Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank Lee
You've repeatedly said it was I who doesn't know what I'm talking about, and not just referring to HHO.
But you've failed to find an erroneous post of mine and refute it.
I can find several posts where YOU were the cheerleader for nonsense.
Is it any different than encouraging someone to lick a frozen flagpole?
What would yet another HHO test prove that dozens or hundreds of previous HHO tests- including tests from people well above layman status- have not?
We HAVE the cannon- actually at least two cannons. One is called EM's proper testing guidelines; keeps people from making claims based on, say, one short fill: http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ery-11445.html
Another is EM's guide for promoting fuel saving devices (aimed at product-pushers but works here too) http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...uel-15251.html
(P.S. I've found this professional engineer's site useful: Fuel saving gadgets - a professional engineer's view
And a forum where real engineers (as opposed to dopes like me) hang out: Eng-Tips Search )
I can't speak for all of EM but I think in spite of all that has transpired, the door is open for anyone that has proof of HHO or any sort of combustion seeding tech that works. Proof being the key word.
But you're right- I've missed the point. Someone is going to have to spell it out for me again because I still don't get it. :/ |
You and others on this forum have the answers to everything.
You embrace the Sagan test. You laugh at the poor HHO guys with their mason jars because they cannot pass the Sagan test to any satisfaction. You say real research supports you because there are no DIRECT studies to prove ANY effects that HHO could have. This only proves there is a lack of direct studies.
You ask for proof. I am working on that. And yet, the same courtesy afforded to some of the builds on this forum are not extended to anything HHO. Those builds are allowed years to bear fruition for far less stringent goals. Am I supposed to have a rigorous study that can pass the Sagan Test completed in the same time frame that the guy with Cloroplast and duct tape completes his project? You imply a lack of proof must correlate with a lack of basis.
So you caught some errors in my posts? So what? Everyone has "errors" due to various and sundry reasons. Should I feel privileged to have attracted your special attention?
So here is the one glaring error in your argument as evidenced in the links you just put out - misplaced authority. You assume some engineer who posts knows everything about a subject. I think you know that to be false. MEs, EEs, CEs, etc. all have their specialties and their limitations. Good ones know these limitations. I am familiar with Eng-Tips. I have used that site for years. And yes, they do discuss HHO but leave the subject as somewhere between snake oil and plausible with caveats. The lack of active CEs in the discussion hindered any real progress to understanding and most of the posters acknowledged this, to their credit.
Back to the need for some decorum in treating HHO posters here in the Corral. If someone wants to test out HHO, let them. Educate them in the rigorous tests they need to perform and let them do what they will do. If they fail or succeed, they provide data. If they disappear, that too is data. Derision and verbal abuse just drives them off and nothing useful is to be found in the whole exercise.
Here is another error - you repeatedly state your posts are irrefutable. That in itself is the error, because . . . we don't care!