No Thread for Tweakers

Guest
When I post solutions on oil and basic necessities for human survival
and you want to discuss sig figs, start another thread.


Bret Cahill
 
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:54:37 -0700 (PDT), BretCahill@peoplepc.com
wrote:

When I post solutions on oil and basic necessities for human survival
and you want to discuss sig figs, start another thread.


Bret Cahill
Click to expand...
Since you seem to be The Messiah, maybe you should post in one of the
religion groups.

John
 
When I post solutions on oil and basic necessities for human
survival
and you want to discuss sig figs, start another thread.

Since you seem to be The Messiah,
Click to expand...
In the chat group of the blind . . .

maybe you should post in one of the
religion groups.
Click to expand...
What? No 0.001% error?


Bret Cahill
 
DB wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
BretCahill wrote:

When I post solutions

!!!!!!!!

Since you seem to be The Messiah

Fooled you.......
Click to expand...

A fool would think so.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

Sporadic E is the Earth's aluminum foil beanie for the 'global warming'
sheep.
 
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 07:58:01 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
<BretCahill@aol.com> wrote:

Liquid fuel costs are increasing 30% a year and that rate is
increasing. Many solutions will take years to implement so the
situation makes any WWII effort look like a picnic. Several decimal
place accuracy may be necessary for the final design work but all that
is necessary -- what am I saying? -- all that is _desirable_ for the
initial conception is basic logic.

The patent office doesn't require or even recommend dimensioning
unless it's critical for the operation of the invention. Only a silly
goose would whine about back of envelope calculations when a new idea
is being introduced.

There is no question the lite posts have entertainment value but if
your comment doesn't amount to at least tens of billions of dollars a
year in energy costs, stay off my threads on alternatives to oil or
you will be ridiculed off them.
Click to expand...
---
I think the ridicule is more likely to be heaped on you, considering
your hare-brained "idea" of circular plowing.

JF
 
Liquid fuel costs are increasing 30% a year and that rate is
increasing. Many solutions will take years to implement so the
situation makes any WWII effort look like a picnic. Several decimal
place accuracy may be necessary for the final design work but all that
is necessary -- what am I saying? -- all that is _desirable_ for the
initial conception is basic logic.

The patent office doesn't require or even recommend dimensioning
unless it's critical for the operation of the invention. Only a silly
goose would whine about back of envelope calculations when a new idea
is being introduced.

There is no question the lite posts have entertainment value but if
your comment doesn't amount to at least tens of billions of dollars a
year in energy costs, stay off my threads on alternatives to oil or
you will be ridiculed off them.

There are plenty of threads out there for bean counters.


Bret Cahill
 
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 10:16:05 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
<BretCahill@aol.com> wrote:

Liquid fuel costs are increasing 30% a year and that rate is
increasing. ?Many solutions will take years to implement so the
situation makes any WWII effort look like a picnic. ?Several decimal
place accuracy may be necessary for the final design work but all that
is necessary -- what am I saying? -- all that is _desirable_ for the
initial conception is basic logic.

The patent office doesn't require or even recommend dimensioning
unless it's critical for the operation of the invention. ?Only a silly
goose would whine about back of envelope calculations when a new idea
is being introduced.

There is no question the lite posts have entertainment value but if
your comment doesn't amount to at least tens of billions of dollars a
year in energy costs, stay off my threads on alternatives to oil or
you will be ridiculed off them.

---
I think the ridicule is more likely to be heaped on you, considering
your hare-brained "idea" of circular plowing.

You know of some theory where plants won't grow in concentric or
spiral furrows?
Click to expand...
---
You know of anyone who makes concentric or spiral combines/harvesters?

JF
 
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 07:58:01 -0700, Bret Cahill wrote:

Liquid fuel costs are increasing 30% a year and that rate is increasing.
Many solutions will take years to implement so the situation makes any
WWII effort look like a picnic. Several decimal place accuracy may be
necessary for the final design work but all that is necessary -- what am I
saying? -- all that is _desirable_ for the initial conception is basic
logic.

The patent office doesn't require or even recommend dimensioning unless
it's critical for the operation of the invention. Only a silly goose
would whine about back of envelope calculations when a new idea is being
introduced.

There is no question the lite posts have entertainment value but if your
comment doesn't amount to at least tens of billions of dollars a year in
energy costs, stay off my threads on alternatives to oil or you will be
ridiculed off them.
Click to expand...
Exactly where are "your threads", Bret? The ones here are Usenet,
accessible to the public. But if you stay on "your threads", you need not
fear ridicule, especially if no one knows where they are. Here, there's
no guarantee.
 
Bret Cahill wrote:
What is a "concentric or spiral combine/harvester?" Did you mean a
harvester that has a turning radius? If so the answer is "yes." All
self powered farm machinery can turn.
Click to expand...

Contour plowing has been accepted as the best choice for
generations. It minimizes wasted land, and reduces the chance of
topsoil erosion to a bare minimum.

So, you want to waste a lot of valuable farmland, and lose topsoil
just to farm in circles?

Are you just stupid online or in real life, too? What a maroon.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

Sporadic E is the Earth's aluminum foil beanie for the 'global warming'
sheep.
 
Liquid fuel costs are increasing 30% a year and that rate is
increasing. �Many solutions will take years to implement so the
situation makes any WWII effort look like a picnic. �Several decimal
place accuracy may be necessary for the final design work but all that
is necessary -- what am I saying? -- all that is _desirable_ for the
initial conception is basic logic.

The patent office doesn't require or even recommend dimensioning
unless it's critical for the operation of the invention. �Only a silly
goose would whine about back of envelope calculations when a new idea
is being introduced.

There is no question the lite posts have entertainment value but if
your comment doesn't amount to at least tens of billions of dollars a
year in energy costs, stay off my threads on alternatives to oil or
you will be ridiculed off them.

---
I think the ridicule is more likely to be heaped on you, considering
your hare-brained "idea" of circular plowing.
Click to expand...
You know of some theory where plants won't grow in concentric or
spiral furrows?


Bret Cahill
 
Bret Cahill wrote:
I don't run into anyone that stupid on the street. Maybe I scare away
most the idiots in real life.
Click to expand...

That's because you are the village idiot, for at least six states.


--
http://improve-usenet.org/index.html

If you have broadband, your ISP may have a NNTP news server included in
your account: http://www.usenettools.net/ISP.htm

Sporadic E is the Earth's aluminum foil beanie for the 'global warming'
sheep.
 
Liquid fuel costs are increasing 30% a year and that rate is
increasing. ?Many solutions will take years to implement so the
situation makes any WWII effort look like a picnic. ?Several decimal
place accuracy may be necessary for the final design work but all that
is necessary -- what am I saying? -- all that is _desirable_ for the
initial conception is basic logic.

The patent office doesn't require or even recommend dimensioning
unless it's critical for the operation of the invention. ?Only a silly
goose would whine about back of envelope calculations when a new idea
is being introduced.

There is no question the lite posts have entertainment value but if
your comment doesn't amount to at least tens of billions of dollars a
year in energy costs, stay off my threads on alternatives to oil or
you will be ridiculed off them.

---
I think the ridicule is more likely to be heaped on you, considering
your hare-brained "idea" of circular plowing.

You know of some theory where plants won't grow in concentric or
spiral furrows?

---
You know of anyone who makes concentric or spiral combines/harvesters?
Click to expand...
What is a "concentric or spiral combine/harvester?" Did you mean a
harvester that has a turning radius? If so the answer is "yes." All
self powered farm machinery can turn.

Are you acting dumb or are you really this stupid in real life?

But all this dodges the issue:

Why would someone trying to save $30 biillion a year in diesel want
_any_ kind of conventional [diesel powered] combine out in the fields?

The only reason for the concentric or spiral furrows was to do
everything from a beefed up electrically powered "super pivot" that
required no diesel.

Can you think of any reason why any field operation that could not be
accomplished as well or better from a rotating structure?

Face it: You suggested something ridiculous, that furrows must be
straight. You are in the hole and now you are digging yerself in
deeper and deeper.


Bret Cahill
 
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:30:38 -0700, Bret Cahill wrote:

�Here, there's
no guarantee.

The guarantee is simple:

If some idiot suggests that furrows cannot be in a circle or spiral or
that pivots can be used where contour plowing is necessary, I guarantee he
will be ridiculed.
Click to expand...
Wow, that's really effective. Though, "Your mother is a hamster and your
father smells of elderberries", is much more convincing than your usual
analysis, I'll admit.

I don't run into anyone that stupid on the street. Maybe I scare away
most the idiots in real life.

Skunks don't have that problem either.
Click to expand...

Bret Cahill
Click to expand...
Who simply and silently snips what he can't respond to. And apparently
thinks no one notices.
 
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:35:25 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
<BretCahill@aol.com> wrote:

Liquid fuel costs are increasing 30% a year and that rate is
increasing. ?Many solutions will take years to implement so the
situation makes any WWII effort look like a picnic. ?Several decimal
place accuracy may be necessary for the final design work but all that
is necessary -- what am I saying? -- all that is _desirable_ for the
initial conception is basic logic.

The patent office doesn't require or even recommend dimensioning
unless it's critical for the operation of the invention. ?Only a silly
goose would whine about back of envelope calculations when a new idea
is being introduced.

There is no question the lite posts have entertainment value but if
your comment doesn't amount to at least tens of billions of dollars a
year in energy costs, stay off my threads on alternatives to oil or
you will be ridiculed off them.

---
I think the ridicule is more likely to be heaped on you, considering
your hare-brained "idea" of circular plowing.

You know of some theory where plants won't grow in concentric or
spiral furrows?

---
You know of anyone who makes concentric or spiral combines/harvesters?

What is a "concentric or spiral combine/harvester?" Did you mean a
harvester that has a turning radius? If so the answer is "yes." All
self powered farm machinery can turn.

Are you acting dumb or are you really this stupid in real life?

But all this dodges the issue:

Why would someone trying to save $30 biillion a year in diesel want
_any_ kind of conventional [diesel powered] combine out in the fields?

The only reason for the concentric or spiral furrows was to do
everything from a beefed up electrically powered "super pivot" that
required no diesel.

Can you think of any reason why any field operation that could not be
accomplished as well or better from a rotating structure?

Face it: You suggested something ridiculous, that furrows must be
straight. You are in the hole and now you are digging yerself in
deeper and deeper.
Click to expand...
---
Furrows are straight, for the most part, in large agricultural
operations because that's the most efficient way to plant and harvest
food. If it were cheaper to do it in a circular fashion then someone
in the world would be doing it, but they're not, are they?

JF
 
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:30:38 -0700 (PDT), Bret Cahill
<BretCahill@aol.com> wrote:

?Here, there's
no guarantee.

The guarantee is simple:

If some idiot suggests that furrows cannot be in a circle or spiral or
that pivots can be used where contour plowing is necessary, I
guarantee he will be ridiculed.

I don't run into anyone that stupid on the street. Maybe I scare away
most the idiots in real life.
Click to expand...
---
I think you probably don't see the stupidity in your acquaintances
because "Birds of a feather flock together."


JF
 
What is a "concentric or spiral combine/harvester?" �Did you mean a
harvester that has a turning radius? �If so the answer is "yes." � All
self powered farm machinery can turn.

� �Contour plowing has been accepted as the best choice for
generations.
Click to expand...
Hey, it looks like some Einstein figgered out that straight furrows
ain't no requirement to raise crops!

Now all he needs to do show is where pivots, conventional or
otherwise, -- the only reason for the circular or spiral plowing in
the first place -- are used where contour plowing is necessary.



Bret Cahill
 
�Here, there's
no guarantee.
Click to expand...
The guarantee is simple:

If some idiot suggests that furrows cannot be in a circle or spiral or
that pivots can be used where contour plowing is necessary, I
guarantee he will be ridiculed.

I don't run into anyone that stupid on the street. Maybe I scare away
most the idiots in real life.


Bret Cahill
 
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:54:37 -0700 (PDT), BretCahill@peoplepc.com
wrote:

When I post solutions on oil and basic necessities for human survival
and you want to discuss sig figs, start another thread.
Click to expand...
---
You don't post solutions, you post opinions, and this is USENET, where
anyone can do as they damn well please, with or without your consent.

JF
 
On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 11:27:03 -0400, "Tom Biasi"
<tombiasi***@optonline.net> wrote:

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message
news:ktr784lrkrrkmueqna911b9jrlr3o56vam@4ax.com...
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:54:37 -0700 (PDT), BretCahill@peoplepc.com
wrote:

When I post solutions on oil and basic necessities for human survival
and you want to discuss sig figs, start another thread.


Bret Cahill


Since you seem to be The Messiah, maybe you should post in one of the
religion groups.

John


John,
Could you ay least remove all this groupers crosspost so we don't have to
see them?
:)

Tom
Click to expand...
You aren't amused by lunatic technical ravings?

John
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top