Ask Me Help Desk - Climate Change?

The videos are filled with comments from people that Pantone scammed.

Comment on NeedKarma's post

Wow! Paul and Molly Pantone must have been a really clever team, to scam the United States Patent Office, with patent # 5794601. Does that mean that all U.S. patents ever granted need to be labeled scams until proven otherwise... and If so, proven to whom?

I didn't say he didn't get a patent. The patent office is overflowing with unique patents for items that aren't commercially viable. Why are you equating someone having a patent with being immune from scamming others?

Quote:

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

I didn't say he didn't get a patent. The patent office is overflowing with unique patents for items that aren't commercially viable. Why are you equating someone having a patent with being immune from scamming others?

"Commercially viable" is usually a time-sensitive term. How long was it, from the time the Wright brothers flew their flying machine at Kitty Hawk, North Carolina, until people could pay for a ticket, and ride in an airplane from one city to another? Even after their first flight at Kitty Hawk, people who thought they were much smarter than the Wright brothers kept on insisting that flying was impractical for mankind. Who says the GEET processor will not be commercially viable, at any time in the future? It was demonstrated to work at the USPTO, with existing materials and existing fossel fuel components!

I refer you to the Segway.
If you want to invest your money with Pantone then please do it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by infoguy

Tut317, the main point I was trying to address is the thermal discharge from internal combustion engines in motor vehicles equipped with fuel injectors and catalytic convertors. How you morphed that into a carbon dioxide issue is a mystery to me! All humans exhale, and breathe out carbon dioxide (CO2). That has always been the case. Personally, I don't buy into the CO2 bashing. Have you ever used a hair dryer? Does it pour out huge amounts of CO2, or just heat the air mixture that it draws in? We do ourselves a huge disservice by equating all warming with carbon dioxide! Besides, the animal kingdom and the plant kingdom are in a mutually beneficial relationship. We need oxygen and they need carbon dioxide! But who needs catalytic convertors? NOBODY, if we could get fuel efficiency above 90% . . . but the oil industry wants us to have fuel efficiency (fuel mileage) as low as possible! One way they have achieved that, was to reformulate the fuels so that the droplets had high surface tension, making it very difficult to completely vaporize the liquid fuel. Reformulation was exactly what intentionally killed Charles Pogue's super carburetor designs, because the principle no longer worked on the new fuels. The result is, only ten to twenty percent of the expensive fossel fuel you buy today is converted to mechanical energy, and the rest (eighty to ninety percent of your expensive fuel) is delivered into your catalytic converter, to FINISH burning at extermely high temperature! What mixtures and/or compounds of elements (from the periodic table of elements) is discharged from the tailpipes, I cannot say, but how much HEAT is being released into our atmospere from all those horrendously inefficient machines? There have been a scant few clever people who have come up with methods to circumvent the intentionally high INefficiency of internal combustion fuels, such as using catalytic cracking to reformulate the fuel "on the fly," making it possible to vaporize it much more completely. But it is nearly impossible to vaporize (or, more correctly stated, put air spaces between molecules of) fossel fuels that are being delivered into combustion chambers as a liquid, under high pressure . . . which is exactly why the oil companies like fuel injectors so much more than carburetors! Oil companies are virtually assured that we will have terrible fuel mileage, as compared to the 200 MPG figure that was demonstrated with the Pogue carburetor, around 80 years ago, on huge, heavy cars with monstrous engines in them!

I have to say this. You make a good argument for the disinformation your spewing in many of the posts to bolster your opinion. The problem is that even repeating a lie isn't going to change the fact that it is still a lie.

Do you actually believe that the carburator met its demise because of the oil companies? That's a falacy. The reason for it was because they became too expensive to put on cars due to EPA regulations.
Fuel injectors don't squirt fuel into the cumbustion cycle of an angine they spray it as a micro spray. The heat inside the cylinders vaporizes it instantly.
The EPA is the worst of the offenders with their false dreams and ability to push law without regard to the common good.
Catalytic converters used to be a problem because they allowed excessive amounts of CO2 and other green house gasses to escape unreguleted until they had warmed up to operating temprature. (15 - 20 minutes of driving). The new ones heat up in about 5 minutes. Also the systems that are in place like oxygen sensors have changes to preheated ones so they can start detection earlier.
If 80% of the fuel passing through an enfine went unburned you would foul spark plugs and ruin cylinder walls in a very short time.
When you do go on your rants make sure to include the EPA as they are stopping the technology that can overcome many of the current problems. Their standard (Stoichiometric) guidelines are what they push and its not about anything else. Any deviation outside those guidelines and your motor is not allowed to market.

You might wish to read this for some reference. Even they recommend fuel injection for running an engine lean.

Lean Burn Combustion, 101.

Cal ;you're burdened by facts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

cal ;you're burdened by facts.

Im still waiting on my flux capacitor you promised me from last year.

French fry grease turned into fuel

Lunch and a fill up anyone??

Quote:

Originally Posted by talaniman

French fry grease turned into fuel

Lunch and a fill up anyone???

Not unusual... I know several people personally that are doing that and have for years. I don't because I haven't found a clean source yet. The partially hydrogenated stuff makes a poor quality biodiesel that will cloud and clog up filters in temps as high as the low 60's F. And the locals use at least enough of that to screw it up for me, at least as far as my standards go.

Quote:

Originally Posted by califdadof3

Im still waiting on my flux capacitor you promised me from last year.

That's because I'm trying to bypass the plutonium reactor 1.21 gigawatt requirement to ignite the plasma and go directly to the one that's fueled by extracting hydrogen atoms from garbage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

That's because I'm trying to bypass the plutonium reactor 1.21 gigawatt requirement to ignite the plasma and go directly to the one that's fueled by extracting hydrogen atoms from garbage.

Pour hot grease on the garbage to ignite it, but you have to have the right garbage. I would try dilitium chrystals instead of plutonium, its cheaper.

Dilithium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Dilithium - Memory Alpha, the Star Trek Wiki

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

That's because I'm trying to bypass the plutonium reactor 1.21 gigawatt requirement to ignite the plasma and go directly to the one that's fueled by extracting hydrogen atoms from garbage.

Ohhhhh, no wonder. Heck that's easy. Just look up freeenergyforlifeandforcars.com

Of course if I do that I'll be accused of 'throwing my garbage in the air '.

No way to win.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

of course if I do that I'll be accused of 'throwing my garbage in the air '.

No way to win.

Hey Tom have you stopped beating your wife?