I’ve driven a Tesla. The interior was shockingly shitty and the stupid dash tablet was as gross as sex with a 30-year-old woman.

However, they are not somehow more difficult to control. If anything, the fact that it just stops when you take your foot off the pedal makes it easier to control.

The reason these cars are hitting more people is that only retards buy electric cars. There is no reason you would buy an electric car other than because you are retarded. So of course they’re going to smash people up a lot more often.

The Guardian:

Hybrid and electric cars are more likely to strike pedestrians than petrol or diesel vehicles, particularly in towns and cities, according to an analysis of British road traffic accidents.

Data from 32bn miles of battery-powered car travel and 3tn miles of petrol and diesel car trips showed that mile-for-mile electric and hybrid cars were twice as likely to hit pedestrians than fossil fuel-powered cars, and three times more likely to do so in urban areas.

Why eco-friendly cars are more hazardous is unclear, but researchers suspect a number of factors are to blame. Drivers of electric cars tend to be younger and less experienced, and the vehicles are much quieter than cars with combustion engines, making them harder to hear, especially in towns and cities.

“Electric cars are a hazard to pedestrians because they are less likely to be heard than petrol or diesel cars,” said Phil Edwards, first author on the study and professor of epidemiology and statistics at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. “The government needs to mitigate these risks if they are going to phase out the sale of petrol and diesel cars.”

“If you’re moving to an electric car, remember it’s a new kind of vehicle,” Edwards added. “They are much quieter than the old-fashioned cars, and pedestrians have learned to navigate roads by listening for traffic. Drivers of these vehicles need to be extra cautious.”

Road traffic accidents are the leading cause of death among children and young adults in the UK, with pedestrians making up a quarter of all deaths on the roads.

The solution to this problem might be importing fentanyl.

You feel me?

Tucker Carlson absolutely demolishes the argument that forcing everyone to purchase electric cars is somehow the ‘answer’ to climate change: 👇

“Electronic vehicles are a disaster for the energy grid, a disaster for the environment, and a disaster for your personal autonomy.” pic.twitter.com/q230qPbyad

— Scott Morefield (@SKMorefield) August 31, 2022

It’s been understood since at least the early 2000s that plastic recycling is retarded.

It’s incredible how something can be known and confirmed for 20 years, and then finally eventually start to penetrate mainstream consciousness. It shows that humans are not rational, as a rule, and do not operate based on information.

The Guardian:

Lego has stopped a project to make bricks from recycled drinks bottles instead of oil-based plastic, saying it would have led to higher carbon emissions over the product’s lifetime.

…

The Danish company makes billions of Lego pieces a year, and in 2021 began researching a potential transition to recycled polyethylene terephthalate (PET) from acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS), which needs about 2kg of petroleum to make 1kg of plastic. ABS is used in about 80% of Lego blocks.

“It’s like trying to make a bike out of wood rather than steel,” said Tim Brooks, Lego’s head of sustainability, referring to how the non-oil-based material was softer and demanded extra ingredients for durability, as well as greater energy for processing and drying.

The “level of disruption to the manufacturing environment was such that we needed to change everything in our factories” to scale up recycled PET use, he said. “After all that, the carbon footprint would have been higher. It was disappointing.”

“Carbon emissions” don’t matter. No one has picked up on that yet. But the concept that it’s a waste to recycle is totally correct, and you’re allowed to say that because it does’t technically violate the doctrine of global warming.

Plastic production is probably about 10,000 times what it should be. You need some of it in certain situations, but it’s out of control. The idea of “single use” plastic is just insane. They’re poisoning the entire planet.

The solution to plastic waste, however, is very obvious: it should be burned in incinerators and used to create electricity.

But while that can be done with little to know pollution being created, it does release carbon, which this stupid government cult says is changing the weather.

Related:

• They’re Not Going to Talk About Plastics and What They’re Doing to You
• Shock as Retardo Paper Straws Actually More Toxic Than Plastic

The Supreme Court effectively gutted the EPAs ability to regulate carbon emissions. The Supreme Court is becoming a threat to a habitable earth.https://t.co/I6l9kIkdYZ pic.twitter.com/WZUgw7bnIY

— Alejandra Caraballo 🇵🇷🏳️‍⚧️ (@Esqueer_) June 30, 2022

Justice Kagan laid out the stakes clearly here. Climate change is an existential threat and the court just handcuffed the federal government from taking action. pic.twitter.com/3kARyFEK22

— Alejandra Caraballo 🇵🇷🏳️‍⚧️ (@Esqueer_) June 30, 2022

I wish Clarence Thomas would have just declared that global warming isn’t real and told people to check the ice core samples and find that carbon increase follows warming, not the other way around.

Reuters:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday imposed limits on the federal government’s authority to issue sweeping regulations to reduce carbon emissions from power plants in a ruling that will undermine President Joe Biden’s plans to tackle climate change and could constrain various agencies on other issues.

The court’s 6-3 ruling restricted the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from existing coal- and gas-fired power plants under the landmark Clean Air Act anti-pollution law. Biden’s administration is currently working on new regulations.

The court’s six conservatives were in the majority in the decision authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, with the three liberals dissenting.

The EPA and White House said that administration lawyers are analyzing the decision and seeking ways to address emissions under existing laws.

“President Biden will not relent in using the authorities that he has under law to protect public health and tackle the climate change crisis,” a White House spokesperson said.

…

The ruling was based on what is called the “major questions” legal doctrine that requires explicit congressional authorization for action on issues of broad importance and societal impact. The justices in January appeared to embrace that theory when it blocked the Biden administration’s vaccine-or-test policy for larger businesses, a key element of its plan to combat the COVID-19 pandemic.

The court’s invocation of this doctrine sends a signal that the justices will be a major obstacle to federal agencies seeking to implement broad policies of national importance.

The decision will constrain the EPA’s ability to issue any regulations on power plants that push for an ambitious a national shift in energy policy toward renewable sources.

“Renewable sources” are a hoax. Firstly, they’re not renewable, and secondly, they’re not sources. The only actual “renewable resource” that creates energy is hydroelectric or wood.

Unless oil is abiotic – in which case that is also renewing itself (but no one is allowed to have a grant to research that).

This is what a judicial coup looks like pic.twitter.com/dTZ4zgHJdg

— Ken Klippenstein (@kenklippenstein) June 30, 2022

We need to go back to saying that manmade global warming is literally not real. The GOP has gone so far to the left that they now falsely claim that anthropogenic global warming is real, the Democrats are right, but that Democrats are the real global warmers. Ted Cruz says that.

It’s false.

We need to go back to the 1990s, when people said shit straight – a time when pop-ska bands could write songs about falling in love with 14-year-old hookers and then helping them murder their families, and no one complained.

Asthma-sufferers are the most hated members of society, so it’s a good optics move to start killing these people off or make them huff and puff until they keel over. At least that’s what these climate researchers are saying.

Very popular move. The common people are sure to love it.

BBC:

Many people with asthma could cut their carbon footprint and help save the environment by switching to “greener” medications, UK researchers say.

Making the swap would have as big an “eco” impact as turning vegetarian or becoming an avid recycler, they say.

It’s because some inhalers release greenhouse gases linked to global warming.

What isn’t linked to global warming though?

Global warming believers are members of a death cult. They don’t believe in having kids. They don’t believe in eating normal food. Now, they’re working on the next level of wokeness – just giving up on breathing. This asthma stuff is a baby step, really. Soon, they’re going to be asking people to hold their breath for the environment and then just stop breathing altogether.

But you know, once you’re dead, your body will decompose and I’m sure that it releases carbon dioxide as well. So you’re a sinner either way, really.

But the Cambridge University team told BMJ Open patients must check with a doctor before changing medication.

Some patients will not be able to switch and should not be made to feel guilty, they add.

Asthma medication is really just vaping for old people when you think about it. You see these grannies rolling around in their scooters acting like they’re all hot shit puffing on their vapes inhalers and blowing spittle at the young ‘uns.

Enough’s enough. Air ain’t free anymore, Gramps. Time to cough up (your lungs) and pay the inhaler tax.

But perhaps there’s a hidden side to this story that I’m not picking up on here.

Perhaps inhalers are simply a luxury that Cuck Island soon won’t be able to afford.

That might be what a lot of this social justice cult stuff really is: just making the rapid impoverishment of the West seem trendy and cool so that people don’t rebel against it.

• I don’t need that blood diamond, African babies are dying in the mines
• I won’t take that flight to Italy this year, airplanes put out too much carbon dioxide
• No more red meat, gotta save the Amazon from predatory ranchers
• It’s not a concentration camp, it’s a trendy communal loft
• Inhalers are bad for the planet, so I don’t mind the NHS no longer covering my meds
• Reduced to eating trash? Psh, no. I’m dumpster diving to stick it to the big agri-corps

Seriously.

Compare:

And:

Same energy.

Growing poverty and environmental activism have becoming virtually indistinguishable from one another.