[ZeroGravitas]

Yeah, I'm thinking that such people, if they exist at all, are heavily outnumbered by the people saying

* Not actually physically possible

* Its just coal powered

* It's worse for the environment because batteries die after 3 years

* Rare earths!!

* Subsidized foolishness

* Toys for rich people

* Communism

And weirdly those people all get paid to write op-eds in right wing tabloids.

[tekknik]

What are you even saying here?

> And weirdly those people all get paid to write op-eds in right wing tabloids.

Oh, spreading hate. Got it.

[ZeroGravitas]

Yes, let's pretend that there wasn't an organised campaign to discredit EVs, even though basic science made it clear they would be superior, even if you ignored climate change.

And why would you ignore climate change? Possibly because of the organised campaign to discredit the idea even though basic science made it clear it was a problem.

But now, they'll deny that crime against humanity even happened. "No one actually denied climate change they were just worried about government overreach" while demial is still being done by the same people.

It was all published in newspapers, we have it on record. We have academic studies of how many times certain newspapers admitted that climate change was caused by humans in their op-eds.

We have databases that track their lies over decades:

https://www.partnershipforresponsiblegrowth.org/research-1/c...

But no, now the people who let themselves be convinced by those lies bizarrely blame "Greens" or "environmentalists" for complaiming that EVs were too easy. Which despite being obvious lies doesn't seem to be considered "hate", but pointing out the well documented truth is?