wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:21:19 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

I was discussing the difference in performance. I don't think anyone
would
do well getting hit by a propeller.

Then what is the point?


That a propeller guard doesn't significantly impact performance.

How do you know that? Just curious.
It is clear you have never shopped for propellers


I'm willing to take thunder's word for it. He seems pretty credible to me.
From the limited amount I've read on the subject in the last few days, it
seems about right.

--
Nom=de=Plume

On Apr 12, 9:18*am, hk wrote:
On 4/12/10 9:12 AM, Loogypicker wrote:





On Apr 11, 10:58 am, *wrote:
On 4/11/10 10:15 AM, Loogypicker wrote:

On Apr 10, 6:10 pm, * *wrote:
On 4/10/10 5:16 PM, Jack wrote:

On Apr 10, 4:47 pm, * * *wrote:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...9ETMVA02..html

So now what, will this become a safety standard of the industry that
props should have guards?

A guy jumped in the water behind a boat with a running motor. *The
driver of the boat puts the boat in reverse, and hits the guy with the
prop.

The boat manufacturer has to pay.

That's so screwed up it's almost unbelievable. *Almost.

A president and his vice president lie about WMDs, and tens of thousands
of people paid the price with their lives and pocketbooks.

That's so screwed up it is unbelievable.

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym

You act like a ****ing little boy out on the playground - *everyone
look at me, look at me, pay attention to me*.....
What in HELL does this thread have to do with politics, at least until
you injected your bull****?

Here's a secret for you...I don't give a damn about what passes for
thought in your pea-sized brain. BTW, it's spring here. When are you
planning to make your promised visit here to engage in criminal assault
and home invasion?

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym-Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Please show where I ever said I was going to criminally assault
anyone. Then please show where I said I was going to do a home
invasion. See you in a few weeks, but please answer these allegations
of yours first.

*snerk

Told you before, fart-for-brains...you're not welcome here and if you
attempt to push the issue through assault or home invasion or vandalism,
it will end badly for you.

--http://tinyurl.com/ykxp2ym- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As suspected....nothing, so you resort to your low life childish name
calling..... Now where in HELL are you getting this "home invasion or
vandalism" crap?

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 22:29:14 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

Nope, you hold the coffee and steer with your belly. Probably sticks out
and hits the wheel anyway.

Come on Bill we all know you steer with your knee.


I do, but plum probably uses the belly method.

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:49:25 -0400, Larry wrote:


Amazing. Two morons and a big settlement. I hope they can appeal
it.
It's worse than the lady who spilled coffee on her lap and sued
because
it was hot.

Yeah, well there is hot, and then there is what McDonald's was
selling.
Eight days in hospital, with skin grafts, hot.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

When you are 70 years old, and a coffee drinker, you should have
learned coffee is hot. And not be so stupid as to take off the
protective lid and place the cup in your crotch as your son drives
over the curb leaving McD's. And the $24million was reduced to about
1.4 million. After medical and legal costs, I bet she had enough to
buy a senior coffee at McD's.

We're all eternally grateful that you're not in the legal profession,
a judge, or qualified to sit on a jury.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Unlike you, I am qualified to sit on a jury, and have a couple times.

Unlike me? There's no bar for an attorney to sit on a jury. Feel free to
prove otherwise.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Your attitude would get the defense to toss you.

Uh huh... wow. I must have really hit a nerve. I'm betting you're pretty
homophobic also. Why don't you tell us about all your gay friends.

--
Nom=de=Plume


I see you can not answer a question again. Just like Harry to change
subject.

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:50:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 22:58:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

If you want some light reading take a peek
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...4pcs. txt.pdf


I couldn't get the link to work... I seriously doubt one's home would be
required to have an energy star label like my fridge does.

The link works, you may have just not waited long enough for it to
load.
... and "energy star label" is exactly the language they use. I doubt
it means you have to put a sticker on the door but you will have a
notation on your title deed.



I'll try again later. There's already tons of paperwork required for a
sale... all sorts of disclosure statements. It's likely the same bs.

This is going to be a huge bureaucracy coming up around energy
savings. The states will have to hire a bunch of federally certified
inspectors and if they refuse or are unable the feds will step in and
bill the residents accordingly. I got an Email that makes this bill
sound worse than it is but in trying to wade through it, I find plenty
of troubling things. This is another brick of paper one person could
barely pick up. It may be years before we really understand the
ramifications of it. (much like that H,R 4577 we are arguing about)


I think I'll withhold judgement until I read some of the facts from
organizations dedicated to dissecting such things.


--
Nom=de=Plume

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:21:19 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

I was discussing the difference in performance. I don't think anyone
would
do well getting hit by a propeller.

Then what is the point?


That a propeller guard doesn't significantly impact performance.

How do you know that? Just curious.
It is clear you have never shopped for propellers


I'm willing to take thunder's word for it. He seems pretty credible to
me. From the limited amount I've read on the subject in the last few
days, it seems about right.

--
Nom=de=Plume


I run a boat with the ultimate ducted propeller. About 15% decrease in
performance.

I think it's operator error, since you're in error on most other things.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 22:29:14 -0700, "Bill McKee"
wrote:

Nope, you hold the coffee and steer with your belly. Probably sticks out
and hits the wheel anyway.

Come on Bill we all know you steer with your knee.


I do, but plum probably uses the belly method.

You probably use your head, which is why you need to have auto insurance.

--
Nom=de=Plume

"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:49:25 -0400, Larry wrote:


Amazing. Two morons and a big settlement. I hope they can appeal
it.
It's worse than the lady who spilled coffee on her lap and sued
because
it was hot.

Yeah, well there is hot, and then there is what McDonald's was
selling.
Eight days in hospital, with skin grafts, hot.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

When you are 70 years old, and a coffee drinker, you should have
learned coffee is hot. And not be so stupid as to take off the
protective lid and place the cup in your crotch as your son drives
over the curb leaving McD's. And the $24million was reduced to about
1.4 million. After medical and legal costs, I bet she had enough to
buy a senior coffee at McD's.

We're all eternally grateful that you're not in the legal profession,
a judge, or qualified to sit on a jury.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Unlike you, I am qualified to sit on a jury, and have a couple times.

Unlike me? There's no bar for an attorney to sit on a jury. Feel free
to prove otherwise.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Your attitude would get the defense to toss you.

Uh huh... wow. I must have really hit a nerve. I'm betting you're pretty
homophobic also. Why don't you tell us about all your gay friends.

--
Nom=de=Plume


I see you can not answer a question again. Just like Harry to change
subject.



Mr. McGoo. The only question in the above is MY question: Unlike me? So,
you're an idiot. Oh wait, we already knew that.


--
Nom=de=Plume

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
m...

"nom=de=plume" wrote in message
...
"Bill McKee" wrote in message
...

"thunder" wrote in message
t...
On Sat, 10 Apr 2010 21:49:25 -0400, Larry wrote:


Amazing. Two morons and a big settlement. I hope they can
appeal it.
It's worse than the lady who spilled coffee on her lap and sued
because
it was hot.

Yeah, well there is hot, and then there is what McDonald's was
selling.
Eight days in hospital, with skin grafts, hot.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm

When you are 70 years old, and a coffee drinker, you should have
learned coffee is hot. And not be so stupid as to take off the
protective lid and place the cup in your crotch as your son drives
over the curb leaving McD's. And the $24million was reduced to
about 1.4 million. After medical and legal costs, I bet she had
enough to buy a senior coffee at McD's.

We're all eternally grateful that you're not in the legal
profession, a judge, or qualified to sit on a jury.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Unlike you, I am qualified to sit on a jury, and have a couple times.

Unlike me? There's no bar for an attorney to sit on a jury. Feel free
to prove otherwise.

--
Nom=de=Plume


Your attitude would get the defense to toss you.

Uh huh... wow. I must have really hit a nerve. I'm betting you're pretty
homophobic also. Why don't you tell us about all your gay friends.

--
Nom=de=Plume


I see you can not answer a question again. Just like Harry to change
subject.



Mr. McGoo. The only question in the above is MY question: Unlike me? So,
you're an idiot. Oh wait, we already knew that.


--
Nom=de=Plume



Enough of your idiocy, back in the igore mode. Don't cry. Harry will not
like you if you do.

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 13:34:26 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:50:30 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

wrote in message
m...
On Sun, 11 Apr 2010 22:58:05 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

If you want some light reading take a peek
http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...4pcs. txt.pdf


I couldn't get the link to work... I seriously doubt one's home would
be
required to have an energy star label like my fridge does.

The link works, you may have just not waited long enough for it to
load.
... and "energy star label" is exactly the language they use. I doubt
it means you have to put a sticker on the door but you will have a
notation on your title deed.



I'll try again later. There's already tons of paperwork required for a
sale... all sorts of disclosure statements. It's likely the same bs.

This is going to be a huge bureaucracy coming up around energy
savings. The states will have to hire a bunch of federally certified
inspectors and if they refuse or are unable the feds will step in and
bill the residents accordingly. I got an Email that makes this bill
sound worse than it is but in trying to wade through it, I find plenty
of troubling things. This is another brick of paper one person could
barely pick up. It may be years before we really understand the
ramifications of it. (much like that H,R 4577 we are arguing about)


I think I'll withhold judgement until I read some of the facts from
organizations dedicated to dissecting such things.

Actually if you have an opinion it is time to contact your senator
although I understand this is probably DOA in the senate


Hmm... well, that was said of the healthcare bill, but if it is DOA, then
why is it so disturbing?

--
Nom=de=Plume