The Hybrid Hoax

I don't care if the author leans left, right, or upside down.

That article is journalistic drivel! Just written to preach to the choir, and agitate the oppositiion. Not even worthy of discussion.

 

Since when did hybrid bashing become a conservative-only endeavour? That is one massive right-wing conspiracy to think that all of the negative articles written bemoaning hybrids originate from the right side of the aisle.

I mean, when we see the weekly article like this, people talk about how misinformed the journalist is. This one happens to be in a conservative paper and people focus on lying conservative right-wingers.

Let's face it, there are gonna be both people on the sides of the aisle who will think hybrids are dumb until the day they ride in one or talk with someone who has one. I don't think this has anything to do with being liberal or conservative.

EDIT: Exactly ged! It is just plain poor journalism.

 

That's as good a theory as I've heard so far, Oxo. I've always wondered what the real motivation was behind the Bush administration's efforts to undermine the credibility of science in government. I thought that it was just greed but a deep-seated hatred of science may be the real cause. It would also explain a lot of their goofy ideas. I may be able to get hold of a copy of that article. Do you have a more specific time when it was published?

 

I sent the following to the editor of the weekly standard ....

There are many good reasons for opposing tax incentives in general, and hybrid vehicle incentives in particular. However, it is disingenuous to criticize the real life mileage of hybrids based what can only be a purposeful distortion of hybrid's performance. The author says "For example, a 2004 Toyota Prius got 35 miles per gallon in city driving, off 42 percent from its EPA rating of 60 mpg". Really? Care to site your source? So one prius somewhere got bad mileage? How about the average performance of the average prius? Here is a counter quote from Car and Driver, hardly a bastion of liberal thought:

"Many of us tried to drive the Prius like committed Greens. Other less patient colleagues hammered down. Our combined results: 1338 miles per 31.832 gallons, or 42.03 mpg. That’s well up on the 35 mpg we managed from our last Prius, and it puts this one in fifth place in the C/D-Observed Fuel-Economy Hall of Fame, behind a 2002 Honda Insight hybrid (48), a 2000 Insight (47), a 1992 Suzuki Swift (45), and a 1998 VW Jetta TDI (43). That’s still impressive, considering the Prius is bigger than all the above and that the Jetta was driven from coast to coast on the superslab"

The author can take a reasonable position that a) tax incentives for hybrids are a bad idea, and B) hybrids don't live up to their hype. But please, use facts to back up those arguments. Fabricating ridiculous mileage numbers out of thin air doesn't help the author's argument. On the contrary, it makes him look like a partisan hack.

best,
Cedar

 

Hybrid bashing is characterized as a conservative-only endeavor because it appears than only conservatives are bashing hybrids. I have only heard anti-hydrid sentiment from the right wing, and there has been a lot of it lately. The bashing has taken place recently on Rush Limbaugh, Shaun Hannity, Hugh Hewitt, and in the Wall Street Journal, just to name a few. It is also quite extensive in the right wing blogosphere. And virtually everything I have heard from the right wing regarding hybrids has been a clear attempt to confuse and mislead, riddled with mistruth and innacuracy. I can't tell you why this is, but it is.

 

Reporters absolutely thrive on milking single-source extreme data examples, like that stupid Jetta diesel verses Prius test. One vehicle was driven from Michigan to DC and the other the other direction. That isn't the slightest bit objective. But then to really invite errors, the tank was only filled once. The reporter noted how the difference between the pump and the Multi-Display was over 10 MPG, yet didn't think that was the slightest bit odd... and clearly had no idea he was dealing with a bladder. So it gave the impression the diesel had done better, but in reality just the opposite occurred.

Point being, the reported result was 38 MPG.

Owner data doesn't report averages that low, yet reporters keep referring to that one test as if it represents what everyone gets under all circumstances. Arrgh!

On the Hybrid Road-Rally in Minnesota in the summer of 2002, we did the same comparison... only we had owners driving, all together on the same roads at the same time, for 1200 miles. That is the proper way to gather data. The two 2001 Prius averaged 48.5 MPG. The Civic-Hybrid got 46 MPG. And the Jetta TDI Automatic only got 42 MPG. Clearly, the Prius kicked butt.

http://john1701a.com/prius/hybrid-road-rally.htm ...provides comments & photos.

 

I believe that was what Consumer Reports got for Prius City.

Their Prius Combined was 44.

 

No - I wish I knew because I've sometimes wanted to re-read it. I think it must have been in the 1960s as fluoridation was a hot topic here round about 1970. I suppose there's an online index of SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN somewhere.

 

I found this PDF, circa 1958.

and this article.

 

There are entire mindsets that rejects science. The reasons are complex. For some, it's just thinking differently, others are quacks and con men, and some are easily persuaded by illogical thinking (a lot of those!). There is both hatred and misunderstanding.

Besides a lot of stuff on the internet, here are two good books on the subject:
"Why People Believe Weird Things" by Michael Shermer and
"How to Think About Weird Things" by Theodore Schick Jr and Lewis Vaughn.

Or maybe I'm just drawn to books with "weird" in the title.

 

Typical left-wing drivel, self-serving half-truths and usually outright lies. You could tell it is a Detroit hack journalist inspired hit piece just by the wording. I'm ony suprised they didn't blame Carl Rove. If I spoke to my mother the way left-wingers speak to the American people I would get laughed at!

There. Now most aluminum-foil-hat wearing 'zoids from the green-and-red-running-light wings should be happy.

 

We're all waiting 'too much energy' on this article.

It's a typical piece of crap by naysayers. The proof is in the pudding. Hybrid sales are sky rocketing and SUV sales sinking.

Obviously not that many people are listening to them.

 

i'd gladly settle for half of that average income there

 

I'm pretty sure that their happiness isn't dependent on your comments or approval.

 

Lose your sense of humor? Here's a link to help recover it.

http://www.scrappleface.com/index.php?s=Gore

 

Right......all of the car magazines and sites (Edmunds, Car and Driver, etc) and all of the journalists who have written articles are a part of the Republican party. Don't get me wrong, I do realize some right wingers don't like hybrids, but some left-wingers don't like hybrids either.

From a very conservative right-winger (not a middle of the road Republican): Hybrids are great and make perfect sense right now.

Saying that right-wingers hate hybrids is just as erroneous as saying that all environmentalists are liberal wackos (See NRPE and here as two examples).

 

link didn't work for me

 

but at least I got my sense of humor back :lol:

 

Tried it. Works!

 

Me neither. Must be too well informed with pesky facts.