NASA’s incredible new solid-state battery pushes the boundaries of energy storage: ‘This could revolutionize air travel’::“We’re starting to approach this new frontier of battery research."

  • Cam@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    11 months ago

    Disagree all you want. I made my case and it is well proven in the world.

    • TheBenCommandments@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I’m certainly always open to the possibility that my views are incorrect, but I tend to base them on facts proven by repeatable science, which is why I linked studies and am requesting you do the same to back up your “well-proven case.”

      You haven’t made any cases because you haven’t provided any studies. If it’s well-proven, linking us some studies should be easy.

      I’d also encourage you to read the studies I linked because you might change your view on this subject. If you’re interested in learning, anyway.

      • Cam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Alright. Do note that there is lots of censorship around this topic. Many scientists have had their careers ruined or been censored when publishing work that goes against the climate narritive. Not many know this.

        A few times in the past I have shared internet sources but was accussed of sharing unoffical sources, or unreliable sources, etc. Kinda like being accusee of sharing fake news since it did not come from a pro green NGO or government.

        I do believe the points I made earlier came from either Patrick Moore or Alex Epstein.

        • Clevermistakes@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          11 months ago

          Called it way above in the comments didn’t I? I must have ESPN or something.

          So just so we’re clear; if there’s published scientific data around it: it’s a conspiracy of scientific censorship because of the “climate narrative”, but if it’s unproven opinion narrative that works for the oil companies profits that happen to be huge public policy lobbying forces; it’s definitely the truth. Because obscure scary reasons, “not many people know this” Got it.

          • TheBenCommandments@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            This is the least satisfying “conversation” I think I’ve ever had on Lemmy. Usually, I’ve found SOME common ground or an ability to prove a point but this has been supremely frustrating and honestly frightening.

            No wonder humanity is having trouble with climate change; this is what we’re up against: A complete disability to think critically.

        • TheBenCommandments@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Oh good, more unverifiable claims. As much time as you’ve spent commenting on this post, surely you could’ve come up with some links containing some actual evidence to back up your claims?

          Do people not know about this stuff you claim because it’s made up? I’m very open minded and curious about your viewpoint, but you’ve given me absolutely nothing to go off of here.

          You can’t just make claims and say shit like this without backing it up somehow.

          You’ve provided the names of two people; am I supposed to go read ALL of their work??

        • SeaJ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          No. They likely had their careers ruined because they did shoddy work.

          The points you made earlier are simply incorrect with even the most conservative estimates. So you should clearly not be listening to whoever wrote them.