Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim, I limited time for frauds. in this case rowell lied straight out to us,
saying that professionally he was an expert in fluid flow. Yet, even his own website drumming up business for his consulting services fails to mention fluid flow experience, let alone expertise. He choice of words right from the get go indicated his fraudulant underpinnings. In the end you reduced himself to arguing that friction in the rudder bearings were the reason reverse flow showed no effects on lateral movement of the rudder. Referring to Derek Rowell: candidly, when I first saw his post and noted his email address, I figured some yo-yo hijacked his address. He claimed professional expertise in fluid flow, but his website make no mention of such, though it does promote his "expertise" in control systems for things such as MRI's. It is sad, though, that you chose to libel him rather than argue the case. Weakens your credibility. JimB |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
sorry about the mistyping.
In the end you reduced himself to arguing that friction in the rudder bearings were the reason should be "he reduced himself" |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
That's a blatant lie, jaxie, you should be ashamed of yourself. Its one thing
to be stupid, that is your right, one which you exercise quite frequently. But to lie so blatantly after you libel someone in unconscionable. It was clear that the last thing you wanted was a professor of mechanical engineering criticizing you logic, so you chased him away. Your behavior was tantamount to admitting that you really don't know what you're talking and were terrified of a rational discussion. "JAXAshby" wrote in message ... Jim, I limited time for frauds. in this case rowell lied straight out to us, saying that professionally he was an expert in fluid flow. Yet, even his own website drumming up business for his consulting services fails to mention fluid flow experience, let alone expertise. He choice of words right from the get go indicated his fraudulant underpinnings. In the end you reduced himself to arguing that friction in the rudder bearings were the reason reverse flow showed no effects on lateral movement of the rudder. Referring to Derek Rowell: candidly, when I first saw his post and noted his email address, I figured some yo-yo hijacked his address. He claimed professional expertise in fluid flow, but his website make no mention of such, though it does promote his "expertise" in control systems for things such as MRI's. It is sad, though, that you chose to libel him rather than argue the case. Weakens your credibility. JimB |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
jeffies, you know more about fluid flow than he does, and you are weak at it.
That's a blatant lie, jaxie, you should be ashamed of yourself. Its one thing to be stupid, that is your right, one which you exercise quite frequently. But to lie so blatantly after you libel someone in unconscionable. It was clear that the last thing you wanted was a professor of mechanical engineering criticizing you logic, so you chased him away. Your behavior was tantamount to admitting that you really don't know what you're talking and were terrified of a rational discussion. "JAXAshby" wrote in message ... Jim, I limited time for frauds. in this case rowell lied straight out to us, saying that professionally he was an expert in fluid flow. Yet, even his own website drumming up business for his consulting services fails to mention fluid flow experience, let alone expertise. He choice of words right from the get go indicated his fraudulant underpinnings. In the end you reduced himself to arguing that friction in the rudder bearings were the reason reverse flow showed no effects on lateral movement of the rudder. Referring to Derek Rowell: candidly, when I first saw his post and noted his email address, I figured some yo-yo hijacked his address. He claimed professional expertise in fluid flow, but his website make no mention of such, though it does promote his "expertise" in control systems for things such as MRI's. It is sad, though, that you chose to libel him rather than argue the case. Weakens your credibility. JimB |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() JAXAshby wrote in message ... Jim, I limited time for frauds. in this case rowell lied straight out to us, saying that professionally he was an expert in fluid flow. Expert is a relative term. Compared to the majority of this news group, he is a profesional expert in fluid flow. Different types of fluid flow compared to those you were thinking of, maybe. I speculate; hydraulics perhaps? A mere tool to him? Yet, even his own website drumming up business for his consulting services fails to mention fluid flow experience, let alone expertise. He choice of words right from the get go indicated his fraudulant underpinnings. Tut tut, Jax. Never use emotive adjectives if you're trying to make a point among thoughtful people. As I said, it reduces your credibility. Just let the facts speak for themselves. JimB |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Expert is a relative term. Compared to the majority of this news
group, he is a profesional expert in fluid flow. Different types of fluid flow compared to those you were thinking of, maybe. I speculate; hydraulics perhaps? A mere tool to him? self-proclaimed "expert" or not, he made statements to this group as fact that were not fact. And he did it from the get-go in a fashion to tell one and all he was b/sing. he is an electrical engineer by training, training he received in the later 1960's in a country with more sheep than people. in an email to me he tried to justify his stance by saying something to effect that the friction in the rudder bearing made the difference. I suspect the good professor had something to contribute, but he claim b/sing, so much I so I figureed someone hijacked his email address and he didn't know. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Expert is a relative term. Compared to the majority of this news
group, he is a profesional expert in fluid flow. Different types of fluid flow compared to those you were thinking of, maybe. I speculate; hydraulics perhaps? A mere tool to him? self-proclaimed "expert" or not, he made statements to this group as fact that were not fact. And he did it from the get-go in a fashion to tell one and all he was b/sing. he is an electrical engineer by training, training he received in the later 1960's in a country with more sheep than people. in an email to me he tried to justify his stance by saying something to effect that the friction in the rudder bearing made the difference. I suspect the good professor had something to contribute, but he claim b/sing, so much I so I figureed someone hijacked his email address and he didn't know. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() JAXAshby wrote in message ... Jim, I limited time for frauds. in this case rowell lied straight out to us, saying that professionally he was an expert in fluid flow. Expert is a relative term. Compared to the majority of this news group, he is a profesional expert in fluid flow. Different types of fluid flow compared to those you were thinking of, maybe. I speculate; hydraulics perhaps? A mere tool to him? Yet, even his own website drumming up business for his consulting services fails to mention fluid flow experience, let alone expertise. He choice of words right from the get go indicated his fraudulant underpinnings. Tut tut, Jax. Never use emotive adjectives if you're trying to make a point among thoughtful people. As I said, it reduces your credibility. Just let the facts speak for themselves. JimB |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Angle of prop shaft - theoretical question. | General | |||
Which way do I turn the torque fin to compensate for the pull? | General | |||
Where to find ramp stories? | General | |||
Push starting your boat | Cruising | |||
Yamaha 100hp pull start | General |