I am a naturally cynical and skeptical person. — Agree-to-Disagree

:rofl:

Scientists are meant to be skeptical. — Agree-to-Disagree

You’re neither a scientist nor a skeptic. You’re just a guy who falls for the equivalent of flat earth “theory.” But keep telling yourself that — always good for a chuckle.

Indeed.

HILARIOUS! Defense Ministry says "NO TALKING" in Chinese EVs!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GumbaWxctOc

Another of MGUYs brilliant videos.

Summary
The UK Ministry of Defense has bought hundreds of Chinese EVs for its employees in order to meet Net Zero targets. They have suddenly realized that this might cause some security problems. But instead of junking the cars and buying new ones that don't spy on their occupants or surroundings, they've come up with a cheaper solution. The brilliant solution is to tell Ministry of Defense employees to shut up when they're traveling in these EVs. Top brass have been ordered to stop talking in EVs over fears that Chinese makers will eavesdrop on conversations. A ministry spokesperson said protecting National Security is the foundation of everything we do. We have strict security procedures in place to ensure sensitive information is protected. But apparently that all takes second place to Net Zero.

That kind of sounds like bs

The climate denier’s love affair with a YouTube rando continues.

That kind of sounds like bs — frank

Frank, which parts of this story do you think are bs?

1) - Do you accept that the UK Ministry of Defense has bought hundreds of Chinese EVs for its employees in order to meet Net Zero targets?

2) - Do you accept that Chinese EVs might cause some security problems?

3) - Do you accept that the UK Ministry of Defense is not junking the cars?

4) - Do you accept that the the UK Ministry of Defense has told its employees and/or "top brass" to stop talking in EVs?

If you accept (1), (2), and (3), but don't accept (4), then that would mean that the UK Ministry of Defense is not worried if "top secret" information ends up in Chinese hands.

What do you think? Please tell us why you think that this story is bs.

Do you accept that the the UK Ministry of Defense has told its employees and/or "top brass" to stop talking in EVs? — Agree-to-Disagree

I doubt this would be public information, so bs.

The climate denier’s love affair with a YouTube rando continues. — Mikie

You haven't been able to disprove a single thing that MGUY has said.

I and everyone I know loves their EVs. — Mikie

This statement implies that you have an EV. Does it sting to know that you have been fooled into buying a pile of crap? . :rofl:

I doubt this would be public information, so bs. — frank

So you believe that the UK Ministry of Defense is not worried if "top secret" information ends up in Chinese hands.

If you don't believe that this is public information then read this news story. It is written by Jerome Starkey, Defence Editor (Published: 17:16 ET, Feb 5 2025, Updated: 17:28 ET, Feb 5 2025)
https://www.the-sun.com/news/13464048/defence-chiefs-electric-cars-chinese-spy

Here is some juicy stuff from the news story. . :scream:

The Sun understands a security notice was issued across the department banning sensitive conversations in electric cars.

A source said: “It’s crazy. A lot of these ­electric cars are used by senior officers, who know a lot of secrets.

"They work on sensitive missions.

“It’s normal to discuss work when they’re driving, especially if everyone in the car is cleared to the same level or working on the same project.

“They aren’t used to thinking the car might be listening — especially if the car has been issued by the UK MoD.”

A second source said: “These cars are everywhere now, from Special Forces headquarters to nuclear submarine bases.

Does The Sun print anything but bs?

Does The Sun print anything but bs? — frank

You are beginning to sound a lot like Mikie.

If the story is not true then somebody (e.g. the UK Ministry of Defense) would expose it as a lie.

If you accept (1), (2), and (3), but don't accept (4), then that would mean that the UK Ministry of Defense is not worried if "top secret" information ends up in Chinese hands.

Is that what you believe?

I think that story is bs, and the only source your provided was The Sun. :meh:

I think that story is bs, and the only source your provided was The Sun. :meh: — frank

The Sun is not the only source. Are all of the following sources bs?

https://www.gbnews.com/lifestyle/cars/drivers-fears-electric-vehicles-spying-mod
Ministry of Defence is thought to have instructed staff to stop speaking in Chinese manufactured electric vehicles

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14366019/MoD-told-not-talk-electric-cars-Chinese-spy.html
MoD top brass are told not to talk in electric cars - in case Chinese 'spy' manufacturers eavesdrop on top-secret information

https://www.express.co.uk/life-style/cars/2010767/ministry-of-defence-electric-cars-china
Defence chiefs ordered to stop talking in electric cars over China spy fears

https://www.cityam.com/chinese-ev-makers-should-be-barred-from-uk-public-contracts-over-data-privacy-fears-campaigners-warn
Ministers should consider banning Chinese electric vehicle (EV) manufacturers from securing government contracts over national security and data privacy concerns, a new report has warned.

https://www.electrive.com/2025/02/06/uk-warns-government-employees-of-spying-cars
Top officials in the UK government's Ministry of Defense have been warned to keep quiet while in their cars as the Chinese government could be listening in, trying to gain access to classified information, according to media reports.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/09/16/chinese-evs-in-britain-could-be-weaponised-think-tank-warns
Experts warn vehicles with Chinese-made components could transmit data back to Beijing
Chinese electric vehicles being driven in Britain could be “weaponised” and should be banned from government use, a report has warned.
Modules within Chinese-made electric vehicles could transmit sensitive data back to the country or even be remotely controlled, the China Strategic Risks Institute (CSRI) warned.
The think tank called for an end to Chinese carmakers being able to win government contracts. Last year it emerged that the Ministry of Defence used electric cars made by Chinese-owned MG.
Whitehall departments are buying up electric cars in an attempt to decarbonise their fleets. The report said the vehicles present a potentially greater security risk than petrol-powered vehicles because they are more likely to be equipped with internet-connected modules capable of collecting data and controlling the car’s functions.

https://www.reuters.com/article/technology/tesla-cars-banned-from-chinas-military-complexes-on-security-concerns-sources-idUSKBN2BB18R/
Britain’s unusual stance on Chinese electric vehicles
Unlike America or Europe, Britain is welcoming the cheap cars—for now
(Reuters) - The Chinese military has banned Tesla cars from entering its complexes, citing security concerns over cameras installed on the vehicles, two people who have seen notices of the directive told Reuters.
The move is the latest sign of China's growing scrutiny of the U.S. electric carmaker amid tensions with Washington. Analysts said it resembled Washington's measures against Chinese telecoms firm Huawei citing national security.

https://cim-coalition.co.uk/collision-course-under-pricing-chinese-ev-risks-in-the-uk
It warns that the Government should consider banning Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers from securing government contracts over national security and data privacy concerns.
It says suppliers suspected of having ties to China’s military-industrial complex pose a key risk due to the potential for built-in wireless components to be “weaponised”, which could even be used to gridlock British streets.
It comes as the UK government is rapidly procuring EVs for the public sector and confirmed last year that some models used by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had been supplied by MG, which is owned by China’s SAIC Motor.

https://fortune.com/2024/09/17/china-evs-csri-europe-electric-vehicles-cybersecurity-risk
Chinese electric vehicles could be ‘weaponized’ and should be banned from government use, report warns

All of those are just quoting The Sun.

All of those are just quoting The Sun. — frank

Really Frank? Am I going to have to spoon-feed you like I spoon-feed Mikie?

The Sun, and most of the others, are quoting from a report put out by The Coalition on Secure Technology in conjunction with the China Strategic Risks Institute (CSRI). The report is called "Collision Course: Under-pricing Chinese EVs risks in the UK". This has been widely picked up in publications today such as CityAM, the Telegraph, and presumably The Sun.

https://cim-coalition.co.uk/collision-course-under-pricing-chinese-ev-risks-in-the-uk

It warns that the Government should consider banning Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers from securing government contracts over national security and data privacy concerns.

It says suppliers suspected of having ties to China’s military-industrial complex pose a key risk due to the potential for built-in wireless components to be “weaponised”, which could even be used to gridlock British streets.

It comes as the UK government is rapidly procuring EVs for the public sector and confirmed last year that some models used by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) had been supplied by MG, which is owned by China’s SAIC Motor.

You can download the full report from a link near the bottom of the webpage. The full report is 36 pages long so I will just quote a little bit of it.

As it stands, around 25% of the ministerial fleet of cars are already ultra-low emission vehicles, with a target for all central government cars and vans to be EVs by 2027 . As with the Government’s EV producer quota system it looks likely that the greatest beneficiary will be Chinese EV producers who can afford to underbid their competitors.

The Ministry of Defence confirmed in September 2023 that its department uses electric vehicles and hybrids produced by MG, which is owned by SAIC Motor. This is unsurprising on cost grounds given the dire state of public finances.

Aside from the threat to the UK’s manufacturing industry, the UK public remains largely unaware of the dependency, disruption, and data security risks Chinese EVs pose via Chinese manufactured Cellular Internet of Things Modules (CIMs) within them.
● Dependency Risk: Chinese EV producers winning UK government procurement
contracts and providing EVs to the police, the armed forces, government departments,
and local authorities, will create dependency which could be exploited by the Chinese
Communist Party (CCP) to pressure the UK Government to change its policies towards
the PRC.
● Disruption Risk: If relations between the UK and the PRC were to deteriorate, CIMs in
Chinese EVs could enable the PRC to disable vehicles and thus cause significant
disruption to the UK Government, the police force, the military, and the UK’s trade supply
chain. Whilst the likelihood of the CCP disrupting the UK Government and society
through sabotaging EVs is low in the current circumstances, responsible governments
should plan for the worst and minimise national security risks in advance.
● Data Security Risk: EVs report geolocation and performance data in real-time. This
would allow the PRC to plot the movement of government and defence vehicles.
Geolocation detail is far greater than can be obtained from monitoring mobile phones.
Put together with other information, this could yield useful intelligence. For example, by
syncing a mobile phone with a car’s audio system, manufacturers can gain access to
personal data. If CIMs contained backdoors – such as those found in the products of
Chinese technology companies Huawei and HikVision – the amount of data which could
be extracted could be considerable.

You suck.

You suck. — frank

Thank you for admitting that you are wrong. Not many people are honest enough to do that. . :up:

Here is some bad news that is not, as far as I know, directly connected to climate change, but certainly adds to the degradation of the environment and affects the food supply. Is it pesticides, varela, viruses, that cold snap, or just accumulated stresses? Wait and see. Anyway, bad news, we don't know yet how bad.



But a bit of good news for UK bees, the government has finally banned neonicotinoid insecticides to treat seeds, that had been permitted against advice.

Edwards added: “The focus must now be on a complete, sustainable transition away from a reliance on the use of neonicotinoids not just in agriculture, but also in pet flea treatments. This is a key source of chemical pollution in our waterways, with 10% of UK rivers found to contain toxic neonicotinoid chemicals.”

https://bylinetimes.com/2025/01/24/what-the-government-has-been-doing/

Further to my earlier mention of the difficulty of having an intuitive understanding of exponential functions. Here is a good explanation of the nature of that difficulty.

http://www.kazabyte.com/2011/12/we-dont-understand-exponential-functions.html

:up:

“Aren’t you mad that the car that’s served you perfectly well over 8 years is really a piece of junk?”

Oof. No wonder even Frank thinks you’re an idiot.

People, I propose that we get this thread back on track.

Have the magnetic poles of the Earth been disrupted in some way, as of 2025? That doesn't seem to be the case.

Has the weather system of the Earth been disrupted in some way, as of 2025? That doesn't seem to be the case either.

But I'll tell you what's the case, you already know it: tons of plastic in our oceans, pollution in general in our cities and towns, and I think that we, as human beings, need to take the blame here. Yes, volcanic eruptions are not due to human action. Mass extinction events like the one that killed the T. Rex are not due to human action. But, by parity of reasoning, the existence of tons of plastic in our oceans, such as empty water bottles, or plastic bags, for example, are due to human action. So, in that sense, we're definitely affecting different ecosystems.

Is that the same thing as climate change? That's debatable. But let's debate it with a bit of, I don't know, intellectual sophistication. Insults are for adolescents. We're way past that point. So, let's discuss, as is expected of men and women.

Is climate change real? Yes, it is, because the climate exists, and it changes. Have we caused that change? Not all of it, but some of it. And yes, it has to do with the tons of plastic that pollute our oceans. Because those plastics were made despite the fact that massive carbon emissions would be required for producing them. Factory farming is also negatively impacting ecosystems, and the climate more generally. Thousands of acres of tropical rainforest are cut down as we speak, and this has been going on for decades, both in the Amazon rainforest as well as the tropical jungles of Southeast Asia. These patches of land are cleared for cattle raising. In a few centuries, at this rhythm, there will be no more tropical rainforests or jungles, and we don't know what effect this will have on the climate (just think of how difficult it is to make an accurate weather prediction in professional climatology, to say nothing of professional meteorology). What we do know, is that tropical storms have something to do with heat waves, and we also know that plants absorb light, heat, and water. So, destroying tropical ecosystems might actually make tropical storms more potent, and more chaotic. And since we've been destroying tropical flora for decades now, it is entirely possible that human beings have caused some of the most destructive effects that climate change itself causes as of 2025.

Hope that made sense. Feel free to disagree.

The climate is changing at a pace not seen in human history— and it’s because of carbon emissions from using fossil fuels. It’s not that complicated.

, that was your takeaway from the paper? (telling)

↪Arcane Sandwich


The climate is changing at a pace not seen in human history— and it’s because of carbon emissions from using fossil fuels. It’s not that complicated. — Mikie

I already addressed that point, Mikie:

Is climate change real? Yes, it is, because the climate exists, and it changes. Have we caused that change? Not all of it, but some of it. And yes, it has to do with the tons of plastic that pollute our oceans. Because those plastics were made despite the fact that massive carbon emissions would be required for producing them. — Arcane Sandwich

Why figure on plastics, exactly? Electricity generation, transportation, home heating, cement and steel production, etc — all huge contributors. So why not say that? Why exclusively mention plastics?

Sure. Even mining for Bitcoins has an effect on the carbon footprint. I mentioned plastic because it's the most obvious example. I didn't mean to imply that it's the only example. I thought that much was obvious.

It’s cool, but to me it’s not the most obvious example. The most obvious is transportation or electricity. That’s why I found it odd. But no worries.

Yeah, but it's like, we can live with less plastic, I'm honestly really sure about that. Can we live with less transportation or less electricity? I'm not so sure. What are your own thoughts on that?

that was your takeaway from the paper? (telling) — jorndoe

What was your takeaway from the paper?