We Desperately Need To Get Off Oil, But Batteries Are A Bad Idea For Fueling Vehicles! - Rev. J.T. Smith

I am in no way supporting Big Oil with what I'm about to say as petrol as a fuel is an environmental disaster.  There is no denying that at all.

That said, batteries are not the right way to go either for several reasons.

One of which is that batteries all wear out eventually.  Just look to your mobile phone and you'll realize this.  Then again, far too many feel a desperate need to always have the latest and greatest product and update their mobile phone every year or so.  A fact that manufacturers don't only realize but actively count on and encourage this behaviour.  Consumerism at all costs.  Great for the bottom lines of corporations around the world but utter shit for the environment.

Car companies, including Tesla, are counting on this short-sighted behaviour too.  Though of course they won't admit it as that would be bad for sales.

One of the more subtle ways of encouraging this is to place in the instructions that come with the device, including electric cars, the notion that batteries supposedly no longer develop a memory the way nickle-cadmium [Ni-Cad] batteries used to so you should recharge them once they drop to 15% rather than run them flat first before recharging.  They tell you this, not because they really want you to get the most life out of your battery (FYI, there's zero profit in it for corporations for you to not have to replace the batteries sooner!), but because they want to sell you more batteries and/or a new device sooner.

These days, the only thing that's kept around longer than the rechargeable batteries that run them are vibrators.  Then again, a dead vibrator is still a dildo. 

Now, I grant that lithium ion [Li-Ion] batteries don't develop a memory the way that Ni-Cad ones did, they do still develop that memory only over a longer period of time.  Longer enough, the manufacturers figure, that you'll be throwing out your old device and replacing it with a new one before the battery will no longer hold a charge.  But if you really want your rechargeable batteries to actually last as long as they can before they're permanently dead, then you should always run them until they're flat before you recharge them and you should recharge them until they're fully recharged before using them again.

In the meantime there's still the matter of the fact that it still takes hours to fully recharge a battery from flat (the more powerful the batteries, the longer it takes to recharge them); and as noted earlier, if you don't run the battery to flat prior to fully recharging completely you will shorten the total overall life of the battery.  (This is the end result of the aforementioned memory.)  I know this for a fact by taking two identical modern mobile phones (I inadvertently got two identical handsets, one from each of two people, due to my previous mobile phone dying completely after 4 years of service, and I kept the second as a backup) and ran the first one battery to flat every time prior to fully recharging.  That handset started getting a bit worn so I started using the second handset fresh from the box.  Only with the second handset I decided to go against my better judgement and started recharging every day or so regardless of how low the battery was.  The end result was that the battery of the second handset ended up needing to be recharged as often after one year as the first one did after two hours.  Now, neither handset will last 24 hours before going flat. And unlike Top Gear, who would fake things to get their end result, I didn't fake any of it.  That's because batteries typically lose approximately 80% of their capacity after a couple of years.

Regardless, if you do decide to keep your electric vehicle for long enough, you'll have to deal with the battery.  While some companies like Nissan are trying to make it that you would only have to replace a bad cell rather than the entire battery replace the entire battery, it's currently more common and more likely that your dealer won't be the ones to deal with individual cells; so you'll still end up having to replace the battery outright to keep that car going the way petrol fueled vehicles can currently.  At which point you have a piece of trash that still contains components that still can't be recycled; and that, in turn, continues to have a toxic environmental impact.  Yes, more of the components can be recycled, but the cost of lithium is low right now because the relative demand is low currently, but that'll change over time.  And all of this presumes you'll still be able to get a matching replacement battery when the time comes, anyway.

I fully acknowledge the fact that petrol fuel is an environmental disaster, but one of the advantages of a liquid fuel is that as long as the engine/motor still uses that fuel then it doesn't matter what shape the fuel tank takes as long as it fits into the hull of the vehicle.  And replacing a liquid fuel tank is a lot cheaper than replacing the battery on an electric vehicle.  And one of the beautiful things about classic cars is that we can still drive them now, decades after they were manufactured.  If the trend of throwing away battery operated devices, either as soon as or before the batteries will no longer hold a charge, then things like classic car shows will be a thing of the past.  Classic car shows aren't  singing the praises of Big Oil; they're showcases of lasting and durable engineering and works of art created from metals.

Even more troubling than the technical issues, there's still the slave labour and environmental problems inherent in the manufacture of batteries.

We would do far better with a hybrid car consisting of a hydrogen fuel cell backed up with solar panels.  But thanks to irrational fears due to a misunderstanding of just what downed the Hindenburg, it'll be a long time before this is more widely accepted.  And thanks to current economics, it'll be cheaper to replace an entire vehicle than only the battery when the battery can no longer hold a charge.  Batteries are a stopgap measure at best.

by  Rev. J.T. Smith

Bernie Sanders Just Stabbed Us In The Back And Screwed Us As A Result - Rev. J.T. Smith

Bernie Sanders had been running a campaign that fought for We The People over the wealthy and corporations, that was consistently against the forever wars, and recognized how much the inequality in America has hurt us all.

#NotMeUs.  Ha!  Us are boned now, thank you very much.

Sanders and Warren were the ONLY  true Progressive candidates to run.  My hope had been that Warren and Bernie would run together.

Now?

Bernie has bowed out of the run for the nomination.  He says he'll keep fighting the fight, but he just gave up his best potential avenue to fight for us: As the President.

If you believe that the only viable political parties are Democrats and Republicans, the Bernie has just screwed us!  Our options are a bigot Republican and a bigot corporate Democrat.  I seriously do not see a whole lot of difference here.  While I grant that Biden is somewhat saner than Trump. the end result is still the same: The wealthy are still going to be in charge and the wars are going to keep on going until a real leader steps up and is put in office!

I had believed that leader to be Bernie Sanders.  Clearly, I was in error.

Gee, thanks, Bernie! 

by Rev. J.T. Smith

2020 United States Presidential Election, My Choice - Rev. J.T. Smith

There is no perfect candidate for President.  Ever.  This is simply because perfection, aside from God, is purely subjective.

Of course, there will always be candidates that are better than others.  In 2016, I supported Bernie Sanders in the primary and hated the way the D.N.C. blew him off as viable candidate even though he was able to consistently draw more people to his rallies than any other candidate.  Go figure.

In 2016, I ultimately voted for Jill Stein because I couldn't in good conscience vote for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump [see It's Neither A Spoiler Nor A Protest Vote! by Rev. J.T. Smith for full account of exactly why] as she was the best available candidate.

Once again, Bernie is running for President, and he is once again my choice for President.  My reasoning is thus: Bernie Sanders has been leading the fight since well before the 2016 elections, including steadfastly and consistently fighting for We The People and against the corruption and warmongering so prevalent in government.  And he's also the first to propose Medicare For All, which eliminates all deductibles and co-pays with the exception of elective non- medically procedures.  No one is perfect, but he's the best choice of candidate.

Voting for a person strictly because of their gender or sexuality is a mistake.  Yes, it is long past time for a woman or a member of the LGBT+ community to become president, there is no question of that; but as with any position of authority, it needs to be the right person, regardless of gender or sexuality, to be voted into power.  
While I find it commendable that Pete Buttigieg is open about his sexual orientation while running for President, I cannot vote for him simply because he's a corporate Democrat.  And corporate Democrats, which are nearly as bad as the Republicans currently in power are among the last things Americans need voted into office.
I cannot vote for Amy Klobuchar for simple reason she's effectively Hillary Clinton lite.  Still a corporate Democrat, even if not quite as deep into the pockets of Wall Street.

Tom Steyer, like Mike Bloomberg, is yet another billionaire running for President, and America definitely never needs another billionaire as president.  And like Steyer and Bloomberg, Joe Biden is yet another corporate Democrat.

To make it worse, Biden and Bloomberg are also notorious bigots.  And while Tulsi Gabbard seems to barely register in the polls compared to the others who're still running, I do like that she's Hindu and running against the endless wars, but she also has a history of bigotry and troubling past actions in terms of her foreign policy positions solidly working against her.

The only major issue I have with Warren is her relative inexperience compared to Sanders.

Frankly, my current dream ticket is Sanders/Warren with Sanders as president for eight years followed by Warren for the following eight years.  Though I would accept Warren as President with Sanders as VP for the same eight years followed by Sanders as President for eight years.

Ultimately, I am still not a liberal Democrat, I'm a progressive independent; and if a superior third-party contender runs for President, then I'll vote for them.  At present, that doesn't seem likely regardless of the party.

- Rev. J.T. Smith

Vegans Really Need To Learn - Rev. J.T. Smith

The reality is that actual meat is NOT the problem.  Modern factory methods are the problem in terms of how farm animals are treated.  

It's important to remember than humans are biologically designed to consume and utilize animal protein, and thinking "protein is protein" is a mistake as there are significant differences between animal and plant proteins.  Humans need to stop trying to separate themselves from the rest of the natural flora and fauna of this planet!  Like bears, humans, are OMNIVOROUS!  For crying out loud, if we realize that the other fauna of Earth are also sentient, then we must accept and fully acknowledge that the bear knows the salmon is also sentient, yet the bear seems to have no issues eating the salmon when the opportunity arises.

And considering most of the alternatives to leather, etc, are in fact made of petroleum based products, you're trading one problem that you don't like to a bigger problem that you'd rather turn a blind eye to.

A much bigger and far more real problem is the massive overpopulation of humans on this tiny planet.

An aspect that so many people miss is that this planet is becoming ever more dangerously overpopulated with humans.  The REAL problem is the fact that this planet is not evolutionarily designed for the MASSIVE overpopulation of humans.  It took just 123 years for the human population to double from the first 1 billion in 1804 to 2 billion in 1927.  Then only 33 years to reach 3 billion.  In 47 years, the total population has more than doubled from 3+ Billion humans to 7+ Billion today.  The problem is NOT the people who eat meat but that humans breed nearly faster than unchecked rabbits.  Human breeding (not black, not Jewish, not Muslim, not [fill in the blank with ethnic group(s) of choice], but HUMAN breeding desperately needs to be slowed.  It is this overpopulation that ultimately causes all of the major fights over resources (e.g. fuel, potable water, etc), and is the root cause of climate change (that statement is in no way a defense of Big Oil or King Coal).  When the original texts of the Bible were written, particularly the bit about "be fruitful and multiply," human population worldwide on Earth only counted in the millions.  It was just over two centuries ago that humans crossed the 1 billion mark.  And the population has more than doubled in the last 50 YEARS.  Guess what: you've been very fruitful and multiplied like rabbits.  Now knock it off already!

And there's something else the high and mighty vegans constantly overlook in their deluded superiority - Veganism is in fact Not healthy for everyone. 

What about all of the plants every one of us murder every day?  What?  Just because they can't run, fly, or swim away and you can't hear their screams, it's alright to kill and mutilate them?  (Mowing the lawn and cutting shrubs into fanciful shapes is mutilation, even though they don't bleed!)  Thinking otherwise further proves you're faunacentric.


It wasn't long ago that it was generally accepted that non-human animals don't feel pain the way that humans do.  Now, it is becoming far more accepted that the inverse is true.  What's more, scientists are discovering that plants also form friendships and remember their experiences, that they really are asking asking for our help, and the evidence is growing that plants are also conscious.

Let's face it, Human "ethics" in terms of diet are an artificial construct born from humanity constantly trying to separate themselves from the rest of the flora and fauna of this planet.  If plants were able to fight back, humans would undoubtedly be at the top of their target list due to not only the ingestion of plants but also that humans are continuously cutting down living plants for everything from buildings and clothing all the way to topiary.

Just as there is a whole sexuality spectrum that we see and know clearly within the biological gender binary, there is also obviously a dietary spectrum to be found within the omnivorous binary that runs from herbivorous to carnivorous and everything in between; and trying to force people, even if only by social pressure, to become completely herbivorous is just as wrong as it is to put peer pressure on members of the LGBT community to be heterosexual.
 

- Rev. J.T. Smith

This Planet Is A Closed Environmental System, And The Capacity To Colonize Any Other World Is Still Too Far Off