"Nathan W. Collier" > wrote in message =
...
> "Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message=20
> .. .
> >Of course I am... otherwise, you'd be a damn
> >fool, and you can't be a damn fool, we know
> >that! Right?
>=20
> heh...as if we didnt already know that.

Or... you could be a damn fool!
=20
> > You still don't see your grammatical error!
>=20
> lol....crying about grammar is yet another sign of your pitiful =
desperation!

Grammer is how we communicate... if you can't=20
create a proper English sentence, then how do
you expect to be able to make sense to someone?
Your uncomprehending use of the double-negative
precludes understanding what you're trying to
say... indeed, it implies just the opposite.
If you tell your helper "don't not open that valve!",
and he opens it... who's at fault?

>=20
> >>great! now give me an alternative to replacing an HMC in a pinch.
>=20
> > No ambient specification.
>=20
> that wasnt my post to you.....that was my post to jeff. my post to =
YOU=20
> clearly stated -30 degrees.

Spinning.... spinning. How your head does spin!
=20
> >>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).
>=20
> > The 'such as' condition is by no means limiting
>=20
> lol you can squirm like a little weasel all day long and it wont =
change a=20
> thing! i clearly listed -30 degrees and you later accused me of =
trying to=20
> change criteria and slip one in. i have exposed your lies yet again, =
and=20
> its fun to watch you try to squirm. :-D

You forgot "TRANSLATION"... although you
have discovered another goofy smiley to use.
It still doesn't help you change the original=20
specifications of the challenge... which I met
quite adequately. I said just bypass the head
pressure control, as long as ambient wasn't
low... you try to weasel in a condition where
the ambient is low... but you didn't make the
condition, you merely suggested it as an
elaboration of being 'in a pinch'. You are a welch.

> > Call me a liar, too...
>=20
> liar.

Here's a lie for you... someone once suggested to
me that he'd change his views on ozone depletion
when presented with convincing evidence of the
cause-and-effect due to CFC usage... after presenting
reams of high-quality evidence, the person did
not change their views... indeed, he proceeded
to pontificate his own version of atmospheric
science garnered from a leak detector user
manual. I'd call such a person a damn liar, wouldn't
you?

And lest we forget, the millstone around your
neck:

<>
you:
> more babble. i nailed you on it. i recognize my limitations and=20
> immediately own it. you lie, make excuses, and attempt to dazzle us =
with=20
> bull**** 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
..