Tesla Roadster: The World's Only Cool Electric Car

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

I have already demonstrated an example with EEStor where you have mixed fact with your deliberately superimposed 220V figure to suggest how silly the notion of the articles statement of "charge in minutes as opposed to hours" was, even though the article makes absolutely no reference to 220V domestic charging, when it makes the statement about charging in minutes. Anyone can see through your explanations and the more you explain the more silly your explanations become. You have shown your slight of hand.



EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity
The Energy Blog: EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity

So what did I state as fact that wasn't fact?

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

So what did I state as fact that wasn't fact?

It was not stated as fact that 220V was being referred to in the article on EEstor which talked about charging in minutes. The discussion pertained to the article linked below. You suggested the notion of charging in minutes in relation the article was silly, yet the article makes no reference to charging in minutes, at your imputed 220V value. In fact the article makes no reference to overnight or domestic charging at all. You have clearly and deceptively misrepresented the article to make it appear silly in this thread. You can make excuses until the cows come home, but nobody will buy them. You can't even give them away.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

"Silly, isn't it?"

The Energy Blog: EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/01/eestor_ultracap.html

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

It was not stated as fact that 220V was being referred to in the article on EEstor

Did I claim that it was fact?
That's just yes or no, BTW.

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Did I claim that it was fact?
That's just yes or no, BTW.

Irrelevant to my point and when someone posts a remark, they normally expect it to be taken as fact. Your simple but sufficiently detailed calculation example was by you, clearly intended to be interpreted as fact, however you made a grossly misleading statement about the remarks of charging in minutes article being silly. Whether your example was fact or fiction is irrelevant to the fact that your statement "Silly, isn't it?" in terms of the articles reference to charging in minutes and not hours, missrepresented the article. You mixed the statements in the articles with imputed values of your own, to present the article as silly, when the article made no reference to 220V nor charging domestically or overnight. Thus its entirely reasonable to see that the article would have been referring to charging stations, when talking about charging in minutes. You have mislead the audience. BTW my answer will suffice as I see fit.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

"Silly, isn't it?"

The Energy Blog: EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/01/eestor_ultracap.html

“Fast charging is here; it’s available,” Boyd said. “You can put a station at a Starbucks for a cost of $125,000. There’s no reason to wait [for something else].”

Greentech Media | Electric-Car Firms Push Alternative to Project Better Place's Idea

Admittedly skepticism was mentioned, but that is largely market operational logistics and appropriate pricing mechanisms and as mentioned, most people will charge overnight at home. The key thing is that the technology exists and is practical.

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Irrelevant to my point

Fine. You want to make a point.
Why don't you just give a direct answer that would support your contention?

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Fine. You want to make a point.
Why don't you just give a direct answer that would support your contention?

You get the answer I give you and not what you demand. I have given you my direct answer and a simple Yes or No answer alone, is not a direct answer, does not provide reasonable context and it's a misleading answer that's does not relate to my point. The fact that you mislead, is the Yes answer, if you must have one. YES your remarks "Silly, isn't it?" in terms of the EEStor Ultracapacitor article's reference to charging in minutes and not hours, misrepresented the article. YES you mixed the statements in the articles with imputed values of your own, to present the article as silly, when the article made no reference to 220V nor charging domestically or overnight. YES you did create a false and misleading impression, when stating how silly the notion of charging in minutes was. YES you drew an incorrect analogy between your stated example, factual or otherwise and the statements in the article, thus making the article appear less credible. There is your yes answer, along with an explanation as to why.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

"Silly, isn't it?"

The Energy Blog: EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity
http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/energy/2006/01/eestor_ultracap.html

“Fast charging is here; it’s available,” Boyd said. “You can put a station at a Starbucks for a cost of $125,000. There’s no reason to wait [for something else].”

Greentech Media | Electric-Car Firms Push Alternative to Project Better Place's Idea

Admittedly skepticism was mentioned, but that is largely market operational logistics and appropriate pricing mechanisms and as mentioned, most people will charge overnight at home. The key thing is that the technology exists and is practical.

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

You get the answer I give you and not what you demand.

A sentence ending with a question mark is a question, not a demand.
I stated that I prefer to stick to facts. Your post #57 "evidently not" comment indicates that you think what I state as fact is not so, or not always so. Clearly, that questions my integrity.

Surely it is not unreasonable that I ask, and perhaps expect, you or anyone else for that matter who questions my integrity, to explain their basis for doing so?

But, you have not cited a single instance where I have purported something to be fact that isn't.

Might I suggest that you review and act in accordance with your first comment in post #66?

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

A sentence ending with a question mark is a question, not a demand.

Well then even more, you get the answer given. No rule says you have to like it. The truth can be uncomfortable at times.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

I stated that I prefer to stick to facts. Your post #57 "evidently not" comment indicates that you think what I state as fact is not so, or not always so. Clearly, that questions my integrity.

Indeed, even if that includes misrepresenting facts. You may prefer to, but evidently you haven't. Again I've explained repeatedly in my example re; your statements "How many minutes......is 6 a good number?" and "Silly, isn't it?" regarding the "charge in minutes as opposed to hours" statement in the EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity article. The notion of charging in minutes pertains to this article, being the notion you claimed to be silly, however this article makes no reference to 220V nor does it make reference to domestic or overnight charging. Thus the reasonable implication being it meant charging in minutes in the context of charging stations.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

Surely it is not unreasonable that I ask, and perhaps expect, you or anyone else for that matter who questions my integrity, to explain their basis for doing so?

Indeed, however again I've explained repeatedly in my example re; your "Silly, isn't it?" remark regarding the "charge in minutes as opposed to hours" statement in the EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity article.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

But, you have not cited a single instance where I have purported something to be fact that isn't.

Yes I have. Again I've explained repeatedly in my example re; your "Silly, isn't it?" remark regarding the "charge in minutes as opposed to hours" statement in the EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity It's three for all to see. Your denials only further diminish the strength and integrity of your further comments.


Originally Posted by Besoeker
"Silly, isn't it?"

“Fast charging is here; it’s available,” Boyd said. “You can put a station at a Starbucks for a cost of $125,000. There’s no reason to wait [for something else].”

Greentech Media | Electric-Car Firms Push Alternative to Project Better Place's Idea

Admittedly skepticism was mentioned, but that is largely market operational logistics and appropriate pricing mechanisms and as mentioned, most people will charge overnight at home. The key thing is that the technology exists and is practical.

[Besoeker]

Originally Posted by LMagic007

Yes I have.

You still miss my point about the 220V. If you don't understand it, just drop it.

And might I also suggest that cite just one thing I claimed as fact that isn't or act in accordance with your first comment in post #66?

[LMagic007]

Originally Posted by Besoeker

You still miss my point about the 220V. If you don't understand it, just drop it.

Originally Posted by Besoeker

And might I also suggest that cite just one thing I claimed as fact that isn't or act in accordance with your first comment in post #66?

Nothing of key relevance to your remarks is missed or misunderstood. You clearly indicated the article EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity was silly to suggest "charge in minutes as opposed to hours" and nothing you say will explain away that fact. Whether you claimed your example to be fact or not and regardless of the degree of its correctness or otherwise, is irrelevant to my point. What's relevant to the point I have been making, is that you inappropriately used your example to falsely show the article EEStor Ultracapacitor Shuns Publicity claims of charging in minutes to be silly. If you don't understand that, perhaps just drop it.

Originally Posted by Besoeker
"Silly, isn't it?"



Electric Fast Charging Stations, yes this technology also exists ! Charges in minutes, not hours.

“Fast charging is here; it’s available,” Boyd said. “You can put a station at a Starbucks for a cost of $125,000. There’s no reason to wait [for something else].”

Greentech Media | Electric-Car Firms Push Alternative to Project Better Place's Idea

Admittedly skepticism was mentioned, but that is largely market operational logistics and appropriate pricing mechanisms and as mentioned, most people will charge overnight at home. The key thing is that the technology exists and is practical.