"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42A5F7F8.4182E7D9@***.net...
> Except, the liberals have banned R-12, based on their ozone
> theories from satellite inferred frequencies, that were not in place
> until after we were grown and out of school. Like, maybe these holes
> have been with earth all along, and are necessary, like it's time to
> melt the Antarctica, change the ocean currents to start the coming ice
> age. A time to be born and a time to die.



Nobody, especially me, is suggesting the rules are good, I am only
suggesting that they are in place. We have them for better or worse, and we
have to go by them until they change. I suspect they will never change
because the people that decide this sort of thing don't care that R12 is
really the cause of ozone depletion or not. They thought there was a link
once and crafted a stupid rule. There is no reason to uncraft the stupid
rule because R134 does the job. Maybe R134 doesn't do the job as
efficiently, but the load difference on an automotive system is negligible.
R134 makes your car cold enough that nipples stand erect and nuts shrivel,
what more do you need?

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42A5F7F8.4182E7D9@***.net...
> Except, the liberals have banned R-12, based on their ozone
> theories from satellite inferred frequencies, that were not in place
> until after we were grown and out of school. Like, maybe these holes
> have been with earth all along, and are necessary, like it's time to
> melt the Antarctica, change the ocean currents to start the coming ice
> age. A time to be born and a time to die.



Nobody, especially me, is suggesting the rules are good, I am only
suggesting that they are in place. We have them for better or worse, and we
have to go by them until they change. I suspect they will never change
because the people that decide this sort of thing don't care that R12 is
really the cause of ozone depletion or not. They thought there was a link
once and crafted a stupid rule. There is no reason to uncraft the stupid
rule because R134 does the job. Maybe R134 doesn't do the job as
efficiently, but the load difference on an automotive system is negligible.
R134 makes your car cold enough that nipples stand erect and nuts shrivel,
what more do you need?

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42A5F7F8.4182E7D9@***.net...
> Except, the liberals have banned R-12, based on their ozone
> theories from satellite inferred frequencies, that were not in place
> until after we were grown and out of school. Like, maybe these holes
> have been with earth all along, and are necessary, like it's time to
> melt the Antarctica, change the ocean currents to start the coming ice
> age. A time to be born and a time to die.



Nobody, especially me, is suggesting the rules are good, I am only
suggesting that they are in place. We have them for better or worse, and we
have to go by them until they change. I suspect they will never change
because the people that decide this sort of thing don't care that R12 is
really the cause of ozone depletion or not. They thought there was a link
once and crafted a stupid rule. There is no reason to uncraft the stupid
rule because R134 does the job. Maybe R134 doesn't do the job as
efficiently, but the load difference on an automotive system is negligible.
R134 makes your car cold enough that nipples stand erect and nuts shrivel,
what more do you need?

 

10-4.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> Nobody, especially me, is suggesting the rules are good, I am only
> suggesting that they are in place. We have them for better or worse, and we
> have to go by them until they change. I suspect they will never change
> because the people that decide this sort of thing don't care that R12 is
> really the cause of ozone depletion or not. They thought there was a link
> once and crafted a stupid rule. There is no reason to uncraft the stupid
> rule because R134 does the job. Maybe R134 doesn't do the job as
> efficiently, but the load difference on an automotive system is negligible.
> R134 makes your car cold enough that nipples stand erect and nuts shrivel,
> what more do you need?

 

10-4.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> Nobody, especially me, is suggesting the rules are good, I am only
> suggesting that they are in place. We have them for better or worse, and we
> have to go by them until they change. I suspect they will never change
> because the people that decide this sort of thing don't care that R12 is
> really the cause of ozone depletion or not. They thought there was a link
> once and crafted a stupid rule. There is no reason to uncraft the stupid
> rule because R134 does the job. Maybe R134 doesn't do the job as
> efficiently, but the load difference on an automotive system is negligible.
> R134 makes your car cold enough that nipples stand erect and nuts shrivel,
> what more do you need?

 

10-4.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> Nobody, especially me, is suggesting the rules are good, I am only
> suggesting that they are in place. We have them for better or worse, and we
> have to go by them until they change. I suspect they will never change
> because the people that decide this sort of thing don't care that R12 is
> really the cause of ozone depletion or not. They thought there was a link
> once and crafted a stupid rule. There is no reason to uncraft the stupid
> rule because R134 does the job. Maybe R134 doesn't do the job as
> efficiently, but the load difference on an automotive system is negligible.
> R134 makes your car cold enough that nipples stand erect and nuts shrivel,
> what more do you need?

 

10-4.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> Nobody, especially me, is suggesting the rules are good, I am only
> suggesting that they are in place. We have them for better or worse, and we
> have to go by them until they change. I suspect they will never change
> because the people that decide this sort of thing don't care that R12 is
> really the cause of ozone depletion or not. They thought there was a link
> once and crafted a stupid rule. There is no reason to uncraft the stupid
> rule because R134 does the job. Maybe R134 doesn't do the job as
> efficiently, but the load difference on an automotive system is negligible.
> R134 makes your car cold enough that nipples stand erect and nuts shrivel,
> what more do you need?

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42A5F2DF.338B9A53@***.net...
> Yes it's physically impossible for our hemisphere to exchange
> atmospheres. Unless you can make the water in your sink to drain
> clockwise in our northern side.

?? What planet are you on? Are you saying that the air that's
one foot to the north of the equator never exchanges with
the air that's one foot to the south of the equator? Who makes
you exhale when you cross over? There's less than a 10% difference
in measured atmospheric CFC between north and south, btw...
it *does* even out.

> And I say polar flip, as in magnetic north and south poles, it's
> recorded in every rock:

What has the *magnetic* pole to do with our discussion?
You were citing crystal mysticism! Wacky!
__
Steve
..

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42A5F2DF.338B9A53@***.net...
> Yes it's physically impossible for our hemisphere to exchange
> atmospheres. Unless you can make the water in your sink to drain
> clockwise in our northern side.

?? What planet are you on? Are you saying that the air that's
one foot to the north of the equator never exchanges with
the air that's one foot to the south of the equator? Who makes
you exhale when you cross over? There's less than a 10% difference
in measured atmospheric CFC between north and south, btw...
it *does* even out.

> And I say polar flip, as in magnetic north and south poles, it's
> recorded in every rock:

What has the *magnetic* pole to do with our discussion?
You were citing crystal mysticism! Wacky!
__
Steve
..

 

"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:42A5F2DF.338B9A53@***.net...
> Yes it's physically impossible for our hemisphere to exchange
> atmospheres. Unless you can make the water in your sink to drain
> clockwise in our northern side.

?? What planet are you on? Are you saying that the air that's
one foot to the north of the equator never exchanges with
the air that's one foot to the south of the equator? Who makes
you exhale when you cross over? There's less than a 10% difference
in measured atmospheric CFC between north and south, btw...
it *does* even out.

> And I say polar flip, as in magnetic north and south poles, it's
> recorded in every rock:

What has the *magnetic* pole to do with our discussion?
You were citing crystal mysticism! Wacky!
__
Steve
..