Sam wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Sam wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Uh, where did I EVER say that? Are you having reading comprehension
problems?

Here is again-

" So, you do realize that that water, in order to cool with any
noticeable
amount, would be quite warm, usually warmer than the ambient air
temperature, don't you?"


I'd STILL like to know, however, how, if you are flowing equal amounts
of water at equal temps., how the ice chest will make it more
effective.

Who said that?

You did. I said that it would make no difference whether the ice was in
an ice chest or in a cardboard box.


*I* said it makes a difference while the ice/water is below ambient and
makes no difference at ambient.
*You* said it makes no difference regardless of ice/water temp.

You said I was wrong.

You are.

LOL!

Holy ****! Are you really that bad at reading comprehension???
Okay, here's an easy one. Show me one bit of proof that the machine
would be more effective with the ice in a chest as opposed to a
cardboard box.

Tim wrote:
Tell us? or, tell you?


basskisser wrote:
Tim wrote:
right.

Right, WHAT then?
And tell us more about THE transatlantic cable, okay?!

I'm sure others would like to hear about THE only transatlantic cable,
but either way is fine.

"basskisser" wrote in message
ps.com...

Sam wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Sam wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Uh, where did I EVER say that? Are you having reading comprehension
problems?

Here is again-

" So, you do realize that that water, in order to cool with any
noticeable
amount, would be quite warm, usually warmer than the ambient air
temperature, don't you?"


I'd STILL like to know, however, how, if you are flowing equal
amounts
of water at equal temps., how the ice chest will make it more
effective.

Who said that?

You did. I said that it would make no difference whether the ice was in
an ice chest or in a cardboard box.


*I* said it makes a difference while the ice/water is below ambient and
makes no difference at ambient.
*You* said it makes no difference regardless of ice/water temp.

You said I was wrong.

You are.

LOL!

Holy ****! Are you really that bad at reading comprehension???
Okay, here's an easy one. Show me one bit of proof that the machine
would be more effective with the ice in a chest as opposed to a
cardboard box.


LOL!

Stanley Barthfarkle wrote:
Well, I take it that you don't believe the article? Prove the writer
wrong. I'll be waiting.



I love you too, man. Peace.

What an intelligent and well thought reply.....NOT.......

I take it that although you have no science to repute the article, you
must goose step to the party and try to negate it, huh?

(refute??)


I prefer the two-step. Goose stepping just looks gay, especially at a party.

I take it that you aren't quite bright enough to provide any
information to back up your statements. So, instead you try to act
humorous and homophobic.

basskisser wrote:
Sam wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...
Sam wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Uh, where did I EVER say that? Are you having reading comprehension
problems?
Here is again-

" So, you do realize that that water, in order to cool with any
noticeable
amount, would be quite warm, usually warmer than the ambient air
temperature, don't you?"


I'd STILL like to know, however, how, if you are flowing equal amounts
of water at equal temps., how the ice chest will make it more
effective.
Who said that?
You did. I said that it would make no difference whether the ice was in
an ice chest or in a cardboard box.

*I* said it makes a difference while the ice/water is below ambient and
makes no difference at ambient.
*You* said it makes no difference regardless of ice/water temp.

You said I was wrong.
You are.

LOL!

Holy ****! Are you really that bad at reading comprehension???
Okay, here's an easy one. Show me one bit of proof that the machine
would be more effective with the ice in a chest as opposed to a
cardboard box.

Bassy,
Have you ever noticed that everyone you debate has reading comprehension
skills? That everyone you debate are as ignorant as can be? I don't
believe anyone in rec.boats has ever been able to follow one of your
arguments, and I really can't remember anyone saying, "You know Bassy, I
think you are correct in this matter". I know there are many people who
agree with you on certain issues, but no one ever supported you in any
of your diatribes. Why is that?

I prefer the two-step. Goose stepping just looks gay, especially at a
party.

Not to mention it's hard on your arches.



Easier than arching your hard on, though.

I love you too, man. Peace.

What an intelligent and well thought reply.....NOT.......

I take it that although you have no science to repute the article, you
must goose step to the party and try to negate it, huh?

(refute??)


I prefer the two-step. Goose stepping just looks gay, especially at a
party.

I take it that you aren't quite bright enough to provide any
information to back up your statements. So, instead you try to act
humorous and homophobic.


I love you, man. Is that homophobic enough?

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Sam wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...
Sam wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Uh, where did I EVER say that? Are you having reading comprehension
problems?
Here is again-

" So, you do realize that that water, in order to cool with any
noticeable
amount, would be quite warm, usually warmer than the ambient air
temperature, don't you?"


I'd STILL like to know, however, how, if you are flowing equal amounts
of water at equal temps., how the ice chest will make it more
effective.
Who said that?
You did. I said that it would make no difference whether the ice was in
an ice chest or in a cardboard box.

*I* said it makes a difference while the ice/water is below ambient and
makes no difference at ambient.
*You* said it makes no difference regardless of ice/water temp.

You said I was wrong.
You are.

LOL!

Holy ****! Are you really that bad at reading comprehension???
Okay, here's an easy one. Show me one bit of proof that the machine
would be more effective with the ice in a chest as opposed to a
cardboard box.

Bassy,
Have you ever noticed that everyone you debate has reading comprehension
skills? That everyone you debate are as ignorant as can be? I don't
believe anyone in rec.boats has ever been able to follow one of your
arguments, and I really can't remember anyone saying, "You know Bassy, I
think you are correct in this matter". I know there are many people who
agree with you on certain issues, but no one ever supported you in any
of your diatribes. Why is that?

Sure they do. It's just that YOUR club doesn't, and will go to any
length to try and make me look wrong. I can supply information beyond
belief, give clear and concise articles to back me up, and on and on,
then when my point is proved beyond anyone's REASONABLE doubt, the name
calling and insults begins. As far as the above goes, I've stated that
the machine wouldn't be anymore effective with the ice in an ice chest
or in a cardboard box, because the water flowing across the ice would
melt the ice at the same rate. Then Sam started that childish name
calling. And STILL hasn't shown anything to the contrary.

Stanley Barthfarkle wrote:
I love you too, man. Peace.

What an intelligent and well thought reply.....NOT.......

I take it that although you have no science to repute the article, you
must goose step to the party and try to negate it, huh?

(refute??)


I prefer the two-step. Goose stepping just looks gay, especially at a
party.

I take it that you aren't quite bright enough to provide any
information to back up your statements. So, instead you try to act
humorous and homophobic.


I love you, man. Is that homophobic enough?

No, simply further shows your ignorance, that's all.

"basskisser" wrote in message
oups.com...

Sure they do. It's just that YOUR club doesn't, and will go to any
length to try and make me look wrong. I can supply information beyond
belief, give clear and concise articles to back me up, and on and on,
then when my point is proved beyond anyone's REASONABLE doubt, the name
calling and insults begins. As far as the above goes, I've stated that
the machine wouldn't be anymore effective with the ice in an ice chest
or in a cardboard box, because the water flowing across the ice would
melt the ice at the same rate. Then Sam started that childish name
calling. And STILL hasn't shown anything to the contrary.

LOL!