Peter Pontbriand

Ye gods! Logic being reintroduced at this point? Who would've thunk!

/Peter

"jeff" <jalowe44INVALID@hotmail.com.INVALID> wrote in message
news:i3Uve.3843$Xr6.3282@trnddc07...
> Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> > "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> > news:MM5ve.1816$5w3.212@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com ...
> >
> >>Logical fallacy... you don't get to impugn the source
> >
> >
> > lol youre basing your statements upon the credibility of the source! if
the
> > source is a self-serving governmental entity its conclusions are suspect
at
> > _best_. give me something conclusive from the scientific community.
> >
> >
> >
> >>Not science. No mention of ozone layer anywhere.
> >
> >
> > because it will never reach the ozone. as it clearly stated, it falls
> > because it is heavier than air.
> >
>
> Service manuals are not the bible. Any reasonably good tech knows that
> they are only the starting point for thinking. Set the simplistic
> language of service manuals for one moment and apply your problem
> solving thought processes to other observable world phenomena: Water
> vapor is heavier than air. We know this because fog is water vapor and
> it lays near the ground. IF you follow the heavier than air argument as
> absolute truth, then clouds cannot exist. For example, if you take an
> average cumulus cloud, it will be about a mile square by about half a
> mile thick and will have a water vapor/ice crystal weight of about 2000
> tons. That is certainly "heavier than air".
> How is that possible when some service manual says vapors heaver than
> air irrevocably fall to the ground? The answer is yes vapors heaver than
> air fall, in a localized environment, like immediately adjacent to a
> leaking line, but, like a water drop evaporating and eventually becoming
> part of a cloud, it will diffuse into the atmosphere.
>
> --
> jeff

Peter Pontbriand

Ye gods! Logic being reintroduced at this point? Who would've thunk!

/Peter

"jeff" <jalowe44INVALID@hotmail.com.INVALID> wrote in message
news:i3Uve.3843$Xr6.3282@trnddc07...
> Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> > "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> > news:MM5ve.1816$5w3.212@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com ...
> >
> >>Logical fallacy... you don't get to impugn the source
> >
> >
> > lol youre basing your statements upon the credibility of the source! if
the
> > source is a self-serving governmental entity its conclusions are suspect
at
> > _best_. give me something conclusive from the scientific community.
> >
> >
> >
> >>Not science. No mention of ozone layer anywhere.
> >
> >
> > because it will never reach the ozone. as it clearly stated, it falls
> > because it is heavier than air.
> >
>
> Service manuals are not the bible. Any reasonably good tech knows that
> they are only the starting point for thinking. Set the simplistic
> language of service manuals for one moment and apply your problem
> solving thought processes to other observable world phenomena: Water
> vapor is heavier than air. We know this because fog is water vapor and
> it lays near the ground. IF you follow the heavier than air argument as
> absolute truth, then clouds cannot exist. For example, if you take an
> average cumulus cloud, it will be about a mile square by about half a
> mile thick and will have a water vapor/ice crystal weight of about 2000
> tons. That is certainly "heavier than air".
> How is that possible when some service manual says vapors heaver than
> air irrevocably fall to the ground? The answer is yes vapors heaver than
> air fall, in a localized environment, like immediately adjacent to a
> leaking line, but, like a water drop evaporating and eventually becoming
> part of a cloud, it will diffuse into the atmosphere.
>
> --
> jeff

Peter Pontbriand

Ye gods! Logic being reintroduced at this point? Who would've thunk!

/Peter

"jeff" <jalowe44INVALID@hotmail.com.INVALID> wrote in message
news:i3Uve.3843$Xr6.3282@trnddc07...
> Nathan W. Collier wrote:
> > "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> > news:MM5ve.1816$5w3.212@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com ...
> >
> >>Logical fallacy... you don't get to impugn the source
> >
> >
> > lol youre basing your statements upon the credibility of the source! if
the
> > source is a self-serving governmental entity its conclusions are suspect
at
> > _best_. give me something conclusive from the scientific community.
> >
> >
> >
> >>Not science. No mention of ozone layer anywhere.
> >
> >
> > because it will never reach the ozone. as it clearly stated, it falls
> > because it is heavier than air.
> >
>
> Service manuals are not the bible. Any reasonably good tech knows that
> they are only the starting point for thinking. Set the simplistic
> language of service manuals for one moment and apply your problem
> solving thought processes to other observable world phenomena: Water
> vapor is heavier than air. We know this because fog is water vapor and
> it lays near the ground. IF you follow the heavier than air argument as
> absolute truth, then clouds cannot exist. For example, if you take an
> average cumulus cloud, it will be about a mile square by about half a
> mile thick and will have a water vapor/ice crystal weight of about 2000
> tons. That is certainly "heavier than air".
> How is that possible when some service manual says vapors heaver than
> air irrevocably fall to the ground? The answer is yes vapors heaver than
> air fall, in a localized environment, like immediately adjacent to a
> leaking line, but, like a water drop evaporating and eventually becoming
> part of a cloud, it will diffuse into the atmosphere.
>
> --
> jeff

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

And as see in the Southern California where it is predominately
high pressure, there are no clouds. Of course, water: hydrogen and
oxygen fortunately are our air.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

jeff wrote:
>
> Service manuals are not the bible. Any reasonably good tech knows that
> they are only the starting point for thinking. Set the simplistic
> language of service manuals for one moment and apply your problem
> solving thought processes to other observable world phenomena: Water
> vapor is heavier than air. We know this because fog is water vapor and
> it lays near the ground. IF you follow the heavier than air argument as
> absolute truth, then clouds cannot exist. For example, if you take an
> average cumulus cloud, it will be about a mile square by about half a
> mile thick and will have a water vapor/ice crystal weight of about 2000
> tons. That is certainly "heavier than air".
> How is that possible when some service manual says vapors heaver than
> air irrevocably fall to the ground? The answer is yes vapors heaver than
> air fall, in a localized environment, like immediately adjacent to a
> leaking line, but, like a water drop evaporating and eventually becoming
> part of a cloud, it will diffuse into the atmosphere.
>
> --
> jeff

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

And as see in the Southern California where it is predominately
high pressure, there are no clouds. Of course, water: hydrogen and
oxygen fortunately are our air.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

jeff wrote:
>
> Service manuals are not the bible. Any reasonably good tech knows that
> they are only the starting point for thinking. Set the simplistic
> language of service manuals for one moment and apply your problem
> solving thought processes to other observable world phenomena: Water
> vapor is heavier than air. We know this because fog is water vapor and
> it lays near the ground. IF you follow the heavier than air argument as
> absolute truth, then clouds cannot exist. For example, if you take an
> average cumulus cloud, it will be about a mile square by about half a
> mile thick and will have a water vapor/ice crystal weight of about 2000
> tons. That is certainly "heavier than air".
> How is that possible when some service manual says vapors heaver than
> air irrevocably fall to the ground? The answer is yes vapors heaver than
> air fall, in a localized environment, like immediately adjacent to a
> leaking line, but, like a water drop evaporating and eventually becoming
> part of a cloud, it will diffuse into the atmosphere.
>
> --
> jeff

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

And as see in the Southern California where it is predominately
high pressure, there are no clouds. Of course, water: hydrogen and
oxygen fortunately are our air.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

jeff wrote:
>
> Service manuals are not the bible. Any reasonably good tech knows that
> they are only the starting point for thinking. Set the simplistic
> language of service manuals for one moment and apply your problem
> solving thought processes to other observable world phenomena: Water
> vapor is heavier than air. We know this because fog is water vapor and
> it lays near the ground. IF you follow the heavier than air argument as
> absolute truth, then clouds cannot exist. For example, if you take an
> average cumulus cloud, it will be about a mile square by about half a
> mile thick and will have a water vapor/ice crystal weight of about 2000
> tons. That is certainly "heavier than air".
> How is that possible when some service manual says vapors heaver than
> air irrevocably fall to the ground? The answer is yes vapors heaver than
> air fall, in a localized environment, like immediately adjacent to a
> leaking line, but, like a water drop evaporating and eventually becoming
> part of a cloud, it will diffuse into the atmosphere.
>
> --
> jeff

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

And as see in the Southern California where it is predominately
high pressure, there are no clouds. Of course, water: hydrogen and
oxygen fortunately are our air.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

jeff wrote:
>
> Service manuals are not the bible. Any reasonably good tech knows that
> they are only the starting point for thinking. Set the simplistic
> language of service manuals for one moment and apply your problem
> solving thought processes to other observable world phenomena: Water
> vapor is heavier than air. We know this because fog is water vapor and
> it lays near the ground. IF you follow the heavier than air argument as
> absolute truth, then clouds cannot exist. For example, if you take an
> average cumulus cloud, it will be about a mile square by about half a
> mile thick and will have a water vapor/ice crystal weight of about 2000
> tons. That is certainly "heavier than air".
> How is that possible when some service manual says vapors heaver than
> air irrevocably fall to the ground? The answer is yes vapors heaver than
> air fall, in a localized environment, like immediately adjacent to a
> leaking line, but, like a water drop evaporating and eventually becoming
> part of a cloud, it will diffuse into the atmosphere.
>
> --
> jeff

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

"Because I say so." Parents must use it every day.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Earle Horton wrote:
>
> Not intentionally. I can tell you though that this technique works, whether
> you are telling a lie or the truth. Just keep saying it, and people will
> believe. I believe that it is understood best when read with a quote by
> Lincoln. There are people who will just not listen to the truth, no matter
> how loud and often it is shouted at them. "Some of the people, all of the
> time." Nate's new sock puppet may be one of these.
>
> Earle

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

"Because I say so." Parents must use it every day.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Earle Horton wrote:
>
> Not intentionally. I can tell you though that this technique works, whether
> you are telling a lie or the truth. Just keep saying it, and people will
> believe. I believe that it is understood best when read with a quote by
> Lincoln. There are people who will just not listen to the truth, no matter
> how loud and often it is shouted at them. "Some of the people, all of the
> time." Nate's new sock puppet may be one of these.
>
> Earle

L.W.(=?iso-8859-1?Q?=DFill?=) Hughes III

"Because I say so." Parents must use it every day.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Earle Horton wrote:
>
> Not intentionally. I can tell you though that this technique works, whether
> you are telling a lie or the truth. Just keep saying it, and people will
> believe. I believe that it is understood best when read with a quote by
> Lincoln. There are people who will just not listen to the truth, no matter
> how loud and often it is shouted at them. "Some of the people, all of the
> time." Nate's new sock puppet may be one of these.
>
> Earle