Right, which is why people are confused. Fish likely meant 3.3 miles / kWh, but that comes out to 20 miles for one hour of charge. But the fact they said just under 2 miles of range actually correlates with their 3.3kWh/mile statement, but no one has ever heard of an EV with efficiency that terrible.
I’m still a little confused, wouldn’t 6kwh provide roughly 12 to 24 miles of driving range?
Thanks, I had considered linking a reference, but I didn’t think he was disputing the definition. He was disputing my analysis that this was a valid example of the fallacy.
Maybe I have the wrong fallacy, or I’m just really stretching on this one.
This was my line of thinking:
Begging the question is a logical fallacy that assumes the conclusion within the premise. If OP was not being genuine, then the faulty conclusion would be “there are no good reasons to dislike GrapheneOS, therefore why do people dislike GrapheneOS?”
It’s very close to begging the question, though. It really depends on OP’s actual intent, which is hard to determine through text. But it does seem like it could have a, “Those of you who still hate GrapheneOS, why are you wrong?” tone to it.
Edit: Reading through OP’s comments, they do sound genuine to me, I’m mostly just explaining why someone might mistake the post for begging the question.
Angela Collier actually goes a little more in depth in that video on why MOND is unlikely, even though she does admit it hasn’t been fully ruled out. I didn’t get the impression physicists don’t talk about it because it causes debates, which she claimed seems to happen more often on the internet. I got the impression that most physicists just think it is unlikely to go anywhere, so they just aren’t as interested in it.
The outside plastic at least