Why don't vehicles have aerofoils to partially take the weight of the car?

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

If you can demonstrate complete wrongness, then hypothetically, we have a talking point. But I don't think you have it in you. Additional pretension.
The COMPLETOMETER was sent out for calibration, the battery is fully charged, and awaits your data.
This will be interesting.

You said that the US patent office patents ideas. The US patent office actually says:



It's one of the numerous times where what you post here is completely wrong, a point that you appear to never be able to accept.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

which implies that I'll be buying it. So it's simple cowardice with a dash of avarice.

Just more personal abuse.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

You said that the US patent office patents ideas. The US patent office actually says:



It's one of the numerous times where what you post here is completely wrong, a point that you appear to never be able to accept.

After your completion of a course in reading for comprehension, you'll realize that:
1) the caveats for your false conclusion came in the preceding paragraph.
2) your conclusion is completely wrong.
3) you're nasty.
4) if you continue these ad hominem attacks I'll petition to have you permanently banned from EcoModder.com.
5) you're very close to that threshold.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

Just more personal abuse.

My mother told my siblings and I that, if you allow yourself to be made a doormat, people will walk all over you.
Since you've regularly impugned my character, I feel that I have the right to regularly defend myself every time you slight me.
If you continue to educate yourself, you will ultimately come to the conclusion that, you cannot scientifically defend any counter-theses to my aerodynamic arguments.
None of your 'evidence' has ever altered aerodynamic facts.
Your evidence often supports my theses, not your conclusions.
And as I've stated for over a year now, you don't know what you don't know.
There's never any introspection on your part.
It's seems that it's structurally impossible to conceive that you might be wrong about anything.
The evidence is that, you are wrong about the most important things pertaining to to ecomodding.
But you wouldn't know. It's beyond you. What continually appears to be a clinical condition.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The real abuse is having to sustain the unrelenting attacks, and control the urge to resolve the problem in the only way that would probably work.
You dish it out with the expectation of zero protest or defense.
Utterly amazing!

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

After your completion of a course in reading for comprehension, you'll realize that:
1) the caveats for your false conclusion came in the preceding paragraph.
2) your conclusion is completely wrong.
3) you're nasty.
4) if you continue these ad hominem attacks I'll petition to have you permanently banned from EcoModder.com.
5) you're very close to that threshold.

Unfortunately you're simply continuing to post material here that is incorrect or confused.

Ad hominem - (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

I basically never launch ad hominem attacks, instead I always argue against the position you take. In most cases, those positions are incorrect, misleading or confused.

It is you who constantly hurl personal abuse - the very definition of ad hominem attacks.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

Since you've regularly impugned my character, I feel that I have the right to regularly defend myself every time you slight me.

No I don't. I say what you write here is very often wrong, misleading or confused.

I don't hurl personal abuse, as is your continued behaviour.

[aerohead]

Originally Posted by JulianEdgar

Unfortunately you're simply continuing to post material here that is incorrect or confused.

Ad hominem - (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining.

I basically never launch ad hominem attacks, instead I always argue against the position you take. In most cases, those positions are incorrect, misleading or confused.

It is you who constantly hurl personal abuse - the very definition of ad hominem attacks.

1) you're completely incorrect about the US Patent Office with respect to 'ideas'. That caveat was clearly spelled out in the paragraph preceding the one you circled as an 'exhibit.' Go back to school and learn how to read.
2) I'm clearly not confused about US Patent Office policy with respect to 'ideas.' Your chronic lack of reading comprehension is the chronic source of your confusion. Your problem. Stop making it ours.
3) Every time you use 'misleading' is an ad hominem attack.
4) If I've made a technical mistake, just point it out. You don't have to continually imply that I had intention to sow misinformation.
5) Don't confuse self-defense with abuse. Be thankful for my light handling of these situations.
6) You have no educational foundation upon which to judge my positions, one way or another. You're conclusions about my positions smell of a pretender. You've yet to demonstrate any command of the most significant aspects of road vehicle aerodynamics.
7) If you don't like my responses then I recommend you learn something about aerodynamics or keep your mouth shut. Your ignorant commentary can be extremely difficult to stomach.

[freebeard]

"I know you are, but what am I?"

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

1) you're completely incorrect about the US Patent Office with respect to 'ideas'. That caveat was clearly spelled out in the paragraph preceding the one you circled as an 'exhibit.' Go back to school and learn how to read.
2) I'm clearly not confused about US Patent Office policy with respect to 'ideas.' Your chronic lack of reading comprehension is the chronic source of your confusion. Your problem. Stop making it ours.
3) Every time you use 'misleading' is an ad hominem attack.
4) If I've made a technical mistake, just point it out. You don't have to continually imply that I had intention to sow misinformation.
5) Don't confuse self-defense with abuse. Be thankful for my light handling of these situations.
6) You have no educational foundation upon which to judge my positions, one way or another. You're conclusions about my positions smell of a pretender. You've yet to demonstrate any command of the most significant aspects of road vehicle aerodynamics.
7) If you don't like my responses then I recommend you learn something about aerodynamics or keep your mouth shut. Your ignorant commentary can be extremely difficult to stomach.

More personal abuse, one post after the other.

[JulianEdgar]

Originally Posted by aerohead

4) If I've made a technical mistake, just point it out.

I have, dozens of times.

You just ignore the corrections, deny the corrections, obfuscate the corrections, pretend something else was said, say that black is really white (as you've done with the correction of your statement 'you can patent ideas' - well, no you can't, at least not in the US) - and so on.

I think it is now far better to assume that everything you write here is incorrect, misleading or confused. The exceptions are wonderful, but as far as I can see, they are now quite rare.

And no, that is not an ad hominem attack - it is an attack on what you write here, not you as a person.