this post was submitted on 24 Jun 2023
35 points (100.0% liked)

Science

1224 readers
5 users here now

This magazine is dedicated to discussions on scientific discoveries, research, and theories across various fields, including physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, and more. Whether you are a scientist, a science enthusiast, or simply curious about the world around us, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on a wide range of scientific topics. From the latest breakthroughs to historical discoveries and ongoing research, this category covers a wide range of topics related to science.

founded 2 years ago
 

We look at carbon emissions of electric, hybrid, and combustion engine vehicles through an analysis of their life cycle emissions.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I’m assuming a silent /s here. I certainly hope so.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why does pointing out a documented issue with wind turbines need to be sarcastic?

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Because it's rare to see someone include a link to support their argument, that actually demolishes their argument. Unless that person is being ironic/sarcastic.

To be clear. The articles does not say that wind turbines destroy "entire flocks of birds". It points out that in the grand scheme of things, wind-turbines are a net positive for bird populations, and goes on to say that while numbers of bird deaths aren't negligable - work is going on to reduce numbers further.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

How this happens: person feels a need to prove a point but has literally no knowledge of a subject. Searches for an article they hope will prove their point (for example: “turbine bird deaths”). First article disproves their assertion, skip. Second, third. Ninth looks promising but christ what a long article. CTRL+F until what they see vaguely matches their argument. The rest of the article is probably fine. Copy/paste article URL, type up a “haha so there” comment.