134a Refrigerant

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
.. .
> You deserve what you get... remember that.

exactly. i grossed over a grand today alone. what did you do, loser? :-)

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://InlineDiesel.com
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
http://BighornRefrigeration.com

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
. ..
> See... I'm right.

lol youre a stupid ass. i work to make money and im doing both quite well.
:-) not a lot of cryo to worry about in montana.

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://InlineDiesel.com
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
http://BighornRefrigeration.com

"Nathan W. Collier" > wrote in message
...
> "Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
> . ..
> > See... I'm right. Took me long enough to
> > draw him out... looks like your refrigeration
> > education is incomplete, Nate... stop by
> > the VLA in New Mexico for some lessons.
> > Tell Rudy I said hi.
>
> lol youre a stupid ass. i work to make money and im doing both quite
well.
> :-) not a lot of cryo to worry about in montana.

Well then... were you just forgetting, or
were you lying, when you wrote:

>the only area i dont consider myself qualified on yet is ground
>source/geo thermal.

???
__
Steve
..

"Nathan W. Collier" > wrote in message
...
> "Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
> .. .
> >> TRANSLATION --> "i never let facts get in the way of my story"
> >
> > Obviously!
>
> yes, it is quite evident/obvious that you never let facts get in the way
of
> your lies.

Spinning Nate, got to go 'round... we all
read the challenge. I met the challenge,
all original specific criteria met, and won.
You welched... you suck, we all know
that now (if we didn't have a clue before).

> > The pot is calling the toaster black.
>
> nope, just calling a liar a liar.

You're just daubing the walls of your
chimp cage, Nate... we all read what
you wrote. Remember what brought
me into this incredibly long, stupid
thread? You pronounced decades
of atmospheric science as junk... you
even claimed that if someone could
show you the mechanism or connection
that you'd change your tune. Suprise,
suprise! your tune didn't change...
a big lie. Then you made your biggest
error... claiming to 'recognize and own'
your limitations. Complete and utter
crap... this is what I wrote in response
to that whopping lie:

<>
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
> 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.
</>

It's very important to 'own your limitations', Nate...
and 'immediately' would not be soon enough for me.
__
Steve
..

"Nathan W. Collier" > wrote in message
...
> "Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > You deserve what you get... remember that.
>
> exactly. i grossed over a grand today alone. what did you do, loser?
:-)

Do you mean what did I "do", or what did I "earn"?
And which day, exactly, are you referring to?
__
Steve
..

trophy .sig:
"i recognize my limitations and
immediately own it."... Nate.

"L.W. (ßill) Hughes III" > wrote in message
...
> Stephen Cowell wrote:
> >
> > Are you trying to frighten small children with that pic?
> > It doesn't impress me....
> >
> > Ok, here's an easy one for you... I did this one for
> > extra credit in a college calc class. Explain (without
> > your buddy Google) how the volume of liquid in
> > a cylindrical tank on its side is computed, using only a
> > dipstick marked in inches from a hole in the top...
> > just like you did every day when you read the pumps.
> > Only this time, you don't get a chart... all you get is
> > the radius and length of the cylinder. No cheating!
> > Explain in words, with minimal equations.

> I've got better things to do than work a problem that has nothing
> to do with chlorofluorocarbons. I can tell you the answer contains
> infinity, as there is not one known other than a depth in inches.

Damn! that's funny! You found a sideways 8 in a simple
volume calculation! How many times have you stuck the
tanks and read the pumps? Tens of thousands? And never
once (even with your advanced mathematics knowlege)
did you ever get curious about why that tank chart was
written like it was.

Here's the first clue... the halfway point of the volume
is the same, either standing up or laying down. This
means that you know the half-volume from a simple
(pi*(r^2)*L)/2 equation. That's half the area of the end
circle times the length.

One of the big things your math teacher couldn't
get you to realize... in math, we seek *general*
solutions... once you have the general solution,
the rest of the examples are simply grinding
through the equations. Here we seek the general
solution to the volume of liquid in a partially-filled
cylindrical tank, on its side... something you have
had to do literally thousands of times in your life.
Yet you have no clue... and continue to claim
"I've gone through Calculus". If so, you went
through it like corn through a goose.
__
Steve
..

"Nathan W. Collier" > wrote in message
...
> "Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> > "Nathan W. Collier" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> <bull**** snipped>
> >>
> >> your bull**** doesnt do the job. liar.
> >
> > We all read the challenge.
>
> exactly. and you never provided me with what i asked you for. i asked
you
> for credible links. instead you gave me noaa/epa and even a link with
> "proudliberal" in the domain. yeah liar, thats credible. <rolling eyes>

Are we confused here? You seem to be referring to
the NOAA information I provided... that's not the issue
referred to by "challenge" above. You challenged Jeff
to find a replacement for a head pressure control... I said
you could just bypass the control if the ambient wasn't
going to get low. Then you started squawking about
some supposed specification that the ambient *was*
low... but your supposed 'specification' had the
disclaimer 'such as', so in effect was not a specification
at all, and in fact was not part of the original challenge,
but a modification that you sought to introduce once
you saw that your goose was cooked. Telling that you
never addressed my point... that the head pressure
control could be bypassed at high ambient. Very
telling... you welched. *That's* some Repub values!

Now you want to talk about CFC's in the atmosphere
again... you refer to the 'credibility' of my links. I
explained that you are operating under a logical
fallacy, the fallacy of 'ad hominem - abusive'.
Using this logical fallacy, I would be required to
come up with links or information that *you*
would agree are credible... an obvious trap, one
which I refused to fall into. You never addressed
the science of the links I presented in a meaningful
way... the links you presented had no usefulness
beyond finding a refrigerant leak in a closed space...
putting the detector downwind from the leak source
wasn't even mentioned! although I did get you to
admit that downwind would be the proper place for
it... thus proving the limits of your source's applicability.
Talk about 'credibility' of sources... you used a
leak detector manual to attempt to debunk decades of
established atmospheric science! Of course, I then
maneuvered you into making a claim about your
limitations... one that was very revealing in that
you obviously have no clue about your limitations,
since you attempt do do away with decades of
established science with a wave of your hand.

I advise you to 'recognize and own' your limitiations,
Nate... it may be the only thing you get out of this
thread with.
__
Steve
..

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
...
> Well then... were you just forgetting, or
> were you lying, when you wrote:

lol reach all you want. if you think its a victory that im not doing cryo
IN MONTANA then it just shows how pathetic you really are for any type of
loose victory. :-)

just what do YOU know about cryo? whats that, only what youve read online?
BUWAHAHA! :-)

--
Nathan W. Collier
http://InlineDiesel.com
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
http://BighornRefrigeration.com

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
...
>> yes, it is quite evident/obvious that you never let facts get in the way
> of
>> your lies.
>
> Spinning Nate, got to go 'round

yeah no ****, its all youre capable of. well, that and LYING when you spin
full circle and get hit in the face with your own bull****. :-)


> I met the challenge,

LIAR. i asked youf or credible sources and you give me sites with
"proudliberal" in the url. i know why you would stretch for such a lie but
nobody is falling for it.


>> nope, just calling a liar a liar.
>
> You're just daubing the walls

TRANSLATION --> "the truth hurts, nate.....please stop bitch-slapping me
with it".


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://InlineDiesel.com
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
http://BighornRefrigeration.com

"Stephen Cowell" > wrote in message
...
>> exactly. i grossed over a grand today alone. what did you do, loser?
> :-)
>
> Do you mean what did I "do", or what did I "earn"?

both, as im quite sure that neither will amount to much above zero. :-)


> And which day, exactly, are you referring to?

......dumb ass cant read a date on a message header. :-)


--
Nathan W. Collier
http://InlineDiesel.com
http://7SlotGrille.com
http://UtilityOffRoad.com
http://BighornRefrigeration.com