Speed Bump #856

From Longtime Friend & Reader Weetabix:

This morning on the radio, the host called an idea “far-fletched” before describing the problems with the idea. The guest then said, “You hit it right on the nail.”

1) Is a “far-fletched” idea one that has better fletching so it can fly farther?

2) Did the guest believe the host was trying to hammer his thumb on purpose?

Good questions, both.  In mitigation:  radio is a live medium so people can misspeak while expressing an opinion — but that’s all the more reason to gather one’s thoughts before expressing them.

Layers And Layers

It should have been a speed bump, but there was no grammar involved.  See if you can spot the absolute howler in the caption to the pic below, as it appeared in the Daily Mail:

Hint:  there’s photographic proof of what the guy actually wrote on his armband, you fucking morons, yet you not only misread it, but gave it a completely different meaning.

Where did I put my flamethrower?


I should point out that Breitbart got it right:

English Premier League Star Who Wrote ‘I Love Jesus’ on LGBTQ Armband Breaks Silence

Clearly, they actually looked at the pic before writing the headline… unlike the Mail  idiots.

Design Notes

At some point, Someone In Marketing thought that this design change would be a good idea for Roger Depuis watches:

I leave it to your imagination as to the average cost of a Depuis watch… now double it, and you’ll be closer.

I’m always reminded of the immortal words of another Roger, Roger Moore:  “The point of language is to communicate your thoughts in the shortest possible time and in the clearest possible way.”

Now translate that into telling the time, and apply to wristwatches.

And Custer’s Having Problems

Some days the wind blows strongly, some days softly, and other days not at all.  This is not a suggestion, nor yet a theory, but a statement of fact based upon… oh, century upon century of daily observation and measurement.

So why would you want to base your energy supply upon so changeable a source?

Well to most of us, the answer is simple:  you shouldn’t.  Unfortunately, there are others — some in positions of great authority and power — who see the whole thing differently.  And some in that latter group are now getting bitten in the ass:

“At the beginning of this month, Germany’s power supply reached its limits,” Dr. Markus Krebber wrote on LinkedIn.

Citing Nov. 6 as an example, Krebber bemoaned extreme high energy prices and “shortage of supply.” He also warned that the “same situation would not have been manageable on another day with a higher peak load.”

In other words, Europe’s over-reliance on wind power means that when wind speeds slow, energy producers sometimes cannot meet demand.

This state of affairs suppressed energy supply and raised prices in the UK, Germany and elsewhere in northern Europe earlier this month.

You don’t say.

Of course, British government officials have learned all the wrong lessons from “Dunkelflaute.”

For instance, Chris Stark, appointed in July to head the government’s new clean energy-focused Mission Control, doubled down on renewables.

“Even small amounts of low-carbon flex can displace a lot of gas. We’ll also need to support the build of a lot of new renewable generation – of all types, but especially offshore wind,” Stark said on Nov. 5.

Indeed.  When foolishness proves not to work, what you need is… MOAR FOOLISHNESS.  So if the wind isn’t blowing at all, more wind generators will solve the problem.  Does he even realize how stupid he sounds?

As with all Socialism, when the facts do not conform to the theory, the theory is still paramount.

Unbelievable.

About Those Duracell Cars

Seems like every day there’s something new to post about this nonsense.  Here’s the first:

Labour will bow to pressure from car manufacturers and rethink strict rules on the sales of electric vehicles.  Downing Street today confirmed ministers will launch a consultation on current plans following intense lobbying by firms.

Under an existing Government mandate, at least 22 per cent of new cars sold by every manufacturer in the UK this year must be zero-emission vehicles (ZEV).  The mandate is set to increase to 28 per cent next year and will rise each year over the next decade – reaching 80 per cent in 2030 and 100 per cent in 2035.  This is when there will be a ban on the sale of all new non-zero-emission cars as part of the Government’s Net Zero commitments. 

Carmakers are set to be fined £15,000 per polluting car sold above the limits.

But firms have been warning ministers that the ZEV mandate is putting jobs and investment at risk in the UK.

Government mandate, meet market reality.  Mind you, not that any kind of reality has ever been part of governmental wishful thinking (e.g. gun regulation).

And then there’s this:

Germany has joined a growing backlash against fining car makers who miss net zero targets – suggesting the firms should be allowed to keep the money to invest in cutting emissions.  Chancellor Olaf Scholz has hit out at the European Union’s zero emission vehicle plans, which require manufacturers to reduce the emissions from their new cars and vans by 15 per cent compared to 2021 levels by next year.

The quickest way for firms to do this is to reduce the production of petrol and diesel cars and encourage people to swap to electric vehicles – but firms say motorists aren’t biting and warn jobs could be at risk if UK and EU mandates aren’t eased.

However, it will be the car firms that face penalties if they fail to shift enough battery electric vehicles (BEVs) and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs) to hit the 15 per cent target.

This grows to a 55 per cent reduction in car emissions and 50 per cent vans by 2030. EU autocrats then want a 100 per cent reduction – i.e. no purely fossil fuelled cars and vans sold at all – by 2035.

Germany has a vested interest in protecting car firms from fines: its car industry is solely responsible for an estimated five per cent of GDP, and is home to huge names including Audi, BMW, Volkswagen and Mercedes-Benz.

Yeah, rules and fines are all very well, as long as there’s no economic damage — or so one would think.  Except, of course, that governments of the Leftist ilk seldom seem to care about consequences, because as we all know, Leftism requires only that policy is based on good intentions, and the consequences thereof are irrelevant.

At some point — and in this regard, for once, the U.S. seems to have tumbled to this before the others — voters are going to cry “Enough!” to this insanity.  And nowhere is this becoming more evident than in the auto industry.

Times are becoming more and more interesting, nicht wahr?