The Electric Car
in [Design]
|
From: Michael A. Terrell on 22 Sep 2007 06:23 BradGuth wrote: > > On Sep 19, 5:08 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> > wrote: > > John Larkin wrote: > > > > > Please forgive us. We are engineers, and we build things that actually > > > work, and that sometimes gives us an irrational prejudice against > > > raving lunatics. > > > > Don't forget the drooling idiots! They deserve irrational prejudice > > just as much as the raving lunatics. > > And your warm and fuzzy swarm borg like collective fart of such all- > knowing profound naysayism via your anti-think-tank worth of applied > technology-fuckology is based upon what sort of conditional laws of > physics? > > What other if any liquid fueled and assuming atmospheric N2 breathing > ICE (excluding your intellectual flatulence powered alternative) is > capable of getting the most empg at zero NOx and otherwise minimal > CO2? > > What other method of consuming fossil or whatever biofuel is ever > going to give such a fully loaded hybrid Hummer of any atmospheric > consumption of mostly polluted N2 that kind of 100 empg, without such > spewing NOx, CO2 and/or having to drag along that multi-mile extension > cord? > - Brad Guth - Geeze! Stop repeating yourself, before they show up with butterfly nets and one of those white jackets with the extra long sleeves. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: BradGuth on 22 Sep 2007 16:02 On Sep 20, 11:48 am, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 18:05:07 -0000, BradGuth <bradg...(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > >On Sep 19, 2:10 pm, John Larkin > ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > > >> Please forgive us. We are engineers, and we build things that actually > >> work, and that sometimes gives us an irrational prejudice against > >> raving lunatics. > > >> John > > >And your all-knowing profound naysayism of your applied technology- > >fuckology is based upon what sort of conditional laws of physics? > > >What other if any liquid fueled and assuming atmospheric breathing ICE > >is capable of zero NOx and otherwise minimal CO2? > > >What other method of consuming fossil or whatever biofuel is ever > >going to give a fully loaded hybrid Hummer of any atmospheric > >consumption that 100 empg, without such having to drag along a multi- > >mile extension cord? > > When your 100 MPG hummer is actually in the showrooms, we'll all owe > you a great apology. > > Meanwhile, please go away. For some pesky odd reason my poor old PC and usenet access is getting robo/stealth moderated to death, so I'm having to repost the same message more than once. Sorry about that. Your "great apology" is accepted, all because the regular laws of physics and best available science really hasn't changed or improved all that much over the past several decades, has it. - Brad Guth -
From: BradGuth on 22 Sep 2007 16:06 On Sep 20, 3:57 pm, Rich Grise <r...(a)example.net> wrote: > On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 18:05:07 +0000, BradGuth wrote: > > On Sep 19, 2:10 pm, John Larkin > > >> Please forgive us. We are engineers, and we build things that actually > >> work, and that sometimes gives us an irrational prejudice against > >> raving lunatics. > > > And your all-knowing profound naysayism of your applied technology- > > fuckology is based upon what sort of conditional laws of physics? > > Well, there's conservation of energy, for one, but I've never heard > that it was conditional. Hmmmmm..... > > Good Luck! > Rich Luck has little if anything to do with those regular laws of physics, although the R&D science of getting this 100 empg Hummer or the 200 empg GM Volt into the dumbfounded hands of the typical village idiot end-user is going to require some degree of luck. - Brad Guth -
From: Eeyore on 22 Sep 2007 16:29 BradGuth wrote: > Luck has little if anything to do with those regular laws of physics, > although the R&D science of getting this 100 empg Hummer or the 200 > empg GM Volt into the dumbfounded hands of the typical village idiot > end-user is going to require some degree of luck. The 'regular laws of physics' are going to prevent both of those ever happening. Graham
From: BradGuth on 22 Sep 2007 18:55
On Sep 22, 3:23 am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > > Geeze! Stop repeating yourself, before they show up with butterfly > nets and one of those white jackets with the extra long sleeves. In other words, you folks actually get the drift of my butterfly net worthy rant? And thereby your positive/constructive worth of on-topic contributions are ????? A zero NOx and minimal CO2 internal combustion engine is doable as of more than a decade ago, as well the required resources of obtaining clean and renewable energy in surplus for the makings of h2o2 and for otherwise processing whatever coal and/or plants/food into the likes of spendy biofuels has also been a done deal, except that apparently it's not being kept nearly spendy enough for those trying every dirty old trick in their hocus-pocus status quo black book for keeping us dumbfounded into consuming fossil fuels, plus rather badly burning our mostly N2 atmosphere in such vast volumes that turns into more of our soot that's laced with NOx, CO2 and a host of other nastier elements (including radium and ultimately radon). - Brad Guth - |