134a Refrigerant
#3471
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
OK, that's should be easy enough for even you. Give me a formula
with the volume and square root in the equation.
The earth is 4.55 billion years old (plus or minus about 1%).
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Bill... how old is the Earth?
> __
> Steve
> .
with the volume and square root in the equation.
The earth is 4.55 billion years old (plus or minus about 1%).
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Bill... how old is the Earth?
> __
> Steve
> .
#3472
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
OK, that's should be easy enough for even you. Give me a formula
with the volume and square root in the equation.
The earth is 4.55 billion years old (plus or minus about 1%).
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Bill... how old is the Earth?
> __
> Steve
> .
with the volume and square root in the equation.
The earth is 4.55 billion years old (plus or minus about 1%).
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Bill... how old is the Earth?
> __
> Steve
> .
#3473
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
OK, that's should be easy enough for even you. Give me a formula
with the volume and square root in the equation.
The earth is 4.55 billion years old (plus or minus about 1%).
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Bill... how old is the Earth?
> __
> Steve
> .
with the volume and square root in the equation.
The earth is 4.55 billion years old (plus or minus about 1%).
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Stephen Cowell wrote:
>
> Bill... how old is the Earth?
> __
> Steve
> .
#3474
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11drnqo2f3kc1ad@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:9LkDe.499$LF.381@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net.. .
> > No, you didn't show a lie. I claimed popular use.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i tried to spin truth" :-)
>
> you lied, you are a liar.
Of course I am... otherwise, you'd be a damn
fool, and you can't be a damn fool, we know
that! Right?
>
> > Listen carefully... "otherwise there would be no reason not to replace
> > the HMC"... notice the mistake?
>
> lol you see you think this because your stupid, ignorant, and lying ***
> doesnt understand why an HMC is needed to begin with.
You still don't see your grammatical error!
What a dumbass!
Let's try baby talk...
must be low temp,
otherwise,
there would be no reason
*not* (this not doesn't belong)
to replace the HMC.
If you let the two 'nots' cancel,
you get:
must be low temp,
otherwise,
there would be a reason
to replace the HMC.
So if it's *high* ambient,
there is a reason to replace the HMC?
Jeez, dude... learn English.
> >> nope! that was my original statement to jeff. you jumped in so i gave
> >> you
> >> the criteria, specifically for everyone to see:
>
>> No, I don't accept that... the initial condition stands.
>
> my initial condition to you was -30 degrees as i have posted many times now.
> youre a liar stephen, no matter how hard you try to spin your -------- ive
> clearly shown your lies for what they are.
Look, everybody! Nathan is a welch!
> > You can accuse me of lying all day,
>
> lol as if i need your permission to point out your lies, liar.
Plain as the nose on my face:
>great! now give me an alternative to replacing an HMC in a pinch.
No ambient specification. You, sir, are a charlatan.
> >but you *did* try to slip in more conditions, we can
> >*all* see that.
>
> lol what we have all seen is my inital post to you which CLEARLY stated -30
> degrees. lie liar, it just wont get you anywhere. :-)
Ok, Mr. Welch... here's your post to me:
>and "in a pinch" means an alternative to "doing it right" to get you through
>temporarily when youre "in a pinch" (such as on a roof top on a -30 degree
>day).
The 'such as' condition is by no means limiting... it is
an example, that's why the 'such as' term was used.
Note that this post was not the original challenge,
only a response to an elaboration request. I do *not*
recognize it as being the defining post of the challenge.
Go ahead, spin some more. Call me a liar, too...
that's funny. Make goofy smileys while you're at
it... and why stop with the 'TRANSLATION'?
Just don't forget this one... it'll follow you to
your grave:
<>
you:
> more babble. i nailed you on it. i recognize my limitations and
> immediately own it. you lie, make excuses, and attempt to dazzle us with
> -------- in hopes of hiding your blatent (sic) ignorance.
me:
You don't have a clue about your limitations... imagine you,
an HVAC tech, making pronouncements about atmospheric
science! That shows *extreme* hubris... you deserve what
you get.
</>
You deserve what you get... remember that.
__
Steve
..
#3475
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11drnqo2f3kc1ad@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:9LkDe.499$LF.381@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net.. .
> > No, you didn't show a lie. I claimed popular use.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i tried to spin truth" :-)
>
> you lied, you are a liar.
Of course I am... otherwise, you'd be a damn
fool, and you can't be a damn fool, we know
that! Right?
>
> > Listen carefully... "otherwise there would be no reason not to replace
> > the HMC"... notice the mistake?
>
> lol you see you think this because your stupid, ignorant, and lying ***
> doesnt understand why an HMC is needed to begin with.
You still don't see your grammatical error!
What a dumbass!
Let's try baby talk...
must be low temp,
otherwise,
there would be no reason
*not* (this not doesn't belong)
to replace the HMC.
If you let the two 'nots' cancel,
you get:
must be low temp,
otherwise,
there would be a reason
to replace the HMC.
So if it's *high* ambient,
there is a reason to replace the HMC?
Jeez, dude... learn English.
> >> nope! that was my original statement to jeff. you jumped in so i gave
> >> you
> >> the criteria, specifically for everyone to see:
>
>> No, I don't accept that... the initial condition stands.
>
> my initial condition to you was -30 degrees as i have posted many times now.
> youre a liar stephen, no matter how hard you try to spin your -------- ive
> clearly shown your lies for what they are.
Look, everybody! Nathan is a welch!
> > You can accuse me of lying all day,
>
> lol as if i need your permission to point out your lies, liar.
Plain as the nose on my face:
>great! now give me an alternative to replacing an HMC in a pinch.
No ambient specification. You, sir, are a charlatan.
> >but you *did* try to slip in more conditions, we can
> >*all* see that.
>
> lol what we have all seen is my inital post to you which CLEARLY stated -30
> degrees. lie liar, it just wont get you anywhere. :-)
Ok, Mr. Welch... here's your post to me:
>and "in a pinch" means an alternative to "doing it right" to get you through
>temporarily when youre "in a pinch" (such as on a roof top on a -30 degree
>day).
The 'such as' condition is by no means limiting... it is
an example, that's why the 'such as' term was used.
Note that this post was not the original challenge,
only a response to an elaboration request. I do *not*
recognize it as being the defining post of the challenge.
Go ahead, spin some more. Call me a liar, too...
that's funny. Make goofy smileys while you're at
it... and why stop with the 'TRANSLATION'?
Just don't forget this one... it'll follow you to
your grave:
<>
you:
> more babble. i nailed you on it. i recognize my limitations and
> immediately own it. you lie, make excuses, and attempt to dazzle us with
> -------- in hopes of hiding your blatent (sic) ignorance.
me:
You don't have a clue about your limitations... imagine you,
an HVAC tech, making pronouncements about atmospheric
science! That shows *extreme* hubris... you deserve what
you get.
</>
You deserve what you get... remember that.
__
Steve
..
#3476
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11drnqo2f3kc1ad@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:9LkDe.499$LF.381@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net.. .
> > No, you didn't show a lie. I claimed popular use.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i tried to spin truth" :-)
>
> you lied, you are a liar.
Of course I am... otherwise, you'd be a damn
fool, and you can't be a damn fool, we know
that! Right?
>
> > Listen carefully... "otherwise there would be no reason not to replace
> > the HMC"... notice the mistake?
>
> lol you see you think this because your stupid, ignorant, and lying ***
> doesnt understand why an HMC is needed to begin with.
You still don't see your grammatical error!
What a dumbass!
Let's try baby talk...
must be low temp,
otherwise,
there would be no reason
*not* (this not doesn't belong)
to replace the HMC.
If you let the two 'nots' cancel,
you get:
must be low temp,
otherwise,
there would be a reason
to replace the HMC.
So if it's *high* ambient,
there is a reason to replace the HMC?
Jeez, dude... learn English.
> >> nope! that was my original statement to jeff. you jumped in so i gave
> >> you
> >> the criteria, specifically for everyone to see:
>
>> No, I don't accept that... the initial condition stands.
>
> my initial condition to you was -30 degrees as i have posted many times now.
> youre a liar stephen, no matter how hard you try to spin your -------- ive
> clearly shown your lies for what they are.
Look, everybody! Nathan is a welch!
> > You can accuse me of lying all day,
>
> lol as if i need your permission to point out your lies, liar.
Plain as the nose on my face:
>great! now give me an alternative to replacing an HMC in a pinch.
No ambient specification. You, sir, are a charlatan.
> >but you *did* try to slip in more conditions, we can
> >*all* see that.
>
> lol what we have all seen is my inital post to you which CLEARLY stated -30
> degrees. lie liar, it just wont get you anywhere. :-)
Ok, Mr. Welch... here's your post to me:
>and "in a pinch" means an alternative to "doing it right" to get you through
>temporarily when youre "in a pinch" (such as on a roof top on a -30 degree
>day).
The 'such as' condition is by no means limiting... it is
an example, that's why the 'such as' term was used.
Note that this post was not the original challenge,
only a response to an elaboration request. I do *not*
recognize it as being the defining post of the challenge.
Go ahead, spin some more. Call me a liar, too...
that's funny. Make goofy smileys while you're at
it... and why stop with the 'TRANSLATION'?
Just don't forget this one... it'll follow you to
your grave:
<>
you:
> more babble. i nailed you on it. i recognize my limitations and
> immediately own it. you lie, make excuses, and attempt to dazzle us with
> -------- in hopes of hiding your blatent (sic) ignorance.
me:
You don't have a clue about your limitations... imagine you,
an HVAC tech, making pronouncements about atmospheric
science! That shows *extreme* hubris... you deserve what
you get.
</>
You deserve what you get... remember that.
__
Steve
..
#3477
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11drnqo2f3kc1ad@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:9LkDe.499$LF.381@newssvr27.news.prodigy.net.. .
> > No, you didn't show a lie. I claimed popular use.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i tried to spin truth" :-)
>
> you lied, you are a liar.
Of course I am... otherwise, you'd be a damn
fool, and you can't be a damn fool, we know
that! Right?
>
> > Listen carefully... "otherwise there would be no reason not to replace
> > the HMC"... notice the mistake?
>
> lol you see you think this because your stupid, ignorant, and lying ***
> doesnt understand why an HMC is needed to begin with.
You still don't see your grammatical error!
What a dumbass!
Let's try baby talk...
must be low temp,
otherwise,
there would be no reason
*not* (this not doesn't belong)
to replace the HMC.
If you let the two 'nots' cancel,
you get:
must be low temp,
otherwise,
there would be a reason
to replace the HMC.
So if it's *high* ambient,
there is a reason to replace the HMC?
Jeez, dude... learn English.
> >> nope! that was my original statement to jeff. you jumped in so i gave
> >> you
> >> the criteria, specifically for everyone to see:
>
>> No, I don't accept that... the initial condition stands.
>
> my initial condition to you was -30 degrees as i have posted many times now.
> youre a liar stephen, no matter how hard you try to spin your -------- ive
> clearly shown your lies for what they are.
Look, everybody! Nathan is a welch!
> > You can accuse me of lying all day,
>
> lol as if i need your permission to point out your lies, liar.
Plain as the nose on my face:
>great! now give me an alternative to replacing an HMC in a pinch.
No ambient specification. You, sir, are a charlatan.
> >but you *did* try to slip in more conditions, we can
> >*all* see that.
>
> lol what we have all seen is my inital post to you which CLEARLY stated -30
> degrees. lie liar, it just wont get you anywhere. :-)
Ok, Mr. Welch... here's your post to me:
>and "in a pinch" means an alternative to "doing it right" to get you through
>temporarily when youre "in a pinch" (such as on a roof top on a -30 degree
>day).
The 'such as' condition is by no means limiting... it is
an example, that's why the 'such as' term was used.
Note that this post was not the original challenge,
only a response to an elaboration request. I do *not*
recognize it as being the defining post of the challenge.
Go ahead, spin some more. Call me a liar, too...
that's funny. Make goofy smileys while you're at
it... and why stop with the 'TRANSLATION'?
Just don't forget this one... it'll follow you to
your grave:
<>
you:
> more babble. i nailed you on it. i recognize my limitations and
> immediately own it. you lie, make excuses, and attempt to dazzle us with
> -------- in hopes of hiding your blatent (sic) ignorance.
me:
You don't have a clue about your limitations... imagine you,
an HVAC tech, making pronouncements about atmospheric
science! That shows *extreme* hubris... you deserve what
you get.
</>
You deserve what you get... remember that.
__
Steve
..
#3478
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message news:42DDE779.7DE6CB6C@***.net...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > But how do you "suck make it up"?
> If you had common sense you would have been able to plug in a
> couple of words in the below statement to make it make sense: "free
> loading bleeding heart liberals suck make it up
> with their false theories." If you really can't figure it out then I
> truly feel sorry for you.
But the point is... you type in gibberish!
__
Steve
..
#3479
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message news:42DDE779.7DE6CB6C@***.net...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > But how do you "suck make it up"?
> If you had common sense you would have been able to plug in a
> couple of words in the below statement to make it make sense: "free
> loading bleeding heart liberals suck make it up
> with their false theories." If you really can't figure it out then I
> truly feel sorry for you.
But the point is... you type in gibberish!
__
Steve
..
#3480
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: 134a Refrigerant
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message news:42DDE779.7DE6CB6C@***.net...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > But how do you "suck make it up"?
> If you had common sense you would have been able to plug in a
> couple of words in the below statement to make it make sense: "free
> loading bleeding heart liberals suck make it up
> with their false theories." If you really can't figure it out then I
> truly feel sorry for you.
But the point is... you type in gibberish!
__
Steve
..