You're Being Lied to About Electric Cars

[easyrider]

I’d be curious to see Claude’s assessment of my own posts on this same thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Personally, I think if a member like Ken, who has an obvious personal hostility towards me, should use AI, but not in this way as it just seems malicious. As the AI becomes more powerful, people like Ken will take advantage of it to ruin forums. I'm very turned off on this newest bs but challenge accepted.

Bill

 

[Ken555]

I read them both. On these threads I can't explain things in the way they should be explained without breaking forum rules. Advantage AI. To be clear, I'm only interested in ev's if there is a way to make some money off them. As far as I can tell there isn't without subsidies or incentives.

I think you are a putz for using AI in the way you are using it. If you have to rely on AI to make your points for you , you are not as smart as I had thought. I guess it makes sense to you to do what you are doing but in an educated atmosphere we totally call that plagiarizing.

Bill

From Claude:

Bill has responded to your posts. Let me analyze his responses:

## Bill’s Response Analysis

Bill made three key points in his replies:

1. **“Obviously, your just making it up as you go”** - He’s dismissing the AI analysis outright, suggesting you fabricated it.
1. **“To be clear, I’m only interested in ev’s if there is a way to make some money off them. As far as I can tell there isn’t without subsidies or incentives.”** - This is actually quite revealing and confirms my analysis. He’s openly admitting his perspective isn’t about the technology’s merits but purely about financial arbitrage opportunities.
1. **Accusation of plagiarism and being “malicious”** - He’s attacking the method (using AI to analyze his posts) rather than addressing the substance of the critique.

## What This Reveals

**Bill just confirmed exactly what I concluded:** His interest in EVs is purely transactional/speculative, not based on objective assessment of the technology. This explains the inconsistency perfectly - he’s not flip-flopping between liking and disliking EVs based on their merits; he’s simply looking for ways to profit from subsidies and incentives.

His response also demonstrates a classic deflection tactic: when faced with an analysis of his inconsistent positions, he:

- Attacks you personally (“putz,” “malicious”)
- Questions your intelligence
- Claims plagiarism (though analyzing publicly posted forum comments isn’t plagiarism)
- Refuses to engage with the actual substance

## Here’s a response you could post:

-----

Bill, I appreciate you clarifying your position: “I’m only interested in ev’s if there is a way to make some money off them.”

That actually explains the inconsistency perfectly. You’re not evaluating EVs on their technological or environmental merits - you’re looking for arbitrage opportunities with subsidies. That’s a valid personal interest, but it does mean your posts throughout this thread weren’t objective assessments of EV technology, which is what most people were discussing.

As for using AI to analyze your posts - I simply asked it to read through the thread and summarize what you’d said. All the quotes and observations came directly from your own public forum posts. That’s not plagiarism any more than citing someone’s published comments would be. If the analysis made you uncomfortable, perhaps that’s worth reflecting on.

-----

**My assessment:** Bill is clearly bothered that someone systematically reviewed his contradictory statements. His admission that he only cares about profiting from incentives validates everything I wrote about his positions not being objective or coherent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[easyrider]

**My assessment:** Bill is clearly bothered that someone systematically reviewed his contradictory statements. His admission that he only cares about profiting from incentives validates everything I wrote about his positions not being objective or coherent.

Ken, you do have a right to think this way. It is an interesting point but everyone views the world differently. Your claim that my statements are contradictory doesn't explain why you decided to use AI to point this out. Even if my statements are contradictory, why do you care ?

You would try to dismiss all of the relevant points on the problems facing ev's I brought up by saying my statements are contradictory , not objective or not coherent. It would be difficult to be fully objective on this topic without bringing up the why's of the EV problem as it would go into the failed policies, half truths and outright lies of the topic, which would close this thread.

It is interesting and does reveal your deep feelings that you would use AI in such an inappropriate malicious way to single out my posts. Will you be doing this for every post you don't like or just mine ?

My assessment of you stands Ken. It will be interesting to read what Claude thinks of this post along with your side line comments.

Bill

 

[Carolinian]

Vintage Voltage TV
https://www.vintagevoltage.tv/

.


View attachment 116894

View attachment 116896

The value of any classic car depreciates with the installation of an incorrect drive train. I remember a car on auction at one of the classic car shows in Charlotte, a 1930a Rolls Royce with a stock body and interior in great condition but a Chevy engine and drive train. I thought it would be a neat car to use as a daily driver but thought it would go very high. I did not stay for the auction part of the show. Later I found it had only brought a couple of ;thousand due to the incorrect drive train. I kicked myself for not sitting there at the auction and bidding on it.

 

[Ken555]

Ken, you do have a right to think this way. It is an interesting point but everyone views the world differently. Your claim that my statements are contradictory doesn't explain why you decided to use AI to point this out. Even if my statements are contradictory, why do you care ?

You would try to dismiss all of the relevant points on the problems facing ev's I brought up by saying my statements are contradictory , not objective or not coherent. It would be difficult to be fully objective on this topic without bringing up the why's of the EV problem as it would go into the failed policies, half truths and outright lies of the topic, which would close this thread.

It is interesting and does reveal your deep feelings that you would use AI in such an inappropriate malicious way to single out my posts. Will you be doing this for every post you don't like or just mine ?

My assessment of you stands Ken. It will be interesting to read what Claude thinks of this post along with your side line comments.

Bill

You asked, so this is Claude’s response to your latest post. As an aside, I will note that having Claude analyze this and draft a response for me has saved me considerable time and performed work I would never have done, such as review every single post you made in this thread.

Bill’s response is interesting - he’s now pivoting from attacking the method to playing victim and questioning your motives. Let me break down what he’s doing:

## Bill’s Rhetorical Strategy:

1. **“Why do you care?”** - Deflecting from the substance by questioning your motivation
1. **Claims of “malicious” intent** - Framing legitimate analysis as an attack
1. **“Will you be doing this for every post you don’t like or just mine?”** - Suggesting persecution
1. **Implies he can’t be fully honest** - “It would close this thread” - setting up an excuse for why his arguments don’t hold together
1. **Challenges you to have AI analyze this very post** - A dare, likely expecting you won’t

## Here’s a response you could post:

-----

Bill, you ask why I care about contradictory statements in an 85-page thread about EVs. It’s simple: when people are trying to make informed decisions about expensive purchases, inconsistent arguments from someone who (by your own admission) is only interested in profiting from subsidies rather than the technology’s merits can muddy the discussion.

You say you’ve brought up “relevant points on the problems facing EVs,” but when your stated interest is purely financial arbitrage rather than objective analysis, those points carry less weight. That’s not dismissing them - it’s providing context other readers deserve to have.

As for using AI being “malicious” - I asked it to read and summarize your publicly posted comments on a public forum. That’s it. If anything, AI is actually *more* objective than a human doing the same analysis, since it has no personal grudge or agenda. The analysis was based solely on what you wrote.

You’re welcome to disagree with the conclusions, but calling it “inappropriate” to systematically review someone’s arguments in a long debate thread seems like an odd position to take.

-----

**My take:** Bill is now fully in defensive mode. He’s realized that having his 85 pages of comments analyzed revealed the inconsistency, so he’s trying to make this about you being mean rather than about the substance of his positions. The “challenge” to analyze this post is actually kind of funny - there’s nothing contradictory here; he’s being quite consistent in his deflection strategy.

The most telling part is where he suggests he can’t be “fully objective” because it would “close this thread” - essentially admitting his real arguments would violate forum rules, which suggests they’re not about EVs’ technical merits at all but about political grievances.

 

[HitchHiker71]

Ken, you do have a right to think this way. It is an interesting point but everyone views the world differently. Your claim that my statements are contradictory doesn't explain why you decided to use AI to point this out. Even if my statements are contradictory, why do you care ?

You would try to dismiss all of the relevant points on the problems facing ev's I brought up by saying my statements are contradictory , not objective or not coherent. It would be difficult to be fully objective on this topic without bringing up the why's of the EV problem as it would go into the failed policies, half truths and outright lies of the topic, which would close this thread.

It is interesting and does reveal your deep feelings that you would use AI in such an inappropriate malicious way to single out my posts. Will you be doing this for every post you don't like or just mine ?

My assessment of you stands Ken. It will be interesting to read what Claude thinks of this post along with your side line comments.

Bill

I’d surmise, and Bill can correct me here if I’m wrong, that what AI is analyzing as inconsistent views could also be interpreted as the same process any human being undertakes about new ideas or tech that has a bent toward skepticism or could be termed late adopters as opposed to early adopters. Folks like this tend to start out very skeptical and closed to change in certain areas - in this case EVs - and while Bill has said he only ever considered an EV from a financial standpoint, I bet if he were 100% honest this thread has also made him at least question some of his predispositions regarding EVs. Does that mean he’s going to run out and buy an EV? Nope. Could that mean that he is no longer completely closed to the idea of owning an EV? Yes. It might not make sense today, as Bill has indicated he lives in Western WA state in what is a very rural area. That’s why he was also considering a HEV or PHEV instead, which given his location and lifestyle needs may actually be the better choice, were he to decide to do so.

I am quite obviously an early adopter type at least when it comes to vehicle tech. I also hold a significant position in Tesla, and there’s no better way to learn about the product than to own it and use it persistently. I also live in the coastal mid-Atlantic metro area that is on the southern tip of the northeastern part of the US, which is relatively compact compared to the flyover states. I live in suburbia with lots of charging infrastructure all around me. I literally have 10 L3 charging stations within 10-15 minutes of my house. Not that I need them since we charge at home, but I highly doubt Bill has that kind of charging infrastructure near where he lives. He probably rarely sees EVs in his area.

In other areas of my life I’m a born skeptic and have been a late adopter for various reasons. Everyone on this thread can likely give examples of areas where they are progressive and other areas where they are very conservative in so far as product buying decisions. Humans are complex in nature.

When people are pushed into a proverbial corner, they get defensive and typically push back using old tried and true defense mechanisms, whether they are true/accurate or not, they are very familiar. I do the same thing under pressure sometimes. I suspect Bill is not immune to reacting the same way when pushed into a corner so to speak. I’d rather take a positive view that maybe, just maybe, all of the debate in this thread that the AI is summarizing as inconsistency, has actually made Bill, and others, question at least some of their predispositions with regard to EV/HEV/PHEV ownership. They are gradually changing at least some proportion of their views. That’s not inconsistency, that’s how humans change their perspectives, in fits and starts, over a period of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[davidvel]

I’d surmise, and Bill can correct me here if I’m wrong, that what AI is analyzing as inconsistent views could also be interpreted as the same process any human being undertakes about new ideas or tech that has a bent toward skepticism or could be termed late adopters as opposed to early adopters. Folks like this tend to start out very skeptical and closed to change in certain areas - in this case EVs - and while Bill has said he only ever considered an EV from a financial standpoint, I bet if he were 100% honest this thread has also made him at least question some of his predispositions regarding EVs. Does that mean he’s going to run out and buy an EV? Nope. Could that mean that he is no longer completely closed to the idea of owning an EV? Yes. It might not make sense today, as Bill has indicated he lives in Western WA state in what is a very rural area. That’s why he was also considering a HEV or PHEV instead, which given his location and lifestyle needs may actually be the better choice, were he to decide to do so.

I am quite obviously an early adopter type at least when it comes to vehicle tech. I also hold a significant position in Tesla, and there’s no better way to learn about the product than to own it and use it persistently. I also live in the coastal mid-Atlantic metro area that is on the southern tip of the northeastern part of the US, which is relatively compact compared to the flyover states. I live in suburbia with lots of charging infrastructure all around me. I literally have 10 L3 charging stations within 10-15 minutes of my house. Not that I need them since we charge at home, but I highly doubt Bill has that kind of charging infrastructure near where he lives. He probably rarely sees EVs in his area.

In other areas of my life I’m a born skeptic and have been a late adopter for various reasons. Everyone on this thread can likely give examples of areas where they are progressive and other areas where they are very conservative in so far as product buying decisions. Humans are complex in nature.

When people are pushed into a proverbial corner, they get defensive and typically push back using old tried and true defense mechanisms, whether they are true/accurate or not, they are very familiar. I do the same thing under pressure sometimes. I suspect Bill is not immune to reacting the same way when pushed into a corner so to speak. I’d rather take a positive view that maybe, just maybe, all of the debate in this thread that the AI is summarizing as inconsistency, has actually made Bill, and others, question at least some of their predispositions with regard to EV/HEV/PHEV ownership. They are gradually changing at least some proportion of their views. That’s not inconsistency, that’s how humans change their perspectives, in fits and starts, over a period of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is certainly an honorable benefit of the doubt. But having read hundreds of his posts, the incontinency flows from his consistently espousing opinions as fact, throwing out his thoughts and then looking for some snippet of a cite to support his opinion. This often causes him to bounce around tilting at windmills ala a conspiracy theorist.

Most of his comments lack factual support, and to the contrary are in contrast to well established facts. His beliefs are often rooted in anachronistic, archaic and old fashioned stereotypes. Like a puppy chasing a butterfly, he bounces around from idea to idea in his head and then posts those thoughts here. This is consistent in most all of the threads he highly participates in.

 

[easyrider]

I’d surmise, and Bill can correct me here if I’m wrong, that what AI is analyzing as inconsistent views could also be interpreted as the same process any human being undertakes about new ideas or tech that has a bent toward skepticism or could be termed late adopters as opposed to early adopters. Folks like this tend to start out very skeptical and closed to change in certain areas - in this case EVs - and while Bill has said he only ever considered an EV from a financial standpoint, I bet if he were 100% honest this thread has also made him at least question some of his predispositions regarding EVs. Does that mean he’s going to run out and buy an EV? Nope. Could that mean that he is no longer completely closed to the idea of owning an EV? Yes. It might not make sense today, as Bill has indicated he lives in Western WA state in what is a very rural area. That’s why he was also considering a HEV or PHEV instead, which given his location and lifestyle needs may actually be the better choice, were he to decide to do so.

I am quite obviously an early adopter type at least when it comes to vehicle tech. I also hold a significant position in Tesla, and there’s no better way to learn about the product than to own it and use it persistently. I also live in the coastal mid-Atlantic metro area that is on the southern tip of the northeastern part of the US, which is relatively compact compared to the flyover states. I live in suburbia with lots of charging infrastructure all around me. I literally have 10 L3 charging stations within 10-15 minutes of my house. Not that I need them since we charge at home, but I highly doubt Bill has that kind of charging infrastructure near where he lives. He probably rarely sees EVs in his area.

In other areas of my life I’m a born skeptic and have been a late adopter for various reasons. Everyone on this thread can likely give examples of areas where they are progressive and other areas where they are very conservative in so far as product buying decisions. Humans are complex in nature.

When people are pushed into a proverbial corner, they get defensive and typically push back using old tried and true defense mechanisms, whether they are true/accurate or not, they are very familiar. I do the same thing under pressure sometimes. I suspect Bill is not immune to reacting the same way when pushed into a corner so to speak. I’d rather take a positive view that maybe, just maybe, all of the debate in this thread that the AI is summarizing as inconsistency, has actually made Bill, and others, question at least some of their predispositions with regard to EV/HEV/PHEV ownership. They are gradually changing at least some proportion of their views. That’s not inconsistency, that’s how humans change their perspectives, in fits and starts, over a period of time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

AI can only recognize patterns. The AI is using a very short timeline to decide that the pattern is inconsistent. If the AI were to use the two year timeline, the pattern would emerge as something different.

It's true that EV's are not really a big thing where we live. There is no place to take them, including a Tesla, if something breaks down.

It's definitely true that I would buy an EV if I thought it were profitable. Only once have I seen the conditions were this was the case but I was late to the table.

Basically, I don't care for EV's. If you truly examine ev's they really aren't much better than ice in any way regarding the environment.

Bill

 

[easyrider]

This week, China decided to restrict rare earth minerals to the USA. Since ev's rely on rare earth minerals there will be supply chain issues on parts used for ev's. While ice vehicles rely on rare earth minerals for certain components in the exhaust systems, such as cerium which is mined in the USA for the most part, these vehicles could be manufactured without Chinese rare earth minerals.

Bill

 

[Brett]

Meanwhile pity the poor Brits that don't have electric vehicle tariffs

https://ackodrive.com/news/polestar...-electric-vehicle-market-reaches-new-heights/

 

[easyrider]

Meanwhile pity the poor Brits that don't have electric vehicle tariffs

View attachment 117015

https://ackodrive.com/news/polestar...-electric-vehicle-market-reaches-new-heights/

Do you remember the Huawei communications senario ? Huawei was using spyware in their communication towers. Why wouldn't a Chinese EV company, which is actually owned by the PRC, add spyware to their ev's ?

Bill

 

[davidvel]

What if, what if? But couldn't they? Why not? How do you know it isn't true? It is possible that . . .

The paranoid conspiracy theories are endless. Still scary after all these years.

 

[Brett]

Do you remember the Huawei communications senario ? Huawei was using spyware in their communication towers. Why wouldn't a Chinese EV company, which is actually owned by the PRC, add spyware to their ev's ?

Bill

right, it could possibly end like the movie "Christine"

But meanwhile .........

Tesla VS China - Advanced Driver Assistance System comparison test​

 

[easyrider]

What if, what if? But couldn't they? Why not? How do you know it isn't true? It is possible that . . .

The paranoid conspiracy theories are endless. Still scary after all these years.

Spyware & espionage is definitely a possibility brought up by DARPA for years. It's been proven that the PRC does install spyware regarding Huawei and one of the reasons why Tic Tok was about to be banned in the USA.

Why wouldn't the PRC do this in their ev's ? Cyber security experts have been warning about this for years.

Bill

 

[easyrider]

right, it could possibly end like the movie "Christine"

But meanwhile .........

Tesla VS China - Advanced Driver Assistance System comparison test​

China has weaponized ev's by selling them so cheap, limiting rare earth materials to other countries, reverse engineering American ev's and the possibility to remote cyber attack an EV does exist.

Bill

 

[davidvel]

Conspiracy nuts think that because something is a possibility, that means that it is occurring, and of course anything is possible. This ends the analysis in their minds, if it can even be called that.

Which of course leads them to believe that any thought that pops into their head is reality, and they argue ad nauseum that the thing is possible, as opposed to providing any facts that it is happening.

 

[Brett]

Conspiracy nuts think that because something is a possibility, that means that it is occurring, and of course anything is possible. This ends the analysis in their minds, if it can even be called that.

Which of course leads them to believe that any thought that pops into their head is reality, and they argue ad nauseum that the thing is possible, as opposed to providing any facts that it is happening.

Meanwhile electric vehicles sales continue to increase worldwide but the US ...


.

 

[emeryjre]

Deleted

 

[Chrispee]

Let's not get an engaging 86 page thread closed with toxic bickering? As an avid EV early adopter, and general car enthusiast, this discussion has helped me to examine my own biases with regards to the direction of the automotive world.

 

[emeryjre]

The moderators have gone through and removed the toxic posts
I mentioned during these negative interchanges that I had reported name calling and personal attacks as they occurred
I will not be called any negative name by another member of this site
I will not allow other members to be called names
I reported these occurrences
The moderators took their precious time to sort out things out
Moderators
Thank you

 

[easyrider]

Meanwhile electric vehicles sales continue to increase worldwide but the US ...


.



View attachment 117021

Due to cheap Chinese ev's.

Bill