"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11akjtojsid50d@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:jD9qe.2327$751.676@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com ...
> > It is a science of probabilities
>
> horseshit. your beliefs are unproven.

How the hell would you know?

>
>
> > EPA? Read further down! You have an EPA
> > cert? How ironic! NATE is an EPA partner...
>
> nate is abiding by the LAW and nothing more.

I'll just bet you abide by the law.. when someone's
looking, anyway.

>
> > are you the Site Manager?
>
> im a service tech, that is just one of many multi million dollar rack
> systems that i am solely responsible for.

Oh, are you the only person on site? Not that
it matters... one viewing of that film has convinced
me that I wouldn't be able to stand your job
for lots more than you're making... asphalt
plants were a lot more fun than that. I have
a creative job now... I make about half what
you make, and I love it. Wouldn't trade places
for the world.

> > You never gave a link
> > supporting your assertion, btw... that's a little telling,
> > don't you think?
>
> <SIGH>.....fine. my statement is that refrigerants cannot make it to the
> stratosphere because they are heavier than air therefore they fall. when
> attempting to detect a refrigerant leak using an electronic leak detector
> you run your probe BENEATH where you suspect the leak. why? because the
> refrigerant FALLS!

You don't get it, and I'm not going to
waste much more breath trying to make you
get it... after this post, it's ridicule, buddy.

>
> from http://www.bacharach-training.com/methods.htm 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 http://tif.com/manuals/TIFZX1.pdf (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."
>
> now stephen, tell me again all about how the hvac industry agrees with you?
> tell me again how refrigerants rise above the air.
>
> of course, we already know you simply cannot admit to it.

For you, your technical training manuals are the Bible,
and carry incontrovertible information that cannot be wrong.
You imagine that your special status as an HVAC tech
gives you an insight that countless scientists and engineers
don't have. Think about that one... *engineers*, Nate, the
ones that design and build the systems you are only qualified
to leak-check. They use science... you are like the altar-boy,
whereas the *engineer* is the Priest. Whatever the Priest
tells you, you must do... because you don't posess the
Higher Knowlege. Engineers write the dumbed-down tomes
you refer to when repairing your systems... rest assured
that they understand partial pressures, and probabilities
of distribution, much better than you do. Don't you see
what an idiot you look like, saying that Freon can't be
in the upper atmosphere at all, since it's heavier than
air? Hell, Nate, when it's released, it becomes *part*
of air... air is a mixture of gasses, some of which are
heavy, and some of which are light. You say the reason
is 'concentration'... if all the argon fell out of the air
right now, we'd die! We'd be in a layer of argon
%1 as high as the (normalized) atmosphere! When you
climb a mountain, why don't you reach the oxygen
layer, then the nitrogen layer, then the helium layer?
'Concentration'!! you say. This implies mixing,
does it not? All these gasses... differing weights,
*mixed* up? Well, I can assure you that Freon
*mixes* just like all the others.
__
Steve
gloves off
..

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11akjtojsid50d@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:jD9qe.2327$751.676@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com ...
> > It is a science of probabilities
>
> horseshit. your beliefs are unproven.

How the hell would you know?

>
>
> > EPA? Read further down! You have an EPA
> > cert? How ironic! NATE is an EPA partner...
>
> nate is abiding by the LAW and nothing more.

I'll just bet you abide by the law.. when someone's
looking, anyway.

>
> > are you the Site Manager?
>
> im a service tech, that is just one of many multi million dollar rack
> systems that i am solely responsible for.

Oh, are you the only person on site? Not that
it matters... one viewing of that film has convinced
me that I wouldn't be able to stand your job
for lots more than you're making... asphalt
plants were a lot more fun than that. I have
a creative job now... I make about half what
you make, and I love it. Wouldn't trade places
for the world.

> > You never gave a link
> > supporting your assertion, btw... that's a little telling,
> > don't you think?
>
> <SIGH>.....fine. my statement is that refrigerants cannot make it to the
> stratosphere because they are heavier than air therefore they fall. when
> attempting to detect a refrigerant leak using an electronic leak detector
> you run your probe BENEATH where you suspect the leak. why? because the
> refrigerant FALLS!

You don't get it, and I'm not going to
waste much more breath trying to make you
get it... after this post, it's ridicule, buddy.

>
> from http://www.bacharach-training.com/methods.htm 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 http://tif.com/manuals/TIFZX1.pdf (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."
>
> now stephen, tell me again all about how the hvac industry agrees with you?
> tell me again how refrigerants rise above the air.
>
> of course, we already know you simply cannot admit to it.

For you, your technical training manuals are the Bible,
and carry incontrovertible information that cannot be wrong.
You imagine that your special status as an HVAC tech
gives you an insight that countless scientists and engineers
don't have. Think about that one... *engineers*, Nate, the
ones that design and build the systems you are only qualified
to leak-check. They use science... you are like the altar-boy,
whereas the *engineer* is the Priest. Whatever the Priest
tells you, you must do... because you don't posess the
Higher Knowlege. Engineers write the dumbed-down tomes
you refer to when repairing your systems... rest assured
that they understand partial pressures, and probabilities
of distribution, much better than you do. Don't you see
what an idiot you look like, saying that Freon can't be
in the upper atmosphere at all, since it's heavier than
air? Hell, Nate, when it's released, it becomes *part*
of air... air is a mixture of gasses, some of which are
heavy, and some of which are light. You say the reason
is 'concentration'... if all the argon fell out of the air
right now, we'd die! We'd be in a layer of argon
%1 as high as the (normalized) atmosphere! When you
climb a mountain, why don't you reach the oxygen
layer, then the nitrogen layer, then the helium layer?
'Concentration'!! you say. This implies mixing,
does it not? All these gasses... differing weights,
*mixed* up? Well, I can assure you that Freon
*mixes* just like all the others.
__
Steve
gloves off
..

 

"Nathan W. Collier" <MontanaJeeper@aol.com> wrote in message news:11akjtojsid50d@corp.supernews.com...
> "Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:jD9qe.2327$751.676@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com ...
> > It is a science of probabilities
>
> horseshit. your beliefs are unproven.

How the hell would you know?

>
>
> > EPA? Read further down! You have an EPA
> > cert? How ironic! NATE is an EPA partner...
>
> nate is abiding by the LAW and nothing more.

I'll just bet you abide by the law.. when someone's
looking, anyway.

>
> > are you the Site Manager?
>
> im a service tech, that is just one of many multi million dollar rack
> systems that i am solely responsible for.

Oh, are you the only person on site? Not that
it matters... one viewing of that film has convinced
me that I wouldn't be able to stand your job
for lots more than you're making... asphalt
plants were a lot more fun than that. I have
a creative job now... I make about half what
you make, and I love it. Wouldn't trade places
for the world.

> > You never gave a link
> > supporting your assertion, btw... that's a little telling,
> > don't you think?
>
> <SIGH>.....fine. my statement is that refrigerants cannot make it to the
> stratosphere because they are heavier than air therefore they fall. when
> attempting to detect a refrigerant leak using an electronic leak detector
> you run your probe BENEATH where you suspect the leak. why? because the
> refrigerant FALLS!

You don't get it, and I'm not going to
waste much more breath trying to make you
get it... after this post, it's ridicule, buddy.

>
> from http://www.bacharach-training.com/methods.htm 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 http://tif.com/manuals/TIFZX1.pdf (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."
>
> now stephen, tell me again all about how the hvac industry agrees with you?
> tell me again how refrigerants rise above the air.
>
> of course, we already know you simply cannot admit to it.

For you, your technical training manuals are the Bible,
and carry incontrovertible information that cannot be wrong.
You imagine that your special status as an HVAC tech
gives you an insight that countless scientists and engineers
don't have. Think about that one... *engineers*, Nate, the
ones that design and build the systems you are only qualified
to leak-check. They use science... you are like the altar-boy,
whereas the *engineer* is the Priest. Whatever the Priest
tells you, you must do... because you don't posess the
Higher Knowlege. Engineers write the dumbed-down tomes
you refer to when repairing your systems... rest assured
that they understand partial pressures, and probabilities
of distribution, much better than you do. Don't you see
what an idiot you look like, saying that Freon can't be
in the upper atmosphere at all, since it's heavier than
air? Hell, Nate, when it's released, it becomes *part*
of air... air is a mixture of gasses, some of which are
heavy, and some of which are light. You say the reason
is 'concentration'... if all the argon fell out of the air
right now, we'd die! We'd be in a layer of argon
%1 as high as the (normalized) atmosphere! When you
climb a mountain, why don't you reach the oxygen
layer, then the nitrogen layer, then the helium layer?
'Concentration'!! you say. This implies mixing,
does it not? All these gasses... differing weights,
*mixed* up? Well, I can assure you that Freon
*mixes* just like all the others.
__
Steve
gloves off
..

 

Can't argue with that. See, we agree occasionally...

"Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:0jrqe.2460$751.1458@newssvr30.news.prodigy.co m...

I don't believe in selling the troops short... they're
our kids, and deserve our support. But I'm *not*
going to let all this distract me from the big problem...
the US people were lied to in a systematic way.
..

 

Can't argue with that. See, we agree occasionally...

"Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:0jrqe.2460$751.1458@newssvr30.news.prodigy.co m...

I don't believe in selling the troops short... they're
our kids, and deserve our support. But I'm *not*
going to let all this distract me from the big problem...
the US people were lied to in a systematic way.
..

 

Can't argue with that. See, we agree occasionally...

"Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:0jrqe.2460$751.1458@newssvr30.news.prodigy.co m...

I don't believe in selling the troops short... they're
our kids, and deserve our support. But I'm *not*
going to let all this distract me from the big problem...
the US people were lied to in a systematic way.
..

 

Can't argue with that. See, we agree occasionally...

"Stephen Cowell" <scowell@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:0jrqe.2460$751.1458@newssvr30.news.prodigy.co m...

I don't believe in selling the troops short... they're
our kids, and deserve our support. But I'm *not*
going to let all this distract me from the big problem...
the US people were lied to in a systematic way.
..

 

Who lied to us?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/


Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> Can't argue with that. See, we agree occasionally...

 

Who lied to us?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/


Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> Can't argue with that. See, we agree occasionally...

 

Who lied to us?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/


Matt Macchiarolo wrote:
>
> Can't argue with that. See, we agree occasionally...