Matt Macchiarolo

"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42AB4C46.9FAAFBB3@***.net...
> And look where the Al Qaida are now. Isn't it neat to see them
> screwing with their own, over their new democratic government and are no
> longer capable of leading their --------- out side Iraq? Bush done good.

You're confusing "Afganistan" with "Al Qaida." Don't kid yourself...Al Qaida
is still around, and their recruiting soared after we invaded Iraq. Every
time a so-called "leader" is captured, another takes his place.

> Why you people harp about oil, I never understand. It's always been
> easier to buy it from our enemy, rather than produce the oil we have
> inside our lower forty eight.

"Buying from our enemy"...you don't see an inherent conflict of interest?

> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Matt Macchiarolo

"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42AB4C46.9FAAFBB3@***.net...
> And look where the Al Qaida are now. Isn't it neat to see them
> screwing with their own, over their new democratic government and are no
> longer capable of leading their --------- out side Iraq? Bush done good.

You're confusing "Afganistan" with "Al Qaida." Don't kid yourself...Al Qaida
is still around, and their recruiting soared after we invaded Iraq. Every
time a so-called "leader" is captured, another takes his place.

> Why you people harp about oil, I never understand. It's always been
> easier to buy it from our enemy, rather than produce the oil we have
> inside our lower forty eight.

"Buying from our enemy"...you don't see an inherent conflict of interest?

> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Matt Macchiarolo

"L.W. ("ßill") ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42AB4C46.9FAAFBB3@***.net...
> And look where the Al Qaida are now. Isn't it neat to see them
> screwing with their own, over their new democratic government and are no
> longer capable of leading their --------- out side Iraq? Bush done good.

You're confusing "Afganistan" with "Al Qaida." Don't kid yourself...Al Qaida
is still around, and their recruiting soared after we invaded Iraq. Every
time a so-called "leader" is captured, another takes his place.

> Why you people harp about oil, I never understand. It's always been
> easier to buy it from our enemy, rather than produce the oil we have
> inside our lower forty eight.

"Buying from our enemy"...you don't see an inherent conflict of interest?

> God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

Stephen Cowell

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11amm6vt8mkm99a@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:l1Gqe.2570$751.1598@newssvr30.news.prodigy.co m...
> > it means,
> > when you're shown evidence that your belief system
> > is wrong, or needs change, you accomodate that
> > necessary change into your beliefs.
>
> like the links i showed you from "engineers" which clearly show refrigerant
> falls due to its weight.

Higher Knowlege... not for you.

> > and the overwhelming evidence that I presented?
>
> youve given NO evidence. youve given me nothing beyond "could be's" and you
> beg us to believe you. your seminar tactics are worthless here.

Science... not Clusterf*cks.

> > Why aren't we breathing 100%
> > Argon, Nate?
>
> concentration. look it up sometime.

Fool... what's the concentration of Freon?

> > Who the f*ck do you think is raking
> > you over the coals right now?
>
> lol......certainly not you.

I won the straw poll! Just because you
can't smell the scorched meat doesn't mean
your *** isn't barbecued... go ahead, ask some
of your compatriots here.

> > you seriously think he'd
> > have given them to Iran?
>
> i never said a word about iran. im sure bin laden and his network would
> have certainly been accomodating. sad part is that i fear one day those
> weapons will surface HERE.

What weapons? The ones that were destroyed?

> > I feel pretty good about that decade you're describing...
>
> im sure all anti-american socialists do.

Tim McVey... your buddy.

> > Messenger/message Nate... either deal with the information,
> > or put your cranium back in your culo.
>
> you have provided no information. you have provided agenda driven
> speculation full of "could be's" in hopes that the rest of us will be stupid
> enough to fall for it.

The rest of the planet has... you're not
installing CFC's anymore. No amount
of evidence I could (and have) post(ed)
will make you admit your ignorance...
it's a self-perpetuating condition you have.

> > I don't see many links from you, btw...
>
> you asked me for ONE SINGLE link and i gave you two. i can pull up a dozen
> or more links from "engineers" that will explain to search for refrigerant
> leaks below the suspected leakage point because refrigerant falls. youve
> YET to directly respond to those links i provided.

They were from HVAC training courses, fer chrissakes.
I posted NOAA quotes and links that you haven't
responded to... this stuff is done by scientists.
It's the difference between just enough knowlege to fix
a leak, and understanding the operation of the atmosphere.
You see, Nate... you're ignorant. Not only ignorant,
but actively, on-purpose ignorant. This is the most
evil thing you can do to yourself... turn off your brain
so that, no matter what, no information can come in
and change your belief system. Your defense mechanism
is self-perpetuating.
__
Steve
..

Stephen Cowell

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11amm6vt8mkm99a@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:l1Gqe.2570$751.1598@newssvr30.news.prodigy.co m...
> > it means,
> > when you're shown evidence that your belief system
> > is wrong, or needs change, you accomodate that
> > necessary change into your beliefs.
>
> like the links i showed you from "engineers" which clearly show refrigerant
> falls due to its weight.

Higher Knowlege... not for you.

> > and the overwhelming evidence that I presented?
>
> youve given NO evidence. youve given me nothing beyond "could be's" and you
> beg us to believe you. your seminar tactics are worthless here.

Science... not Clusterf*cks.

> > Why aren't we breathing 100%
> > Argon, Nate?
>
> concentration. look it up sometime.

Fool... what's the concentration of Freon?

> > Who the f*ck do you think is raking
> > you over the coals right now?
>
> lol......certainly not you.

I won the straw poll! Just because you
can't smell the scorched meat doesn't mean
your *** isn't barbecued... go ahead, ask some
of your compatriots here.

> > you seriously think he'd
> > have given them to Iran?
>
> i never said a word about iran. im sure bin laden and his network would
> have certainly been accomodating. sad part is that i fear one day those
> weapons will surface HERE.

What weapons? The ones that were destroyed?

> > I feel pretty good about that decade you're describing...
>
> im sure all anti-american socialists do.

Tim McVey... your buddy.

> > Messenger/message Nate... either deal with the information,
> > or put your cranium back in your culo.
>
> you have provided no information. you have provided agenda driven
> speculation full of "could be's" in hopes that the rest of us will be stupid
> enough to fall for it.

The rest of the planet has... you're not
installing CFC's anymore. No amount
of evidence I could (and have) post(ed)
will make you admit your ignorance...
it's a self-perpetuating condition you have.

> > I don't see many links from you, btw...
>
> you asked me for ONE SINGLE link and i gave you two. i can pull up a dozen
> or more links from "engineers" that will explain to search for refrigerant
> leaks below the suspected leakage point because refrigerant falls. youve
> YET to directly respond to those links i provided.

They were from HVAC training courses, fer chrissakes.
I posted NOAA quotes and links that you haven't
responded to... this stuff is done by scientists.
It's the difference between just enough knowlege to fix
a leak, and understanding the operation of the atmosphere.
You see, Nate... you're ignorant. Not only ignorant,
but actively, on-purpose ignorant. This is the most
evil thing you can do to yourself... turn off your brain
so that, no matter what, no information can come in
and change your belief system. Your defense mechanism
is self-perpetuating.
__
Steve
..

Stephen Cowell

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11amm6vt8mkm99a@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:l1Gqe.2570$751.1598@newssvr30.news.prodigy.co m...
> > it means,
> > when you're shown evidence that your belief system
> > is wrong, or needs change, you accomodate that
> > necessary change into your beliefs.
>
> like the links i showed you from "engineers" which clearly show refrigerant
> falls due to its weight.

Higher Knowlege... not for you.

> > and the overwhelming evidence that I presented?
>
> youve given NO evidence. youve given me nothing beyond "could be's" and you
> beg us to believe you. your seminar tactics are worthless here.

Science... not Clusterf*cks.

> > Why aren't we breathing 100%
> > Argon, Nate?
>
> concentration. look it up sometime.

Fool... what's the concentration of Freon?

> > Who the f*ck do you think is raking
> > you over the coals right now?
>
> lol......certainly not you.

I won the straw poll! Just because you
can't smell the scorched meat doesn't mean
your *** isn't barbecued... go ahead, ask some
of your compatriots here.

> > you seriously think he'd
> > have given them to Iran?
>
> i never said a word about iran. im sure bin laden and his network would
> have certainly been accomodating. sad part is that i fear one day those
> weapons will surface HERE.

What weapons? The ones that were destroyed?

> > I feel pretty good about that decade you're describing...
>
> im sure all anti-american socialists do.

Tim McVey... your buddy.

> > Messenger/message Nate... either deal with the information,
> > or put your cranium back in your culo.
>
> you have provided no information. you have provided agenda driven
> speculation full of "could be's" in hopes that the rest of us will be stupid
> enough to fall for it.

The rest of the planet has... you're not
installing CFC's anymore. No amount
of evidence I could (and have) post(ed)
will make you admit your ignorance...
it's a self-perpetuating condition you have.

> > I don't see many links from you, btw...
>
> you asked me for ONE SINGLE link and i gave you two. i can pull up a dozen
> or more links from "engineers" that will explain to search for refrigerant
> leaks below the suspected leakage point because refrigerant falls. youve
> YET to directly respond to those links i provided.

They were from HVAC training courses, fer chrissakes.
I posted NOAA quotes and links that you haven't
responded to... this stuff is done by scientists.
It's the difference between just enough knowlege to fix
a leak, and understanding the operation of the atmosphere.
You see, Nate... you're ignorant. Not only ignorant,
but actively, on-purpose ignorant. This is the most
evil thing you can do to yourself... turn off your brain
so that, no matter what, no information can come in
and change your belief system. Your defense mechanism
is self-perpetuating.
__
Steve
..

Stephen Cowell

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11amm6vt8mkm99a@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:l1Gqe.2570$751.1598@newssvr30.news.prodigy.co m...
> > it means,
> > when you're shown evidence that your belief system
> > is wrong, or needs change, you accomodate that
> > necessary change into your beliefs.
>
> like the links i showed you from "engineers" which clearly show refrigerant
> falls due to its weight.

Higher Knowlege... not for you.

> > and the overwhelming evidence that I presented?
>
> youve given NO evidence. youve given me nothing beyond "could be's" and you
> beg us to believe you. your seminar tactics are worthless here.

Science... not Clusterf*cks.

> > Why aren't we breathing 100%
> > Argon, Nate?
>
> concentration. look it up sometime.

Fool... what's the concentration of Freon?

> > Who the f*ck do you think is raking
> > you over the coals right now?
>
> lol......certainly not you.

I won the straw poll! Just because you
can't smell the scorched meat doesn't mean
your *** isn't barbecued... go ahead, ask some
of your compatriots here.

> > you seriously think he'd
> > have given them to Iran?
>
> i never said a word about iran. im sure bin laden and his network would
> have certainly been accomodating. sad part is that i fear one day those
> weapons will surface HERE.

What weapons? The ones that were destroyed?

> > I feel pretty good about that decade you're describing...
>
> im sure all anti-american socialists do.

Tim McVey... your buddy.

> > Messenger/message Nate... either deal with the information,
> > or put your cranium back in your culo.
>
> you have provided no information. you have provided agenda driven
> speculation full of "could be's" in hopes that the rest of us will be stupid
> enough to fall for it.

The rest of the planet has... you're not
installing CFC's anymore. No amount
of evidence I could (and have) post(ed)
will make you admit your ignorance...
it's a self-perpetuating condition you have.

> > I don't see many links from you, btw...
>
> you asked me for ONE SINGLE link and i gave you two. i can pull up a dozen
> or more links from "engineers" that will explain to search for refrigerant
> leaks below the suspected leakage point because refrigerant falls. youve
> YET to directly respond to those links i provided.

They were from HVAC training courses, fer chrissakes.
I posted NOAA quotes and links that you haven't
responded to... this stuff is done by scientists.
It's the difference between just enough knowlege to fix
a leak, and understanding the operation of the atmosphere.
You see, Nate... you're ignorant. Not only ignorant,
but actively, on-purpose ignorant. This is the most
evil thing you can do to yourself... turn off your brain
so that, no matter what, no information can come in
and change your belief system. Your defense mechanism
is self-perpetuating.
__
Steve
..

Stephen Cowell

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11ammntrdbjq659@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:dkGqe.2575$751.698@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com ...
> >> because your own links are nothing more than "could be's".
>
> > No they're not...
>
> lol......now THERES something conclusive. <rolling eyes>

They're not!

> >> TRANSLATION --> "i have no real response for the links you provided".
>
> >Selective reading is a trait we don't share...
>
> lol what a stool! i gave you links from the hvac industry which CLEARLY
> support my statements (ill quote them again for the benefit of anyone in
> doubt about how ignorant you really are) and you just will not respond
> directly. :-)

Go ahead...

> > > from http://www.bacharach-training.com/methods.htm near the bottom
> > > under
> > > electronic leak detectors:
> > > "Refrigerant has a higher specific volume than air, therefore
> > > refrigerants
> > > will fall when exposed to atmospheric pressures. This means leak
> > > detecting
> > > on the bottom sides of the piping or components will be more effective
> > > in
> > > detecting a leak and will save you time."

"will be more effective "... that's not conclusive!


> > > from http://tif.com/manuals/TIFZX1.pdf (operating manual of the
> > > electronic
> > > leak detector that i personally use)
> > > "Be aware that refrigerants are invariably heavier than air and will
> > > tend
> > > to
> > > fall from or collect below actual leak points/sources. Searching below
> > > areas of potential leaks is invariably the most effective and reliable
> > > way
> > > of finding such."

"tend to fall"? That's not conclusive!

>
> >> those same engineers that you present as being omnipotent wrote the very
> >> manuals that CLEARLY show that refrigerants FALL due to their weight.
>
> > Spoken like a true HVAC altar boy
>
> TRANSLATION --> "youre right nate!" :-) your pitiful attempts at dodging
> my links are funny at this point. that you would defend your statements
> further show your ignorance. youre downright pitiful and i find you quite
> hilarious. i think ill continue to quote these responses. :-)

Your HVAC training links are not worthy of consideration...
however, I did go back and show that even your little
techie links have inconclusive parts to them. Chew on it.

What's the concentration of Freon, Nate?

> > answer me
> > this... outside, on a windy day, where do you hold
> > the leak check probe? BE SPECIFIC.
>
> lol you stool the wind doesnt blow from ground level to the stratosphere.

You can't answer a simple HVAC tech question! I've
even posted links to information about the Polar Vortex...
useless, you refuse to acknowlege them. This is not
an argument, this is a shouting contest. We can both
shout all day long, and make this the longest sorry
OT thread in history... but I'll be the Scientist, and
you'll be the Dumbass, and that's the way that the
archives will have it for eternity.


> > It ain't science, I can certify that.
>
> thats what ive been trying to tell you. your statements arent science.
> theyre agenda driven speculation and nothing more.

NOAA, Nate... vs techie training manuals.


> > Engineers, Nate...
>
> yup. those same engineers wrote the very manuals that i quoted for you.
> funny, huh? :-)

Not as funny as that smiley up your ***! :)

> >> the same engineer that wrote the manuals supporting my statements. :-)
>
> > As I said... the Higher Knowlege is not for you.
>
> lol those same engineers wrote the manuals that i quoted for you (yes, ill
> continue to say that to show what a fool you are and how pitiful your
> argument has become) :-)

Keep doing it, Nate... I won't give up. You
are a fool. We all know this.

> > Higher Knowlege, Nate.... not for you.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i have no response"

No, it's my actual response. You are not fit
for engineering, Nate... you don't have the
correct mindset. Remain a tech, and be happy...
rest assured that the engineers will make rules
to keep you from doing harm. Break the rules,
lose your piece of paper, and your mealticket.
You'll damn well do what the scientist tells you
to do... at least, while someone is watching.
__
Steve
..

Stephen Cowell

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11ammntrdbjq659@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:dkGqe.2575$751.698@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com ...
> >> because your own links are nothing more than "could be's".
>
> > No they're not...
>
> lol......now THERES something conclusive. <rolling eyes>

They're not!

> >> TRANSLATION --> "i have no real response for the links you provided".
>
> >Selective reading is a trait we don't share...
>
> lol what a stool! i gave you links from the hvac industry which CLEARLY
> support my statements (ill quote them again for the benefit of anyone in
> doubt about how ignorant you really are) and you just will not respond
> directly. :-)

Go ahead...

> > > from http://www.bacharach-training.com/methods.htm near the bottom
> > > under
> > > electronic leak detectors:
> > > "Refrigerant has a higher specific volume than air, therefore
> > > refrigerants
> > > will fall when exposed to atmospheric pressures. This means leak
> > > detecting
> > > on the bottom sides of the piping or components will be more effective
> > > in
> > > detecting a leak and will save you time."

"will be more effective "... that's not conclusive!


> > > from http://tif.com/manuals/TIFZX1.pdf (operating manual of the
> > > electronic
> > > leak detector that i personally use)
> > > "Be aware that refrigerants are invariably heavier than air and will
> > > tend
> > > to
> > > fall from or collect below actual leak points/sources. Searching below
> > > areas of potential leaks is invariably the most effective and reliable
> > > way
> > > of finding such."

"tend to fall"? That's not conclusive!

>
> >> those same engineers that you present as being omnipotent wrote the very
> >> manuals that CLEARLY show that refrigerants FALL due to their weight.
>
> > Spoken like a true HVAC altar boy
>
> TRANSLATION --> "youre right nate!" :-) your pitiful attempts at dodging
> my links are funny at this point. that you would defend your statements
> further show your ignorance. youre downright pitiful and i find you quite
> hilarious. i think ill continue to quote these responses. :-)

Your HVAC training links are not worthy of consideration...
however, I did go back and show that even your little
techie links have inconclusive parts to them. Chew on it.

What's the concentration of Freon, Nate?

> > answer me
> > this... outside, on a windy day, where do you hold
> > the leak check probe? BE SPECIFIC.
>
> lol you stool the wind doesnt blow from ground level to the stratosphere.

You can't answer a simple HVAC tech question! I've
even posted links to information about the Polar Vortex...
useless, you refuse to acknowlege them. This is not
an argument, this is a shouting contest. We can both
shout all day long, and make this the longest sorry
OT thread in history... but I'll be the Scientist, and
you'll be the Dumbass, and that's the way that the
archives will have it for eternity.


> > It ain't science, I can certify that.
>
> thats what ive been trying to tell you. your statements arent science.
> theyre agenda driven speculation and nothing more.

NOAA, Nate... vs techie training manuals.


> > Engineers, Nate...
>
> yup. those same engineers wrote the very manuals that i quoted for you.
> funny, huh? :-)

Not as funny as that smiley up your ***! :)

> >> the same engineer that wrote the manuals supporting my statements. :-)
>
> > As I said... the Higher Knowlege is not for you.
>
> lol those same engineers wrote the manuals that i quoted for you (yes, ill
> continue to say that to show what a fool you are and how pitiful your
> argument has become) :-)

Keep doing it, Nate... I won't give up. You
are a fool. We all know this.

> > Higher Knowlege, Nate.... not for you.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i have no response"

No, it's my actual response. You are not fit
for engineering, Nate... you don't have the
correct mindset. Remain a tech, and be happy...
rest assured that the engineers will make rules
to keep you from doing harm. Break the rules,
lose your piece of paper, and your mealticket.
You'll damn well do what the scientist tells you
to do... at least, while someone is watching.
__
Steve
..

Stephen Cowell

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11ammntrdbjq659@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:dkGqe.2575$751.698@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com ...
> >> because your own links are nothing more than "could be's".
>
> > No they're not...
>
> lol......now THERES something conclusive. <rolling eyes>

They're not!

> >> TRANSLATION --> "i have no real response for the links you provided".
>
> >Selective reading is a trait we don't share...
>
> lol what a stool! i gave you links from the hvac industry which CLEARLY
> support my statements (ill quote them again for the benefit of anyone in
> doubt about how ignorant you really are) and you just will not respond
> directly. :-)

Go ahead...

> > > from http://www.bacharach-training.com/methods.htm near the bottom
> > > under
> > > electronic leak detectors:
> > > "Refrigerant has a higher specific volume than air, therefore
> > > refrigerants
> > > will fall when exposed to atmospheric pressures. This means leak
> > > detecting
> > > on the bottom sides of the piping or components will be more effective
> > > in
> > > detecting a leak and will save you time."

"will be more effective "... that's not conclusive!


> > > from http://tif.com/manuals/TIFZX1.pdf (operating manual of the
> > > electronic
> > > leak detector that i personally use)
> > > "Be aware that refrigerants are invariably heavier than air and will
> > > tend
> > > to
> > > fall from or collect below actual leak points/sources. Searching below
> > > areas of potential leaks is invariably the most effective and reliable
> > > way
> > > of finding such."

"tend to fall"? That's not conclusive!

>
> >> those same engineers that you present as being omnipotent wrote the very
> >> manuals that CLEARLY show that refrigerants FALL due to their weight.
>
> > Spoken like a true HVAC altar boy
>
> TRANSLATION --> "youre right nate!" :-) your pitiful attempts at dodging
> my links are funny at this point. that you would defend your statements
> further show your ignorance. youre downright pitiful and i find you quite
> hilarious. i think ill continue to quote these responses. :-)

Your HVAC training links are not worthy of consideration...
however, I did go back and show that even your little
techie links have inconclusive parts to them. Chew on it.

What's the concentration of Freon, Nate?

> > answer me
> > this... outside, on a windy day, where do you hold
> > the leak check probe? BE SPECIFIC.
>
> lol you stool the wind doesnt blow from ground level to the stratosphere.

You can't answer a simple HVAC tech question! I've
even posted links to information about the Polar Vortex...
useless, you refuse to acknowlege them. This is not
an argument, this is a shouting contest. We can both
shout all day long, and make this the longest sorry
OT thread in history... but I'll be the Scientist, and
you'll be the Dumbass, and that's the way that the
archives will have it for eternity.


> > It ain't science, I can certify that.
>
> thats what ive been trying to tell you. your statements arent science.
> theyre agenda driven speculation and nothing more.

NOAA, Nate... vs techie training manuals.


> > Engineers, Nate...
>
> yup. those same engineers wrote the very manuals that i quoted for you.
> funny, huh? :-)

Not as funny as that smiley up your ***! :)

> >> the same engineer that wrote the manuals supporting my statements. :-)
>
> > As I said... the Higher Knowlege is not for you.
>
> lol those same engineers wrote the manuals that i quoted for you (yes, ill
> continue to say that to show what a fool you are and how pitiful your
> argument has become) :-)

Keep doing it, Nate... I won't give up. You
are a fool. We all know this.

> > Higher Knowlege, Nate.... not for you.
>
> TRANSLATION --> "i have no response"

No, it's my actual response. You are not fit
for engineering, Nate... you don't have the
correct mindset. Remain a tech, and be happy...
rest assured that the engineers will make rules
to keep you from doing harm. Break the rules,
lose your piece of paper, and your mealticket.
You'll damn well do what the scientist tells you
to do... at least, while someone is watching.
__
Steve
..