Hybrid and EV Adoption Comes Down To...Genetics?

A flawed analysis.

It's the old Nature vs. Nurture? controversy come back again.
Sounds like a high school sophomore writing assignment completed in a
hurry in study hall.

IIRC, most respected authorities on the topic have identified the implicit
[ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma]False dilemma - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame] or false dichotomy in the question as typically stated.

A reasoned response would use a [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzy_logic]Fuzzy logic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]
based aproach that asked,
"How much Nature is involved and how much Nuture?"

Only or mostly genetically based propulsion system choice?
What , is the person growing up alone, on the back side of the moon?
IMHO, not likely. Not even close.

Environment in the form of external information sources, attitudes of
significant other's, and a desire to please or be part of a perceived
important group or movement is mixed in there somewhere as well.

The question properly is, "How much genetics and how much
external inputs and internalized values is involved in the choice of
"green" vehicles?

For only $10M spread over 10 years, I'll attempt to find an answer.

 

why is everybody always trying to explain us? are we that close to the edge?

 

lol I agree.

I am pretty positive I'm nothing like the typical hybrid driver:rockon::rockon::welcome:

 

The genetics part should be satisfied by being human. Two arms, two legs, 80 to 300 pounds, 4 to 7 feet tall, IQ at least 60, vision adequate for driving. Special consideration available for most handicaps.

Everything else is environment.

 

Where did you find the information to draw these conclusions?

From what I could see, CivicQC referenced a web newspiece which referred to a newspaper article which in turn talked about a study but did not provide a link.

I did not see anything to lead me to believe that the study authors were asserting that it was all Nature.

What the newspaper article suggested to me was that the study looked to see whether identical twins were more consistent in a varieties of behaviour than fraternal twins.

While I did not see their conclusions, their reasoning or their data, I presume that they may have concluded that for behaviours where the identical twins were far more consistent than the fraternal twins, there appeared to be a strong genetic influence at work.

For all I know they may have used Fuzzy logic.

What is of particular interest is the difference between:

The newspaper sub- header, "may be partly down to our genes, new research suggests",

the newspaper header "Preference for hybrid cars 'genetic', say scientists"

and the web article "Hybrid and EV Adoption Comes Down To...Genetics?".

While I have little background in this area, it seems reasonable to me that "may be partly down to our genes" could be a very reasonable inference by the authors of the paper.

Am I missing something?

 

This I think is the main issue. I can believe some of that could be genetic ....

 

Yes, you must be. Let's see less than 3 percent drive hybrids. It is doubtfull that driving a hybrid enhances or hurts the chance of survival, so these hybrid genes are likely 1) recessive and 2) involved with sexual selection. The question is will a mate be more attracted to someone driving a prius. The answer is likely a no. But in the future these genes might be like the genes for birds with tails so long that they make flying more difficult. These birds are more successful in finding mates it is theorized because they are better fliers in spite of the handicap of the tail. The female is more attracted to these males. Experiments have been done cutting short the tail feathers of some birds and adding them to birds with shorter tails. The plastic surgery approach does work, but only part of the way. Perhaps the bird knows they are not his own tail feathers and does not have the same confidence as a bird that grew them naturally. Will people start buying priuses even if they are not in the genes, if it is found they do improve the chances of breeding?

Naw, just a far fetched theory based on something true, genetics does affect our preferences for certain things.

 

Well ... it is true that full-size SUV drivers have genetically smaller brains.

.

 

lol (surely not all as we don't want to be stereotyped)

[IMGLINK]http://www.jokechallenge.com/funny_pictures/homers_brain.jpg[/IMGLINK]

 

Link: gladwell dot com - big and bad

But seriously, enough with the self-aggrandizement (there's actually a less sophisticated term that comes to mind). Owning a car (or anything else you can simply buy) will never make you cooler or better than anyone else.

 

So, taking this to the 'final' conclusion, does this mean we can justify sterilization of big SUV buyers?

I kid! I kid!

 

With every positive there is negative. A drawback with the current, modern society that we have is that we do not allow natural selection to occur. The same emergency medical rescue, emergency rooms, and hospitals that save the lives of smart people, also keep alive those who would otherwise be naturally selected out of the population. As a result, not only are the excellent genes surviving, but so are the debilitating genes. The cavemen that could outsmart a saber tooth tiger, develop a strategy and engineer weapons survived while the stupid cavemen did not. Today, our modern society just keeps everyone alive. Natural selection has come to a complete halt (in 99.9999999 % of situations).