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. :-)
lol thats the best response you can form? :-) no surprise. the links are there, if you dont like what i snipped feel free to read it.
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. :-)
lol you stool the wind doesnt blow from ground level to the stratosphere.
thats what ive been trying to tell you. your statements arent science. theyre agenda driven speculation and nothing more.
yup. those same engineers wrote the very manuals that i quoted for you. funny, huh? :-)
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) :-)
TRANSLATION --> "i have no response"
Didn't find your answer? Ask the community — no account required.
S
Stephen Cowell
Higher Knowlege... not for you. =20
Science... not Clusterf*cks.
Fool... what's the concentration of Freon? =20
I won the straw poll! Just because you can't smell the scorched meat doesn't mean your ass isn't barbecued... go ahead, ask some of your compatriots here. =20
What weapons? The ones that were destroyed? =20
Tim McVey... your buddy.
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. =20
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=20 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. =20 __ Steve .
S
Stephen Cowell
They're not! =20
provided".
Go ahead...=20 =20
"will be more effective "... that's not conclusive!
"tend to fall"? That's not conclusive!
statements=20
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? =20
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.
NOAA, Nate... vs techie training manuals.
Not as funny as that smiley up your ass! :) =20
Keep doing it, Nate... I won't give up. You are a fool. We all know this. =20
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 .
N
Nathan W. Collier
TRANSLATION --> "i have no response nate, i never expected you to prove me wrong".
depends on how much is vented, but id bet its less than .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the total air around us. :-)
lol theyre laughing at you, only youre to stupid to realize it, and to ignorant to know when to quit. its cool, ill continue to post my links which are written by your engineers that prove you are dead wrong. :-)
here they are again: from
formatting link
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." from
formatting link
(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."
:-)
the ones everyone (without their head stuck in the sand) knows existed and still exist today. just look at the things we _did_ find.
BULLSHIT! the second link is the operators manual for the leak detector that i personnally use. the leak detector AND manual which was designed and written by those same engineers you swear by. :-)
now on top of being an ignorant fool, youre a LIAR. i know in your liberal seminars they teach you that if you tell a like often enough people will eventually believe it but that wont fly here. i responded MANY times to your links CLEARLY showing you the "could be's" that invalidates anything from being conclusive.
N
Nathan W. Collier
EXACTLY! your links are not conclusive. :-)
but the "Refrigerant has a higher specific volume than air, therefore refrigerants will fall when exposed to atmospheric pressures." certainly is! :-)
TRANSLATION --> "i have no response because they clearly prove what youve been saying"
.....which says nothing beyond "could be's". :-)
S
Stephen Cowell
Cute... for a dumbass.
Let's see... that's ten to the negative 57th. Were you aware that there are only ten to the 78th atoms in the observable universe? I didn't think so... you being a dumbass and all... You lose the bet... the computed number of atoms in the planet earth is around ten to the 50th... your figure is smaller than an atom on earth. What a dumbass.
Here's the link, if you're capable of understanding algebra and chemistry:
formatting link
Now, dumbass, let's talk about the *real* 'concentration' of CFC's in the atmosphere. Here's some info and a link:
formatting link
Chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs)=20 This class of compounds is purely man-made in origin. It includes = CFC-11 (CFCl3), CFC-12 (CCl2F2), CFC-113 (C2Cl3F3), and CCl4. These = compounds have been used for many years as solvents, refrigeration = fluids, spray-can propellants, and, more recently, as blowers in = foam-making. Their concentrations have been measured in the atmosphere = since 1978 (WMO, 1985). The annual growth rates for atmospheric = concentrations have been 5% for CFC-11 (Fig.3) and CFC-12, and 1% for = CCl4. The 1983 concentrations of CFC-11 and CFC-12 were 200 pptv (parts = per trillion by volume) and 320 pptv, respectively. The measured = concentration of CFC-113 was 32 pptv in January 1985 and that of CCl4 = was 140 pptv in 1979. The 1990 concentrations are about 280, 484, 60, = and 146 pptv for CFC-11, CFC-12, CFC-113 and CCl4, respectively (IPCC, =
1990). Much attention has been focused on these compounds, because they = are the primary agents causing the destruction of stratospheric ozone. = They have long atmospheric lifetimes (75, 111, and about 50 years for = CFC-11, CFC-12, and CCl4, respectively) (Wuebbles & Edmonds, 1988).=20
Adding all those up, comes out to 970pptv...=20 definitely *not* zero. You were only off by a factor of ten to the 48th... a number not far from the number of atoms on earth.=20 What an incredible lack of scientific acumen... I mean, dumbass.
How would you know? They're not lining up to support you... and my personal email from this little flamefest is going %100 my way. Not that it matters, much.... you, and anyone that thinks like you do, has their head in the sand.
You mean the explosives that were looted? The high-tech stuff that can be used to make atom bombs? The stuff that Rumsfeld let slip away? It's being used to kill US soldiers in roadside bombs every day... it will probably end up here, since we did Iraq on the cheap. I don't know of any WMD found, do you?
=20
Call one... ask him. I double dare you... btw, have you read the 'TOUBLESHOOTING' (sic) section of your leak-checker manual?
Seriously, using a leak-checker manual to debate the NOAA... pure dumbass material, Nate. Go back to school.
I have posted links you haven't responded to...=20 you never responded to this:
formatting link
In the stratosphere, the region of the atmosphere between about 10 and =
50 kilometers (6-30 miles) above the Earth's surface, ozone (O3) plays a = vital role by absorbing harmful ultraviolet radiation from the sun. = Stratospheric ozone is threatened by some of the human-made gases that have been = released into the atmosphere, including those known as chlorofluorocarbons = (CFCs). Once widely used as propellants in spray cans, refrigerants, electronics cleaning agents, and in foam and insulating products, the CFCs had been hailed as the "wonder chemicals." But the very properties that make them useful - chemical inertness, non-toxicity, insolubility in water - also = make them resistant to removal in the lower atmosphere. CFCs are mixed worldwide by the large-scale motions of the atmosphere = and survive until, after 1-2 years, they reach the stratosphere and are = broken down by ultraviolet radiation. The chlorine atoms within them are = released and directly attack ozone. In the process of destroying ozone, the = chlorine atoms are regenerated and begin to attack other ozone molecules... and = so on, for thousands of cycles before the chlorine atoms are removed from = the stratosphere by other processes.
When will you respond to this link I've posted twice now? And why do I have to have been to a 'liberal seminar'? I hereby deny it... I'm kicking your ass with my own two frontal lobes, no help necessary, beyond standing on the shoulders of giants. Don't worry if you don't get the reference... completely out of your league. __ Steve .
S
Stephen Cowell
Nothing would be, to you... dropout. =20
Outdoors?
Pitiful! 'translation'... just how *much* HS did you=20 actually make it through? __ Steve .
D
Dave Milne
Question: At this stage, do you two think you can convince the other ?
Dave Milne, Scotland '91 Grand Wagoneer, '99 TJ
Nothing would be, to you... dropout.
Outdoors?
Pitiful! 'translation'... just how *much* HS did you actually make it through? __ Steve .
L
L.W.( Ãill ) Hughes III
N
Nathan W. Collier
spin all you wish, i proved you wrong and its obvious that it burns. :-)
heh....its been such easy work that "support" simply isnt required.
BUWHAHAHA! the old "my email" ploy. i _knew_ it was only a matter of time before you resorted that that one. :-)
the NOAA statement is nothing more than "could be's". my link, written by the very engineers you seem to worship, clearly states that refrigerant falls due to its weight with no room for doubt. you can pout, cry, whine, or attempt to spin off the issue as many times as you like but the statement is absolute and conclusive. here ya go. :-)
from
formatting link
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." from
formatting link
(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."
:-)
N
Nathan W. Collier
that statement is absolute. atomic weight does not change being in or out of doors.
nice try, liberal. :-)
N
Nathan W. Collier
lol aint it the truth!
S
Stephen Cowell
You still want to play 'Scientist and Dumbass'... OK.. :)
You don't know what mental work is... remember dropping out?
Well?
refrigerant=20
formatting link
In the stratosphere, the region of the atmosphere between about 10 and =
50 kilometers (6-30 miles) above the Earth's surface, ozone (O3) plays a = vital role by absorbing harmful ultraviolet radiation from the sun. = Stratospheric ozone is threatened by some of the human-made gases that have been = released into the atmosphere, including those known as chlorofluorocarbons = (CFCs). Once widely used as propellants in spray cans, refrigerants, electronics cleaning agents, and in foam and insulating products, the CFCs had been hailed as the "wonder chemicals." But the very properties that make them useful - chemical inertness, non-toxicity, insolubility in water - also = make them resistant to removal in the lower atmosphere. CFCs are mixed worldwide by the large-scale motions of the atmosphere = and survive until, after 1-2 years, they reach the stratosphere and are = broken down by ultraviolet radiation. The chlorine atoms within them are = released and directly attack ozone. In the process of destroying ozone, the = chlorine atoms are regenerated and begin to attack other ozone molecules... and = so on, for thousands of cycles before the chlorine atoms are removed from = the stratosphere by other processes.
When will you respond to this link I've posted thrice now? =20 __ Steve playing 'Scientist and Dumbass'.... guess who stars as Dumbass... .
S
Stephen Cowell
Question: Who do *you* believe, Dave? Remember the trade winds?
Obviously, there's no convincing going on... but I'm having fun wiping up the floor. As long as Nate keeps weebling back up, I'm punching... __ Steve
S
Stephen Cowell
So, your answer is, hold the probe directly under the leak, even in the wind? Why not downwind, human? __ Steve : ) .
S
Stephen Cowell
Is he stranger than Jeff Gannon?
: ) __ Steve .
N
Nathan W. Collier
dont be so hard on yourself stephen. eventually youll get used to defeat. :-)
im not surprised that you would equate intelligence with education. its the only way youre able to suppliment your own short-comings.
....tell me again about how all your "personal emails" say youre right. i laughed so hard the first time (literally) and i could use another good one. :-)
N
Nathan W. Collier
as the instructions state, you hold the probe below the suspected leak point because the engineers (those guys whom you seem to worship so) have determined that refrigerant falls due to its weight. just as i told you.
from
formatting link
near the bottom underelectronic leak detectors:"Refrigerant has a higher specific volume than air, therefore refrigerantswill fall when exposed to atmospheric pressures. This means leak detectingon the bottom sides of the piping or components will be more effective indetecting a leak and will save you time." from
formatting link
(operating manual of the electronicleak detector that i personally use):"Be aware that refrigerants are invariably heavier than air and will tend tofall from or collect below actual leak points/sources. Searching belowareas of potential leaks is invariably the most effective and reliable wayof finding such."
:-)
S
Stephen Cowell
Yes, you still want to play dumbass. Ok, I'll kick you some more...=20
If you notice, I didn't mention intelligence... I mentioned mental work. The kind that gets you through high school. I called you stupid *before*.
Let's see... you didn't capitalize the first word of the sentences, you left the apostrophe off of I'm, you're, and It's, misspelled 'suppliment' and 'shortcomings'. Plus, you think we invaded Iraq in order to liberate their women, who were unable to attend school before we got there... and you believe that Freon is heavier than air, but Argon is not. You think there is less than one molecule of Freon on the planet Earth...=20 you don't think Bush told any lies. You refuse to listen to any link that disagrees with your feeble understanding of science... You're not really a good poster child for the=20 'non-college intelligent' crowd.=20
Jeez... can't even create a sensible sentence. What's the 'literally' refer to above? There's no 'figuratively' implied... don't try to use brains you don't have.
Like I said, %100 for me... and %100 for me here, as well. I'm getting fond of saying this, so I'll say it again... I'm the scientist, and you're the dumbass, and the archives will keep that information forever.
: ) __ Steve .
S
Stephen Cowell
And since your booklet doesn't tell you this, you don't know enough to hold the probe both under and *downwind* of the leak? __ Steve
: )
.
Join the Discussion
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Didn't find your answer?
Ask the community — no account required
Report Content
You are reporting this content to the moderators. They will look at it
ASAP.