Basskisser,
I have watched you two argue this one to death, and I still have not figured
out your position. Are you saying that some oil is burned/consumed in the
combustion process and some oil is exhausted without actually being burned?

If that is correct, how is that different than what Steve is saying?


"basskisser" wrote in message
om...
(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
...
On 10 Jul 2003 04:59:03 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
...
On 9 Jul 2003 12:13:48 -0700, (basskisser) wrote:

(Steven Shelikoff) wrote in message
Also, do you or do you NOT contend that burned and consumed do
NOT
mean the same?

I'll answer that directly if you answer my followon question
directly.
My answer is that I contend that consumed can mean burned. It can
also
mean other things. For instance, fusion and fission come to mind.

Now, do you or do you NOT contend that "burned" and "consumed in
the
combustion process" DO mean the same thing?

correct, I do NOT contend that "burned" and "consumed in the
combustion process" mean the same thing. IF it said "consumed VIA
combustion", yes. However, it simply says that oil is consumed
(through many different ways) DURING the combustion PROCESS." The

No no no, wrong. It does NOT say oil is consumed DURING the
combustion
process. Are you really that incapable of reading? It says oil is
consumed IN the combustion process.

You idiot. It says "in the combustion PROCESSS". Get it? NOT
SPECIFICALLY DURING the precise combustion. It is CONSUMED in the
PROCESS of combustion. Man, you are thick.

You're wrong again. You really can't read, can you? It doesn NOT say
consumed in the process of combustion. Although if it did, that would
still be the same thing as burned. Now, let's try this yet one more
time. And I'll put quotes around the things to compare.

Is it your contention that something being "consumed in the combustion
process" is somehow different than something being "burned"?

And if it is somehow different, then when the technical reference says:

"When a piston moves down its cylinder, a thin film of oil is left on
the cylinder wall. During the power stroke, part of this oil layer is
consumed in the combustion process."

where does the oil that is consumed in the combustion process go if it
isn't burned? Is it your contention that the thin film of oil that is
stuck to the sides of the cylinder can somehow make it's way out of the
engine during the power stroke without being burned?

Remember that the oil has to be consumed "during the power stroke" and
the oil is "on the cyilinder wall" when it is consumed "in the
combustion process." So please tell us all, if the oil is not burned,
what way does an engine lose oil that fits all those criteria, i.e., on
the cylinder wall during the power stroke in the combustion process?

Steve

Oh my God, you ARE the most thick headed person in the world!!! I
can't WAIT to show this to the others in my office!! Laughs over beer
will be on YOU tonight!
Is not "the combustion process" the same as the process of combustion?
I simply paraphrased to simplify to TRY to get you to understand a
VERY basic flaw in your diatribe. But, you are either too stupid to
get it, or just refuse to.
Now, WHY and WHERE did you come up with something as absurd as "the
oil has to be consumed during the power stroke? Also, are you really
so dumb that you think that the ONLY way oil can be consumed is by
being burned?? You see, the intent isn't that the oil is necessarily
consumed in a global, universal, or galactical way, it's consumed only
as far as an ENGINE is concerned. Jeez.