Dieselgate Revisited
-
Did Volkswagen Lie about Clean Diesel
or
Did the world's emission regulatory agencies lie about the definition of what is clean vs dirty regarding emissions?Dieselgate is old news, just as JFK's assassination is (even older). 2015 vs 1963. But unraveling the narrative is never old, just a work in progress. Just as much as hitherto conspiracy theories have a way of eventually being cast and defumigated with stronger light and less jaded eyes, and with more honest and less narrative and agenda-fueled coverage, most or always driven by independent media doggoneness.
We've been thru COVID. From that worldwide trauma, I am more certain there are more lies than we take for granted as truth. For we know politics is corrupt, and that when money and especially power is concerned, there is no sacred cow.
Being in our health forums (I refer to this and the one many of us came from), we are made aware of how the tptb uses censorship in blatant as well as subtle forms to deprive enough of us of access to what really happened and what really is.
We know how so-called climate experts misrepresent CO² as harmful for the environment and for causing man-made global warming, yet even Ray Peat extols the beneficial effect of carbogen. The 5% of carbon dioxide relative to oxygen, when breathes, helps improve our metabolism and health, yet the .04% content of CO2 in atmosphere is not even as beneficial as when our atmosphere has 5% of it. We need more CO² in our atmosphere, not less. And not just us, as the earth needs it to. To provide for the growth of forests. If the world is more green, it would even help with better climate patterns, helping us with less dry spells as well as extreme wind and storms.
If the tptb can lie through their teeth about CO², would not be as liable to do the same with regards to diesel emissions being high in NOx, a byproduct of the most advanced diesel technology that outdoes gasoline emissions with regard to CO²?
The tptb actually have nothing against CO² emissions from modern combustion engines, yet say bad things of CO² as if CO² is singled out for its "carbon footprint." But enough stupid people, the majority actually, believe this false science to give gasoline driven cars a black eye, even the most highly advanced and designed and made ones, even as these vehicles have become so efficient that it produces very low amounts of what is really toxic- carbon monoxide.
They got a bull's eye on gasoline vehicles, and have undoubtedly lied enough to hit the bull's eye.
Next in the crosshairs was diesel. And they got another bull's eye.
Dieselgate. Volkswagen must have felt truly that lawfare was being used against diesel, as it was the remaining ICE (internal combustion engine) that stood in their way of pushing for the wide acceptance of "greener" vehicles in the form of EVs.
The tptbs had to prove that NOx emissions from diesel engines are pollutants, but not just pollutants but pollutants that damage our health and lead to chronic diseases, cancer, and lower life spans. But I suspect the tptb are grasping at straws proving this.
Volkswagen knows this, and they faked the results of emissions so they could continue to sell vehicles that they regard as safe, despite what the EPA and their cadres of scientists say. I side with Volkswagen on their science, though Volkswagen can't prove their case in court as you know how our courts are stacked in favor of any sleazy science blessed by Nobel Prize committees. The same impartial body that awarded Barack the peace prize, even before he stepped into office and proceeded to make mass drone killings of innocent Iraqi civilians a hallmark of his rule. This is the very same that awarded filthy scientist John Enders for discovering and validating the existence of viruses in 1954, a good base to run a worldwide racket of blaming banshees for a new sickness called AIDS and selling snake oil for it, before embarking on its recent terror campaign on the world with the COVID hoax.
So Volkswagen did what any marijuana user would so who sees marijuana as a natural medicine - Continue to use it despite the consequences of not following an unjust law.
So Volkswagen got penalized. It may even be home bankrupt as a result.
But this is the rub. If you look at Dieselgate's wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal
There is an entry about some outfit doing a study on 10 monkeys to see whether primates like us are harmed by the emissions of Volkswagen diesel vehicles:
*In January 2018, it was revealed that EUGT, an institute funded by Volkswagen, BMW, Daimler-Benz (now Mercedes-Benz Group), and Bosch, formed primarily to advocate for diesel vehicles, hired the Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute in 2014 to experiment on 10 monkeys to prove that diesel exhaust was not harmful to primates.[418]
The test car was a Volkswagen Beetle fitted with the defeat device that produced far less emissions in the experiment than it would on the highway. The tests were suspended before they could be fully completed and EUGT was dissolved in 2017; none of the 10 monkeys died as result of the test.[419][420]
Volkswagen, Daimler, and BMW all condemned the experiments and launched internal investigations. Volkswagen's top lobbyist, Thomas Steg, who knew about the experiments but allegedly failed to inform Volkswagen executives, declared responsibility for the tests and as result was suspended on 23 January 2018.[421] Daimler and BMW also suspended employees in wake of the experiments. VW vowed to take further steps to ensure animals were not tested on again.[422] The disclosure of the tests was titled Monkeygate by the media.*
This smells of coverup to keep Volkswagen from defending itself by exposing the lying science at the heart of the EPA and their counterparts in Europe.
But what really is the science here?
I couldn't find anything of science that would absolve Volkswagen by way of questioning unequivocally the science involved in setting emissions standards.
But there is a lot of subjectivity and false science intertwined in the EPA's actions and regulations and mandates.
Take for example the direction towards using low-sulfur engine oils in the name of reducing sulfur in emissions. Sounds harmless at worst and laudatory at best, right?
But ask a practicing and experienced car mechanic who will tell you otherwise. They would tell you what they observe inside the engines of cars whose which they open up. They are filled with carbon deposits. A lot of gunk which they otherwise would not have seen in less "advanced" engine oils.
