Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: Fine Tuning Shifting

On 11/13/2024 7:50 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Mon Nov 11 17:06:45 2024 Zen Cycle  wrote:

On 11/11/2024 1:29 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Fri Sep 13 12:10:23 2024 Zen Cycle  wrote:

On 9/11/2024 8:09 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:

On Wed, 11 Sep 2024 16:57:58 -0400, Zen Cycle wrote:
>

On 9/11/2024 4:25 PM, cyclintom wrote:

On Fri Aug 16 17:32:19 2024 Jeff Liebermann  wrote:

On Fri, 16 Aug 2024 13:51:44 -0400, Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>

No one I've ever worked with in my 40+ years in this industry has
ever been called 'sparky' except for the aforementioned intern. Your
inane claim is about a valid as claiming I'm not an engineer because
I don't call fiber optics light lines.
>
     It was also used to refer to Radio operators and Liebermann could
verify that if he wasn't more interested in protecting your
intelgrity
from your own comments.

>
Sparky was a slang name for the electric chair in US prisons:
<https://greensdictofslang.com/entry/ylyhrla>
>
Sparks was a slang name for a spark gap radio operator or a
theater/film lighting operator:
<https://greensdictofslang.com/entry/2fsl4qy>
>
I spent a large part of my working career in the 2-way radio business
and don't recall anyone being called sparky or sparks.  Same with ham
radio and broadcast engineering.  Such names sound good in movies and
videos, but elsewhere are treated as derogatory.
>
I've previously mentioned that I can easily determine whether someone
has had relevant experience in any trade, profession or disciple by
inspecting the manner in which they handle industry specific names,
acronyms, jargon, technologies, buzzwords, trademarks etc.  Someone
with experience will use all of these correctly.  Someone pretending
to have relevant experience will always make a mess of it.  (Yes, I do
mean always).  Even someone with extensive prior experience, but no
recent experience, will have problems because the jargon often change
with time.  Tom's misuse of industry jargon and inventing new terms,
is a good example of not having any experience.
>
"Better to Remain Silent and Be Thought a Fool than to Speak and
Remove All Doubt"
<https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/17/remain-silent/>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Jeff Liebermann                 jeffl@cruzio.com PO Box 272
http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272 Skype:
JeffLiebermann      AE6KS    831-336-2558

>
>
>
Jeff, you spent most of your life scrabbling around trying to make a
living. Stop trying to convince anyone that you know anything.

>
Tell us again how water is used to put out gasoline fires?

>
Do you always have to prove me right concerning your IQ?

>
I've always proved you wrong about my IQ, as proven (yet again) below.
>
Gasoline butns at

540 degrees F.

>
Gasoline autoignites at 536F. That flash point is -45F. Neither fact
means you can out out a gas fire with water.
>

>
Lithium Ion fires are MUCH hotter and self sustaining. Fire departments no
longer even try to put them out.
>
But of course you knew that, didn't you?

>
yup.
>

>
https://theconversation.com/what-causes-lithium-ion-battery-fires-why-are-
they-so-intense-and-how-should-they-be-fought-an-expert-explains-214470
>
One of these days someone is going to force you to tell the truth -
probably your managers.

>
Oh, you mean like how gasoline fires should be put out with water?
>
    And when your activities come out, you are going

to be SOL.

>
I have a highly visible position. Everyone is aware of my activities -
it's why I've been given consistent raises and promotions, have a PC in
my office to stream bike races during the work day, and no one bats an
eye when I alter my schedule to accommodate daylight for my commutes.
I'm quite sure* no one gives a rats ass if I post to usenet a few times
a day.
>
* and remember, sparky, "quite sure" = "completely confident".
>
-- Add xx to reply
>

>
3

>
>
ooo, september, this one's only two months old!
>

>
Why do you always have to show your ignorance? Its Lower Flammability Limit (LFL) is 1.4% and its Upper Flammability Limit (UFL) is 7.6%. That means that you can extinguish a gas fire simply by cutting off its access to oxygen

>
You can extinguish any fire by cutting off its access to oxygen
>

  with CO2 or even water which can spread gasoline so thinly that the gas concentration is below the flammible limit.

>
Sure sparky - find me a link or a recommendation from any fire
prevention authority who recommends putting out a gasoline fire with
water. CO2, yes, water, no.
>
You've been given links from fire prevention professionals stating very
explicitly  not to put out gasoline fires with water. If you think its
the right way to do, post a link that states so.
>
>

Flunky apparently doesn't mind being a fool if he thinks it will gain him points with Liebermann.

>
I'm not the one digging up three month old discussion and arguing
against fire safety professionals, you little fool.
>

>
And by the way, you still haven't told us how long you've been divorced.

>
That's because I'm not divorced.
>

And gon't even try to say you aren't after telling us that you spend all your time with your "friends."

>
Where did I write that I spend all my time with my friends?
>
Really tommy, you need to stop projecting your shitty marriage on
everyone else.
>
>
-- Add xx to reply

    Only an idiot like you doesn't know that fire departments well know how to put out gas fires with water.

no, tommy, they don't. Only an idiot thinks they do.

 And the drooling idiot doesn't know that LITHIUM ION batteries cannot be put out with CO2 because they generate their own Oxygen.>  This is WHY fire departments tried to use WATER and not CO2 to lower the temperature below the ignition point.

Where did I ever write that Li battery fires are put out with CO2?
ps, why do you insist on shouting LITHIUM ION?
--
Add xx to reply