"I'll spend as much of YOUR money as I want!" - Bu$h's Sunday Presidential Address

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"B2431" wrote in message
...

From: "Tarver Engineering"

snip

Dan, on the other hand, is a asshole running an archive troll on me and
wanting me to be nice to him. (ie stupid)

Once again you resort to vulgar and personal attacks rather than answer
a
simple question.

No Dan, Knoyle is an insulting ass and you are quoting his archive troll.
There is noting professional, or friendly, about what you are doing. You
deserve to be flamed off the board, but I have been very patient with you.
If you feel that you are not stupid, then why do you continue to act in a
stupid manner? I can not see how you can expect me to treat you with any
respect at all.

You still haven't given us an example of a tome when I attacked you
personally
or otherwise. I really don't think you will ever respond civilly. Oh
well.

The archive troll is a personal attack and has been an economic attack on
my
business for some years. If I thought Knoyle had a pot to **** in I would
take it away, but he has the protection of nothin to lose. Unlike our
ex-NASA participants, who paid dearly for Dudley's ignorance.



Somewhere I read:
"To argue against an easily verifiable fact for a few months is stupid.
To argue against an easily verifiable fact for three years is insanity."

Oh, yea, that was at:
http://home.att.net/~j.knoyle/the_ta...hronicles.html

One point in dispute (among many) is your claim:
Boeing 727 do not use Pitot Tubes because they are too convenient a home for
mud wasps.
....and then you added some nonsense about using a 'screened over pitot port
instead.'

My claim: A 727 has 3 pitot tubes up on the nose and 2 on the vert. stab.

What do YOU call those pointy things on the nose of every commercial
aircraft?
Why does a 727 have three while a 737 has FOUR. (plus 2 pitot tubes on the
vert. stab.)
Why do the several folks who've tried to explain it to you end up on your
growing idiot list?

One of us is correct while the other is an idiot (or insane).

"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"B2431" wrote in message
...

From: "Tarver Engineering"

snip

Dan, on the other hand, is a asshole running an archive troll on me
and
wanting me to be nice to him. (ie stupid)

Once again you resort to vulgar and personal attacks rather than
answer
a
simple question.

No Dan, Knoyle is an insulting ass and you are quoting his archive
troll.
There is noting professional, or friendly, about what you are doing.
You
deserve to be flamed off the board, but I have been very patient with
you.
If you feel that you are not stupid, then why do you continue to act in
a
stupid manner? I can not see how you can expect me to treat you with
any
respect at all.

You still haven't given us an example of a tome when I attacked you
personally
or otherwise. I really don't think you will ever respond civilly. Oh
well.

The archive troll is a personal attack and has been an economic attack
on
my
business for some years. If I thought Knoyle had a pot to **** in I
would
take it away, but he has the protection of nothin to lose. Unlike our
ex-NASA participants, who paid dearly for Dudley's ignorance.



Somewhere I read:
"To argue against an easily verifiable fact for a few months is stupid.
To argue against an easily verifiable fact for three years is insanity."

Knoyle, I already know you are a mental case.

All anyone has to do is compare Henri Pitot's invention to our discussion,
to know you are an idiot, jimmy. The archive troll raises you to village
idiot, but I suppose it does keep you from eating the piece.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Jim Knoyle" wrote in message
...

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"B2431" wrote in message
...

From: "Tarver Engineering"

snip

Dan, on the other hand, is a asshole running an archive troll on me
and
wanting me to be nice to him. (ie stupid)

Once again you resort to vulgar and personal attacks rather than
answer
a
simple question.

No Dan, Knoyle is an insulting ass and you are quoting his archive
troll.
There is noting professional, or friendly, about what you are doing.
You
deserve to be flamed off the board, but I have been very patient with
you.
If you feel that you are not stupid, then why do you continue to act
in
a
stupid manner? I can not see how you can expect me to treat you with
any
respect at all.

You still haven't given us an example of a tome when I attacked you
personally
or otherwise. I really don't think you will ever respond civilly. Oh
well.

The archive troll is a personal attack and has been an economic attack
on
my
business for some years. If I thought Knoyle had a pot to **** in I
would
take it away, but he has the protection of nothin to lose. Unlike our
ex-NASA participants, who paid dearly for Dudley's ignorance.



Somewhere I read:
"To argue against an easily verifiable fact for a few months is stupid.
To argue against an easily verifiable fact for three years is insanity."

Knoyle, I already know you are a mental case.

All anyone has to do is compare Henri Pitot's invention to our discussion,
to know you are an idiot, jimmy. The archive troll raises you to village
idiot, but I suppose it does keep you from eating the piece.


We'll need a bit of translation for this bit of gibberish.

As usual, you've snipped the text that you can't handle.
What's so difficult about admitting what the five pointy things
on a Boeing 727 are called?

You *still* haven't shown us even ONE actual application of
P1T0.

You haven't refuted it, so I guess you accept the fact that the
fitting labeled PITOT on the 747 Mach Airspeed Switch is
connected to the lower right pointy thing on the nose. Did you
ever figure out what the fitting labeled STATIC is connected to?