Let's Take A Vote...
in [Design]
|
From: Nunya on 3 Aug 2010 14:40 On Aug 3, 6:48 am, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 02:52:06 -0700, > > > > "JosephKK"<quiettechb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 16:59:12 -0700, John Larkin > ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >>On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 12:27:17 -0700 (PDT), Nunya <jack_sheph...(a)cox.net> > >>wrote: > > >>>On Aug 1, 12:15 pm, Richard Henry <pomer...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>>> On Aug 1, 10:02 am, Nunya <jack_sheph...(a)cox.net> wrote: > > >>>> > On Aug 1, 8:20 am, John Larkin > > >>>> > <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>>> > > On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:10:49 -0700, > >>>> > > What's interesting is how little attention the climate alarmists give > >>>> > > to particulates. The reason is obvious: they want to use CO2 limits to > >>>> > > strangle the world's capitalist economies, and just adding some > >>>> > > filters can't accomplish that, so they don't care about particulates. > > >>>> > > John > > >>>> > A diesel engine pollutes the air LESS than a gasoline engine does, > >>>> > idiot. > > >>>> > The particulates enitted are heavy, and they do NOT remain suspended > >>>> > in our atmosphere, idiot! > > >>>> > A diesel engine is the least pollutive combustion engine in current > >>>> > mass use. > > >>>> I did not know that. Do you have a source for that knowledge? > > >>> Diesel VW Jetta: 42mpg, low rpm vehicle. > > >>Wussmobile. > > >>John > > >Gosh John, that is a personal attack disguised as a proper response. > > You're reading a lot into one word. > > John You're a goddamned liar. You get worse once you are caught at it.
From: John Larkin on 3 Aug 2010 16:39 On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 11:40:09 -0700 (PDT), Nunya <jack_shephard(a)cox.net> wrote: >On Aug 3, 6:48�am, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 02:52:06 -0700, >> >> >> >> "JosephKK"<quiettechb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 16:59:12 -0700, John Larkin >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >> >>On Sun, 1 Aug 2010 12:27:17 -0700 (PDT), Nunya <jack_sheph...(a)cox.net> >> >>wrote: >> >> >>>On Aug 1, 12:15�pm, Richard Henry <pomer...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>>> On Aug 1, 10:02�am, Nunya <jack_sheph...(a)cox.net> wrote: >> >> >>>> > On Aug 1, 8:20�am, John Larkin >> >> >>>> > <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>> > > On Sun, 01 Aug 2010 01:10:49 -0700, >> >>>> > > What's interesting is how little attention the climate alarmists give >> >>>> > > to particulates. The reason is obvious: they want to use CO2 limits to >> >>>> > > strangle the world's capitalist economies, and just adding some >> >>>> > > filters can't accomplish that, so they don't care about particulates. >> >> >>>> > > John >> >> >>>> > � A diesel engine pollutes the air LESS than a gasoline engine does, >> >>>> > idiot. >> >> >>>> > � The particulates enitted are heavy, and they do NOT remain suspended >> >>>> > in our atmosphere, idiot! >> >> >>>> > � A diesel engine is the least pollutive combustion engine in current >> >>>> > mass use. >> >> >>>> I did not know that. �Do you have a source for that knowledge? >> >> >>> �Diesel VW Jetta: 42mpg, low rpm vehicle. >> >> >>Wussmobile. >> >> >>John >> >> >Gosh John, that is a personal attack disguised as a proper response. >> >> You're reading a lot into one word. >> >> John > > You're a goddamned liar. You get worse once you are caught at it. Liar? A diesel Jetta *is* a Wussmobile. I have a friend who liked my A3 so much, she traded in her Camry hybrid for one. She got the 2L "clean" turbo diesel, which starts and drives and sounds, to me, exactly like a gas car. Well, not like my V6, but about like the 2L gas engine version. John
From: YD on 3 Aug 2010 21:34 So did JT ever come up with his solution to the charge vs energy conundrum? In the open, not that mysteriuos pdf distributed only to those asking for it. - YD. -- Remove HAT if replying by mail.
From: John Larkin on 3 Aug 2010 21:36 On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:34:43 -0300, YD <ydtechHAT(a)techie.com> wrote: >So did JT ever come up with his solution to the charge vs energy >conundrum? In the open, not that mysteriuos pdf distributed only to >those asking for it. > >- YD. He promised us a "mathematical proof" of, well, something. John
From: Jim Thompson on 3 Aug 2010 21:40
On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 18:36:00 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 03 Aug 2010 22:34:43 -0300, YD <ydtechHAT(a)techie.com> wrote: > >>So did JT ever come up with his solution to the charge vs energy >>conundrum? In the open, not that mysteriuos pdf distributed only to >>those asking for it. >> >>- YD. > >He promised us a "mathematical proof" of, well, something. > >John Distributed privately, so you couldn't claim, "That's what I really meant". For dip YD, there is no conundrum... except for dummies. John, Be sure to take your Lithium. And... cluck, cluck yourself... best cluck you'll ever get :-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | SED Has Crumbled to Below SEB Status Populated Only by Bloviators and Pompous PhD's |