personal life than all of the things you mentioned above (which pretty much boils down to one thing, the Henny Penny hysteria we're getting from the left right now can not be concealed that easily).
So it comes as a surprise that I actually care about people other than myself and that their plight from the current administration may just be a tad bit worse than what we deal with regarding TPMS?
I really don't want to get into a political debate in this thread (or any other here for that matter) but your comment above is essentially a self-admittance of inherent flaws in your ideology and the reason why most people choose to eschew it in addition to its many other shortcomings. The fact that one can easily dismiss the overuse of executive orders and interference of judicial process as just liberal fuss yet moan about TPMS is quite ironic for someone who claims they want "small government".
Woodie wrote:And yes, I did an hour of research on the sales of the Suburban and SUV's in general before writing that post. Was hoping to find a nice graph I could include but I didn't. Didn't even find a chart with every year listed, just random year quotes. What I did find showed that Chevy Suburban and other SUV sales took off in the late 70's and again in the 90's, pretty much coinciding with the CAFE standard and a period of relatively low fuel prices.
This essentially supports my claim. The CAFE standards were placed in response to the Oil Embargo Crisis (another factor no one else has mentioned thus far despite it being the reason for CAFE). Following the end of the crisis, fuel prices go down and people buy larger SUVs despite automobiles getting better and better fuel economy due to the new standards. Call me crazy but this seems to strongly suggest that fuel prices are the driving force behind the consumer appetite for SUVs... as we're seeing again right now. Regardless of just coming out of the oil embargo crisis, regardless of climate change issues that get more dire, regardless of the financial struggles during the recent economic crisis, when the gas prices go down, SUV sales go up. This is what I've been arguing from the very beginning.
KuroNekko wrote:As for the age vs. education point, let me put it this way: wisdom comes with experience (age is a contributing factor) but understanding comes from knowledge and education. Relying on personal interpretations and experience clouds one from the objectiveness of reality and truth. This is why the scientific method puts zero value on one's own experience or views and requires the objective reproduction by others to validate a claim.
If that's what you want to believe...knock yourself out. The fact is science is performed by humans who have agendas...whatever they are. The reality is PURE science is a myth. By definition it's perfect. And we all know we live in a perfect world right?
I live the science of automation everyday, and I can tell you there is very little un-objective science going on. Unless, of course, the almighty dollar has lost its luster, then, maybe, we'd get some of what you are truly referring to.
Understanding coming from knowledge and education...well, that's another myth these days. Far too many educated individuals running around that are clueless. Education is big business. I have to deal with that non-sense on a daily basis.
How many millionaires and now billionaires are there with simply a high-school education? I'm thinking they have some pretty damn good understanding of things.
I think you need to study up on the scientific method and what that entails given your reply. Also, science is rather clear cut on many issues. I mentioned the Flat-Earthers, Anti-Vaxxers, and the climate change deniers as the good company of sound-minded individuals one has when they want to denounce scientific findings and knowledge. However, you're right that there is no "PURE Science" hence science uses a much more logical standard of "fail to disprove" to support a finding. Clever, clever.
As for the millionaires and billionaires? I guess you aren't aware that the vast majority of wealthy people in the world inherited their wealth and live very comfortably on shares, trust funds, and ownership. While there are certainly wealthy self-made people, many who come to mind went to some of the most prestigious prep-schools that fed them into Ivy Leagues. When folks like Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, etc. "dropped out of college", they dropped out of Harvard, Stanford, and the like. While I'm not saying that education is the absolute key to success, it's quite helpful whether in making money or finding flaws in a discussion.