Cars are not People
#26
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
I expect that there will always be quick and convenient individual and personal modes of transportation. This method of transportation won't always be the motorised "car" as we know it today ... but something similar will continue to exist for the rest of our lives and decades/centuries beyond. As soon as mankind hitched a cart up to an animal, we saw the benefits of quick and convenient individual and personal modes of transportation ... we're not about to let that go.
A small number will continue to opt for walking, cycling and public transportation as their only or main method of transportation.
A slightly larger number will use those methods of transportation on occasion.
But most will continue to go for the quick and convenient individual and personal modes of transportation.
A small number will continue to opt for walking, cycling and public transportation as their only or main method of transportation.
A slightly larger number will use those methods of transportation on occasion.
But most will continue to go for the quick and convenient individual and personal modes of transportation.
In-migration for 'automotive freedom' will be a migration of relatively affluent people who can afford to drive, but are increasingly limited to do so by changing laws and norms in other areas of the world. It seems a bit analogous to migration to the US from Europe during the mid 19th century when slavery was being abolished worldwide but not (yet) in the US. For this reason, there were economic opportunities for free whites in the US that were being challenged elsewhere.
I don't think Australia will be the only place people try to move to drive. I think it's already happen because of the desire for convenient motorized transportation that you mention. But I see it as a problem; more so than other forms of migration, because any area that has room to drive is under threat of infrastructure expansion that will result in further deforestation/development. So the question is what happens when we try to protect areas against automotive expansion, when there are migration pressures to get out of areas where driving is becoming too congested and/or limited by regulations designed to shift traffic away from driving-dependency.
I certainly hope I don't live to see this as it would require a combination of severe economic collapse and an authoritarian government to make this happen. And that's certainly not something I'd care to experience.
Sure, much driving is unnecessary. A great deal of the activities human beings engage in is unnecessary. The level of housing many enjoy in the US is certainly unnecessary. For that matter the expenditure of resources that allow us to waste our time tapping out our opinions on laptops is hardly necessary. But few people are going to give up driving or anything else they wish to do simply because they realize it's unnecessary.
And most of these advocates can't afford a car to start with.
I could make the claim I'm living Living Lear Jet Free because I don't want a big carbon footprint, but I'd be just as disingenuous.
Don't want an abortion, don't get one, don't tell me I shouldn't have one.
Don't like gay marriage, then don't marry your boyfriend, don't tell me who to marry.
Don't want a gun, don't buy one, don't tell me I shouldn't have one.
Don't want to eat meat, don't eat it, don't tell me I shouldn't eat it.
Don't want a car, don't buy one, don't tell me I shouldn't own one.
You want to praise Jesus, have fun, don't tell me I need your religion.
Don't like gay marriage, then don't marry your boyfriend, don't tell me who to marry.
Don't want a gun, don't buy one, don't tell me I shouldn't have one.
Don't want to eat meat, don't eat it, don't tell me I shouldn't eat it.
Don't want a car, don't buy one, don't tell me I shouldn't own one.
You want to praise Jesus, have fun, don't tell me I need your religion.
See how that works. Do whatever you like, just quit preaching about it.
When you try to tell others how to live and advocate that your way is better and that they don't know what is best for themselves, then I have a negative reaction.
This thread makes little sense and isn't on topic.
#27
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
I don't have a girlfriend or children and all my cats are fixed, no more when they die.
Living Car Free is about finding ways to reduce your personal reliance on automobiles, not for shaming persons who do have cars, nor the elimination of cars from human society.
GOT IT?
This thread makes little sense and isn't on topic.
Living Car Free is about finding ways to reduce your personal reliance on automobiles, not for shaming persons who do have cars, nor the elimination of cars from human society.
GOT IT?
This thread makes little sense and isn't on topic.
Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 07-13-16 at 08:37 AM.
#28
What happened?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 7,927
Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
255 Posts
I have strong negative feeling when people try to tell me I don't need X just because they don't have and want X or when they tell me I MUST do Y just because they do Y.
Don't want an abortion, don't get one, don't tell me I shouldn't have one.
Don't like gay marriage, then don't marry your boyfriend, don't tell me who to marry.
Don't want a gun, don't buy one, don't tell me I shouldn't have one.
Don't want to eat meat, don't eat it, don't tell me I shouldn't eat it.
Don't want a car, don't buy one, don't tell me I shouldn't own one.
You want to praise Jesus, have fun, don't tell me I need your religion.
See how that works. Do whatever you like, just quit preaching about it.
When you try to tell others how to live and advocate that your way is better and that they don't know what is best for themselves, then I have a negative reaction.
Don't want an abortion, don't get one, don't tell me I shouldn't have one.
Don't like gay marriage, then don't marry your boyfriend, don't tell me who to marry.
Don't want a gun, don't buy one, don't tell me I shouldn't have one.
Don't want to eat meat, don't eat it, don't tell me I shouldn't eat it.
Don't want a car, don't buy one, don't tell me I shouldn't own one.
You want to praise Jesus, have fun, don't tell me I need your religion.
See how that works. Do whatever you like, just quit preaching about it.
When you try to tell others how to live and advocate that your way is better and that they don't know what is best for themselves, then I have a negative reaction.
+2, more bacon.
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
#29
What happened?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Posts: 7,927
Bikes: 3 Rollfasts, 3 Schwinns, a Shelby and a Higgins Flightliner in a pear tree!
Mentioned: 57 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1835 Post(s)
Liked 292 Times
in
255 Posts
Apparently the caretakers of this institution have taken leave and a couple of the residents are running amok posting on LCF their free-form thoughts on whatever Foo-ish political, economic, religious, sociological or imaginary subject strikes their fancy, with no concern about its relevance to Living Car Free, or to reality. Nor with any concern that the Foo-ish and P&R posts and threads will be moved to an appropriate list for Foo-ish and P&R posts.
Those are the benefits of free thought. These things stimulate other things elsewhere and a MOVEMENT begins
__________________
I don't know nothing, and I memorized it in school and got this here paper I'm proud of to show it.
#31
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta, GA. USA
Posts: 3,804
Bikes: Surly Long Haul Disc Trucker
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1015 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Or is it just that they so strongly believe in the right to drive as some kind of fundamental human right?
And if they feel it's a fundamental human right, why don't they care about everyone living around the world LCF as being deprived of driving?
#32
Prefers Cicero
And you are right, there is nothing immoral about owning a car, even though cars have killed hundreds of millions of people, both directly and indirectly Cars are a systemic problem, not an individual one.
Last edited by cooker; 07-18-16 at 03:19 PM.
#33
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta, GA. USA
Posts: 3,804
Bikes: Surly Long Haul Disc Trucker
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1015 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Maybe cars are just what we need to combat the population problem. They just need to be more dangerous. Get rid of speed limits, air bags, safety belts. But keep traffic signals at intersections for the benefit of pedestrians.
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 774
Bikes: Trek 970, Bianchi Volpe,Casati
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 358 Post(s)
Liked 122 Times
in
87 Posts
our. god
Cars are are our gods. They give us jobs and sustain our souls.. But really they are just so intertwined with human life it is scarey. Driving is a way of life.. It is so involved with our economy, livelihood and way of being in this world . scarey. I have been able to reduce car and truck usage. My livelihood depends on my van and remodeling.. Luckily the jobs are close .
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 774
Bikes: Trek 970, Bianchi Volpe,Casati
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 358 Post(s)
Liked 122 Times
in
87 Posts
QUOTE: " Even passenger jets aren't very fuel-efficient. Commercial passenger jets get about the same passenger mpg as driving. Buses and trains get much better fuel-efficiency per passenger." According to google a 747 holds 48,000 gallons of jet fuel ,,,mind boggling to me we have not run out of oil yet, maybe the fire at the center of the earth produces unlimited oil??
#36
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
Cars are are our gods. They give us jobs and sustain our souls.. But really they are just so intertwined with human life it is scarey. Driving is a way of life.. It is so involved with our economy, livelihood and way of being in this world . scarey. I have been able to reduce car and truck usage. My livelihood depends on my van and remodeling.. Luckily the jobs are close .
QUOTE: " Even passenger jets aren't very fuel-efficient. Commercial passenger jets get about the same passenger mpg as driving. Buses and trains get much better fuel-efficiency per passenger." According to google a 747 holds 48,000 gallons of jet fuel ,,,mind boggling to me we have not run out of oil yet, maybe the fire at the center of the earth produces unlimited oil??
So what I'm trying to explain is this complex idea that you might be right that the core/mantle is helping generate fossil fuels, but that radioactive elements in the core/mantle might also be at least partially due to fossilized energy delivered via solar neutrinos; and that would still not make it a good idea to mine these fuels and use them on the surface because doing so upsets the balance of energy, water, and CO2/oxygen/nitrogen that regulates planetary climates and supplies living ecosystems with the water and food they/we need to live sustainably.
#37
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta, GA. USA
Posts: 3,804
Bikes: Surly Long Haul Disc Trucker
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1015 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
QUOTE: " Even passenger jets aren't very fuel-efficient. Commercial passenger jets get about the same passenger mpg as driving. Buses and trains get much better fuel-efficiency per passenger." According to google a 747 holds 48,000 gallons of jet fuel ,,,mind boggling to me we have not run out of oil yet, maybe the fire at the center of the earth produces unlimited oil??
Last edited by Walter S; 07-25-16 at 04:08 PM.
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: SE Wisconsin
Posts: 774
Bikes: Trek 970, Bianchi Volpe,Casati
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 358 Post(s)
Liked 122 Times
in
87 Posts
Okay I was kinda being silly about the earth core burning and churning all this stuff and makinf fuell... But man a jet pulls up to the gas station and pumps in 48000 gallons. And we still have not run out.. Consider a jet lands like what,, one a minute at O'hare airport? Amazing earth can still function with what we spew out at her on a daily basis?
#40
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta, GA. USA
Posts: 3,804
Bikes: Surly Long Haul Disc Trucker
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1015 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
No, he would not be right about that. And your speculations are not right either. Physics is not one of those things you can make up by throwing together some stuff you've read and extending it with your own ideas about what seems reasonable.
#41
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Atlanta, GA. USA
Posts: 3,804
Bikes: Surly Long Haul Disc Trucker
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1015 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Okay I was kinda being silly about the earth core burning and churning all this stuff and makinf fuell... But man a jet pulls up to the gas station and pumps in 48000 gallons. And we still have not run out.. Consider a jet lands like what,, one a minute at O'hare airport? Amazing earth can still function with what we spew out at her on a daily basis?
#42
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
What I am saying is that even if this is the case, it doesn't support the notion that we should mine up fuels and their energy to the surface. My point is that there is an underground energy system that relies on BOTH sinking biomass from the surface AND neutrino penetration from the sun to maintain the molten core/mantle and thus the magnetic field that shields the planet from harmful solar wind. What you're calling speculation is just very general synthesis of basic scientific information that's coming out all the time. I'm not making any claims about how these processes work in detail, just noting that sunlight is a source of energy and so are neutrinos; that the light doesn't penetrate underground except by growing biomass that gets buried and sinks; but the neutrinos do penetrate underground - and we know from the detectors we build that at least some of that neutrino energy is interacting with other materials and thus getting deposited. You could speculate about the details of what's happening with that energy in the core/mantle, how much of it goes into plate tectonics, volcanic activity, etc. but it's not speculating to make simple summary conclusions about the fact that it is there and that biomass is growing from the energy and being fossilized.
#43
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
Don't let your mind get discouraged by the idea that Einstein and other great minds are lightyears beyond your own. They aren't. They are just people who cared more about the scientific material they were thinking about than other things, so they devoted all their time to keep working through ideas to further refinement. They communicated fruitful thoughts with each other and helped each others' ideas and understandings evolve in this way. They weren't afraid to admit when they were wrong, and in fact they wanted to know asap when they were wrong and why so they could reform their thoughts to take account of new information and reasoning. They simply wanted to get things as right as possible and they knew that it would be a neverending process of refinement. There's nothing wrong with anyone devoting their minds to their own process of refinement. Intellectual honesty goes a long way, so as long as you are open to being wrong, and you stay tentative about your conclusions and extrapolations, you can formulate thoughts such as the one you had about fossil fuel bubbling up from the core.
The big caveat is not to get too romantic about ideas that can turn out to be wrong and/or misguided. Being tentative means being open to the fact that your working model will require revision sooner or later. What's more, be aware that much of what you read is propagated by people with underlying interests. E.g. there are plenty of people who jump on an idea like fossil fuel bubbling up from the core because they see it as a justification for liberalizing fossil fuel mining and usage. They are not so much interested in finding the truth or being tentative as they are in grabbing any theory that rationalizes what they want to do, which is use more energy to make more money and have a more convenient life. That's not science, it's rationalized indulgence.
#44
Senior Member
Think you're hearing from liberal arts majors?
#45
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,973
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,536 Times
in
1,045 Posts
#46
Full Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Worcester, MA, USA
Posts: 411
Bikes: Dawes Lightning DLX, 1988 Klein Performance, 1991 Peugeot Safari, 1985 Raleigh Alyeska, Carrera Phantom, 1973 Raleigh Record
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 129 Times
in
92 Posts
Are people offended by anti-automotive sentiments because they empathize directly with cars? Or is it just that they so strongly believe in the right to drive as some kind of fundamental human right? And if they feel it's a fundamental human right, why don't they care about everyone living around the world LCF as being deprived of driving? Is there just a double-standard regarding human rights based on nationality and super-national discrimination between 'people like us' and 'people who are less like us?'
It's all good. I just don't see the need to attack cars because you like to live without them. Isn't there room for all of us?
#47
Prefers Cicero
#48
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,355
Mentioned: 90 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 8084 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 14 Times
in
13 Posts
I don't know about all that. I suppose I could, on occasion, be offended by anti-auto sentiments. I like living car-free, but I also love cars, and most things with engines, motors, and/or wheels. I love the health benefits of living car-free, but it's mainly about saving money for me. Being out in the breeze, smelling your environment - that's all great, but I could get that on a motorcycle, too.
It's all good. I just don't see the need to attack cars because you like to live without them. Isn't there room for all of us?
It's all good. I just don't see the need to attack cars because you like to live without them. Isn't there room for all of us?
Anyway, the point of the thread isn't whether anti-automotivism is warranted or not, but why people react to it in defense of cars. Why, for example, if I would say there are problems with crime don't people rush to the defense of crime? Just because you like cars doesn't mean you have to attack people who dislike them or criticize them for other reasons. Also, just because you like cars doesn't mean it's good for them to be the primary form of transportation for everyone and all roads and developments should be oriented toward everyone driving and parking. Why don't car lovers realize that if LCF was more popular, the roads would be less crowded and driving would be much more fun and scenic for people who drive, when they drive? It's like we all have to drive and traffic has to keep growing or else everyone will be forced to LCF. That's a completely unrealistic scenario, but that's the level of antagonism some people have toward transportation-reformists; i.e. that they have to defend against the extinction of the automobile by extinguishing any thought that less cars, driving, and roads/highways/lanes/pavement would be better.
#49
Full Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Worcester, MA, USA
Posts: 411
Bikes: Dawes Lightning DLX, 1988 Klein Performance, 1991 Peugeot Safari, 1985 Raleigh Alyeska, Carrera Phantom, 1973 Raleigh Record
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 282 Post(s)
Liked 129 Times
in
92 Posts
Anyway, the point of the thread isn't whether anti-automotivism is warranted or not, but why people react to it in defense of cars. Why, for example, if I would say there are problems with crime don't people rush to the defense of crime? Just because you like cars doesn't mean you have to attack people who dislike them or criticize them for other reasons. Also, just because you like cars doesn't mean it's good for them to be the primary form of transportation for everyone and all roads and developments should be oriented toward everyone driving and parking. Why don't car lovers realize that if LCF was more popular, the roads would be less crowded and driving would be much more fun and scenic for people who drive, when they drive? It's like we all have to drive and traffic has to keep growing or else everyone will be forced to LCF. That's a completely unrealistic scenario, but that's the level of antagonism some people have toward transportation-reformists; i.e. that they have to defend against the extinction of the automobile by extinguishing any thought that less cars, driving, and roads/highways/lanes/pavement would be better.
#50
Sophomoric Member
There's a lot of ways to answer that question. I'm not particularly invested in the debate (and I don't want to be), so I'll keep it simple. I defend cars because I like them. I don't like crime, generally (everyone can probably think of a law they think is stupid), so I don't defend that.
Cars are a lot like that, IMO. They've gotten to be pretty destructive in cities. But at this point most people just can't imagine a way past them.