Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is hilarious... There are 8 people in my immediate family... Each owning 6-7 cars over our lifetimes... After conducting independent research on 56 cars in our family's ownership, I've concluded 0% have caught on fire. A few have smoked from overheating... Perhaps the "where there is smoke, there is fire" logic applies to the statistical evidence being referenced in the article.The latest from the New York Times Bible?
To discourage Americans from embracing hybrids like Europeans, let alone ICE autos, the NYT Bible says 5% of all ICE/hybrids combust annually. After scrutiny, now they say it must be only 2-3%.
No, Millions of Cars Are Not Catching Fire Every Year
A New York Times story about U.S. car fires references a study that gets the frequency wrong by a factor of at least 60.www.caranddriver.com
I think they confused all cars with all insurance claims. But even 5% is pretty high. 2-3% sounds more likely. And usually it's older vehicles, which explains maybe why there are far more hybrids that are aged than eVs, whih are fairly new.This is hilarious... There are 8 people in my immediate family... Each owning 6-7 cars over our lifetimes... After conducting independent research on 56 cars in our family's ownership, I've concluded 0% have caught on fire. A few have smoked from overheating... Perhaps the "where there is smoke, there is fire" logic applies to the statistical evidence being referenced in the article.
I think they confused all cars with all insurance claims. But even 5% is pretty high. 2-3% sounds more likely. And usually it's older vehicles, which explains maybe why there are far more hybrids that are aged than eVs, whih are fairly new.
In any case ... between NPR and the NY Times as of late ...
Even allegedly top rated journalism is hitting new lows on physics and statistics. Usually they were far, far better at fact checking science and statistics themselves, as they don't want to lose credibility ... even if partisan at times, their credibility was far better than most other outlets.
I can only imagine they've cut budgets and shed most of their scientific and statisitical SME. I'm almost always disappointed in most journalism for this reason, but usually NPR and, even more so, the NY Times didn't make such easily disproven articles ... scientifically or statistics.
I mean, just 4 years ago, we were still seeing NPR go against the mainstream and call out statistical non-sense.
And even last year, they were still reporting how FDA Expert panels and politically appointed FDA leadership were at odds with one another ... and the CDC slams were still common too.
3 Experts Have Resigned From An FDA Committee Over Alzheimer's Drug Approval
In his resignation letter, Dr. Aaron Kesselheim calls it "probably the worst drug approval decision in recent U.S. history." An FDA official says the agency found the benefits outweighed the risks.www.npr.org
Well, in their defense (not disagreeing, just playing my general 'devil's advocate'), when formally writing, I crank out ...Like most in the younger "electronic" generation, kids are lazy and not willing to put in the proofing/finishing work, too much reliance pm spell check... I've seen way more typos on website articles then I recall ever seeing on print 15-20yrs ago. Maybe I'm reading more, or am more aware these days, but Gimmini Christmas, once every day or so I come by a glaring issue that sound have been easily caught.