Spamming the same thing over and over again doesn’t make your position more valid. You aren’t even addressing my main points.

The same can be said about your posts ...

The fundamental problem with batteries is that it is extreme resource dependent. We’re basically will need wars for lithium or cobalt if everyone drove an EV.

Says who?

Hydrogen avoids this. [...] But at the very least, it is no worse than existing cars and arguably far superior overall.

Source?

Hydrogen combustion will prove to be viable. Just because BMW failed with the the Hydrogen 7 doesn’t mean others aren’t achieving diesel-like efficiencies. If anything, it just shows how unserious past hydrogen programs have been.

Name me one manufacturer that is known to research hydrogen combustion engines at the moment? I know none. That might also be because some jurisdictions will prevent the registration of non-zero emission vehicles after a certain date. Hydrogen combustion is not zero-emission.

By any metric, hydrogen cars are safe. Fear mongering about this is what I mean by made-up nonsense from EV fanatics.

I have never claimed that hydrogen cars are unsafe. Stop putting words in my mouth, please.

But once we do get to the point of needing batteries or fuel cells

We will always need either batteries + fuel cells or batteries only.

fuel cells are the better idea. Batteries have just been the result of aggressive public policy pushing them, and in many ways represent a repeat of diesel cars.

Source? This is just your opinion, not a fact!

Once policy shifts to something more fair, hydrogen vehicles will quickly take off.

Which policy are you talking about exactly? As far as I know, FCEVs are legal in most (all?) countries. Hydrogen fuel is even subsidized in some countries to help its adoption. Nothing's preventing buyers from choosing hydrogen, but buyers don't seem to agree with you. Hyundai/Kia has even paused the development of hydrogen cars.