• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About KnowShtuff

  • Rank
  1. Actually, there are more trees now than there were in the 1800's. Watch Penn and Tell's Bullshit Episode about Recycling/Environmentalism. Trees are a renewable resource! I watched those episodes maybe a month ago. Good suggestion. But, beware that they don't have enough time to cover all dynamics of an issue, so it should not be taken as the entire truth. However, they usually do an excellent job of being accurate about specific points that they bring up whether it is a good summary of the whole issue or not.
  2. If you can't attack the message, attack the messenger. People who have issues with reading posts that are longer than the typical one liners, or brief series of them, are intellectual pussies. That was an attack on your message of criticism for the length of my post and anyone who actually thinks that is intelligent for you to criticise. Unfortunately, I have much better things to do and for some reason I have been easily distracted with posting here. The topic is on trees and global warming, or rather the effect that trees have on the environment, AND how the information is presented by mainstream sources like Faux News. I stuck to it without anything close to an off topic "essay" until people started in with polemic, ignorant, assuming ad hominem and I decided to point out how "fscking ridiculous" it was on multiple levels. I don't really care, I just felt like wasting my time owning ignorance. I might have wasted my time enjoying intelligent civil discourse, but little to none was present. Can you honestly look at your post and consider it to be on topic or is it really just off topic, ad hominem, sideline heckling?
  3. fiction. Too much pride on your part to be mature, I guess.
  4. It's good. It's really good. But, not that good.
  5. I guess you do [smoke crack before posting online] if you can't follow the logic? I'm confused because your post as it is could mean various things. I'm confused because in order to better understand what your post means, I'd have to know what you posted before your edit. If you are trying to place me in a box to try to understand me, then it won't work. I bust through boxes. I was going to compliment your posts in this thread as being the best summary. Especially, "Idiots, "Fuck 'em all", "Get $$"; because if you want to get down to the truth then you point out that the whole intelligent civil discourse, revolution movement may not be futile but it has low probability of desired success in our lifetime so in order to make the best of it one might logically agree with your summation. The "jews" part, is also actually considerable, if you are either joking or reading and listening to things like the works of Benjamin Freedman, Jimmy Carter, Chomsky et al to put pieces of the puzzle together. However, any rational criticism of the military industrial complex and politics of Zionism, or Israel as debated by pro-Israel jews versus anti-Israel jews, is often vehemently denigrated as anti-semitism no matter if it is coming from a jew or not and no matter if it actually is anti-semitic or not. So, I cannot agree with such a blanket statement of yours. Worse, you could actually be an ignorant anti-semitic, nazi or something to that effect ... in which case I would abhor those specific prejudices. I guess you can take this as a compliment, but if you are going to result to asinine ad hominem and childish jokes in feeble attempts to put me in any box of foolishness then you can go fuck yourself.
  6. EDIT: quoting your post, for integrity. I have no political party affiliation. I have never consciously let my knowledge or lack of knowledge of my social, geographic, economic or political environment, nor the many that I am aware of that may be outside of the norms that I inherently function in, deter me from individual thinking. To be more precise in reply to your timber-community-comment, I know little to nothing about the timber economy in the entire world and even less about the timber economy in the community that I frequent. And, as previous statements should make clear, even if I did it would not effect the specific replies that I made nor would it effect any replies to a more in depth conversation of the dynamics of the issue beyond acknowledgeing the role of the timber industry rather than drawing biased conclusions based on said role. The only things from your last post that you can be sure of is that you were so asininely arrogant to be so sure of what is actually your incorrect assumption and you closed it with childish ad hominem attacks about what you feel would be a lack of intelligence on my part based on your error of assuming that, and addressing me as if, I was making points that I was not making for reasons that I was not reasoning about. I never even started to precisely argue the degree of environmental impact nor did I deny the existance of any. I simply replied to two posts that made blanket statements that people you might refer to as "all-out drooling retards" would assume to be statistical fact when in reality they are nothing more than erroneous blanket conclusions of polemic hyperbole based on more dynamic truths left unexplained. To break it down more for you, I guess I'll just have to repeat myself. Wait, if I have to repeat myself for you to understand and not be an ass about it ... then could that mean that you are the actual "all-out drooling retard" that you erroneously speculate that I am or the "socially influenced" person that you erroneously speculate I am if not the forementioned? Or could it be that you got so excited about a chance of being a smug intellectual that you spent more time crafting your smart ass remarks then reading my post with practical, unbiased logic hence protraying yourself as nothing more than a polemic pseudo intellectual when that may actually not be your true norm? I'll repeat with rephrasing and a bit of expounding. The used words that I replied to, being "destroyed" and "cannot be replaced", are factually incorrect statements. In order for them to actually be correct, "destroyed" would have to be replaced with "changed" followed by any accurate explanations of the dynamic change and "cannot be replaced" would have to be modified in some manner to acknowledge that the ecosystem has only displaced animals and changed in a manner that does not in fact make it true that said animals "cannot be replaced" but does in fact make some dynamic changes of animal habitat likely - even though you'd have to continue with the dynamics of adaptations, individuality, how the ecosystem is handled after said logging, in what climate conditions, elevations, and more. That reply, to Perf-149's use of words, was posted in the same premise that my reply to your statement about Rupert Murdoch was. The premise of accuracy, truth, statistics, logic etc for maintaining the integrity of conversation. I barely, if at all, actually discussed the essence of the points surrounded by inaccurate verbiage. It is asinine for you to assume all that you assumed as aforementioned, explained, add to the fact that you added a little remark about assuming how the hypothetical area is treated after logging and for what purpose when nobody before you had made such distinction. MAYBE if I had actually argued what you erroneously purported for the reasons that you erroneously purport in consideration of the conditions that you establish for you own satisfaction THEN I might understand your logic of considering mystatements insulting .... but even that is a stretch. Worse, when you look at what I actually said and why I said it without assuming all that you did, it is absurd that anyone would be offended and the only people who would have any reason to be upset would be people who want to pass of such erroneous statesments, that I pointed out for integrity, for their geo-social agenda that would in that case be in fact derived from a movement, culture or "community" or group of whatever term that you wish to call it rather than individual thoughts of logic, truth and science. People interested in logic, truth and science would simply commend me for trying to maintain the integrity of the discussion. This is one of those moments when I ask - "why even bother?". If you would like to recant your asinine assumptions and ad hominem, followed with an apology, then I will do my best to consider this to be a human error on your part that does not speak poorly of your intelligence, bias or approach to discourse and critical thinking. After reading this post, feel free to read the rest of mine in this forum and elsewhere and maybe you will think even more about how inaccurate your speculation about my intelligence is. Good night and good luck.
  7. I agree with the essence of the point you make - Rupert Murdoch's operations are generally good examples of poor journalism and excellent political hackery. He seems to have the worst impact on the USA. But, this is not a statistical fact. Worse, his operations don't work by his work alone. Worse, he has equally pathetic competition.
  8. Have you ever been to an area that has been logged away? Yes. They are. It's not a pretty sight. Animals, insects even, are displaced.... just like when our homes were built. Deer, birds of all sorts, insects of all sorts, possum, racoons, squirrels, chipmunks, snakes, frogs, and more creatures that were displaced by the building of my home make their way into my yard (and sometimes attempt to make their way into my house) nearly every day; and a vacant post-logged area is more welcoming than a housed area. Your irreplaceable animals claim, as stated, is bunk. You need to do a lot more to an ecosystem than log it in order to destroy it. Hiroshima and Nagasaki are BEAUTIFUL places today with a prosperous ecosystem. Just in case you are forgetting, the USA "destroyed" the area with Atomic Bombs. Your irreplaceable ecosystem claim, as stated, is bunk.
  9. Compression test before and after wouldn't be bad for a better understanding of the condition, but it won't solve anything. I wouldn't rebuild an engine on a 1k$ car that is apparently just a daily drive beater. If you want a better condition engine, get a used one. It will mostly likely save you substantial money, time and hassle and decrease the risk of finding out your rebuild clearance specs are off enough for catastrophic engine failure shortly after rebuild. . But, it seems the poster would mention problems other than smog if this [compression] were a serious issue noticeably effecting the use of the car. I know what entrapment is. I qualified the comment with "essentially". Peace.
  10. Added EGR Valve cleaning in step 2. Moved spark plugs and wires from step 2 to step 5.
  11. Holy shit. I can't believe I just typed that much for this thread. Be grateful, or else.
  12. Biodiversity. Beware of fuckers trying to kill plants/trees, animals AND PEOPLE (depopulation, eugenics) because "CO2 will kill the planet".
  13. Yep. Good reminder to get more specific. I've helped about 20 cars pass smog with a tune up. What is a relative tune up, the nubie car mechanics ask? Here is what I would do, in this order. 1) Before you do all all of this, a great tool that CAN POTENTIALLY have TREMENDOUSLY POSITIVE EFFECT, and is good to use anyways for preventative care, is called Seafoam! It is an internal engine cleaner. I've HEARD good things about their Deep Creep ( , but I only have EXPERIENCE, with RAVINGLY SUCCESSFUL TESTIMONIAL, with Seafoam Motor Tune Up. I've made multiple engines change from running as if they had a broken rod, blown piston seals, multiple misfiring cylinders and were about ready for the junk yard to almost brand new --- LARGELY due to the help of this product. Some people call it a scam, or "snake oil", because they are ignorant or they have only tried to use it on engines that don't have much sludge or carbon buildup on the pistons, piston walls, intake plenum, crank case, etc .... so there is very little smoke show for them to see it working and very little change in how the vehicle runs. If they used it on an engine in the opposite condition, they would rave about it like I have. I have tried it on multiples of clean, average and horribly dirty engines. I know what I am talking about. 1 can is about 10$ at local generic auto store. I buy 1-3 cans depending on what car I am working on and what I know about how it is running/how dirty the internals likely are. Each can gives about 3 uses, but I count each can as 1 treatment. After 1 treatment or 1 whole can, it is important to change the oil before using it again. You can try maybe 1-2 more cans at your own risk, which is less risky the more oil capacity your engine takes, but you better make sure that you have the maximum amount of oil in the engine that your engine specifies --- which can be found in the manual or by calling a dealer or auto store and asking how many quarts of engine oil the engine takes. This is important so that your engine has enough lube to not cause excessive internal wear or even engine seizure. The more seafoam and the less engine oil you have in the engine, the more risk. 50% Seafoam to Oil ratio is the most I would ever risk .... and really that is pushing it. In most cases I would never exceed even 25% of the oil. However, you also need to make sure that you do not have too much total fluid in you crank case, be it oil or seafoam or a combo of both. The fluid capacity should never exceed that of the original specification, but do not panic if you go 1 quart over. Anything over 1 guart of excess is something to be concerned about so a quart should be drained. ALSO keep in mind to not only check the dipstick for it's level between uses, but pay attention to the color and lubricity. For the purpose of this cleaning test, the darker the better because it is hopefully more oil than seafoam. But, the lubricity quality needs to be checked too so rub it around in between your index finger and thumb and if is too grainy or lacks lube then drain it and change it. A lot of the Seafoam MAY burn up during proper use, so it may be less of a problem then possible. Just monitor carefully. The basic directions are on the can. What I do is let the engine run for about 10-15 minutes, while pouring 1/3rd of the can contents into a measuring glass for precision and prepping my special custom application hose depending on how the engine bay is arranged for calculating length and what type of port I will be funneling it to for calculating size/diameter - but I often find that a good setup can be "universal". After the 15 minutes the engine is running very warm so it's a good time to start sucking up the 1/3rd can contents with good vacuum locations from the engine (the engine is still running) that will give the fluid good access to the top of the pistons. I either use the brake booster line - which is good for getting directly to the pistons but depending on location and engine configuration can be more prone to only cleaning the closest cylinders - or what I prefer is to use the Pressurized Crank Ventilation (PCV) line tap into the intake plenum as I find it easy to deal with an better at distributing to all cylinders - plus it cleans the intake plenum a bit. Both lines are shown on the diagram that is usually on a sticker under the hood or in the manual or found at a local auto store. If you really want to be thorough, then use both locations. One time, I was so concerned with cleaning the angine, I used both lines and then finally a syringe to divide the 1/3rd can contents up evenly for the number of cylinders (on this occasion, 6 cylinders) and I cut the engine off after it's 15 minute warmup and pulled out the plugs to squirt/pour the fluid directly on to the top of the pistons. You will also need to find the throttle body cable and hinge/pivot/cable bracket in the engine bay so that you can modulate it as needed. When you find it, you can put pressure on the the pivot/cable to open the throttle body just like what happens when you press what people often refer to as the "gas pedal" in the car. It actually just opens and butterfly valve on the intake plenum called a throttle body open to allow more air into the engine and more fuel is dumped or injected "on it's own" (for purposes of this explanation) in proportion to the air. After all the 1/3rd can content is sucked up into the engine, cut the engine off immediately. This can be a delicate task because if you suck the stuff in the engine too quickly or you use a very airy vacuum line then it may stop running before you finish sucking up all 1/3 of the contents. Also, when first pulling the vacuum line the change in Air/Fuel ratio can be drastic enough for the engine to cut off. If this is the case, and the engine is Electronically Fuel Injected, it will likely "learn" the new A/F ratio if the ECU is given time by simply modulating the throttle body immeditely when the engine is started. You keep it running by modulating the throttle about 500-1000rpms above idle (typically about 800rpms is idle) for 1-5 minutes and during this time you slowly ease off the throttle to hold it steady at idle and then ease off even more to see if it will idle on it's own and keep doing that until it does idle on it's own. If the engine will not idle on it's own, try a different vacuum line or get somebody else to start the car and modulate the throttle for you or modulate the throttle yourself from the engine bay while you allow the engine to suck up the fluid. Of course, none of this is necessary if you decide cut the engine off first to pull the plugs and pour 1/3rd of the can contents evenly to each cylinder. The only thing with this is it is also a different type of hassle, because then you shouldn't just put a new set of plugs in yet but instead put your old plugs back in (you don't want all the dirt to foul your NEW plugs that you will be installing later) .... and you have to keep doing this (pulling the plugs out and screwing them back in - TO PROPER TORQUE SPECS WITH A TORQUE WRENCH (also found in manual, auto store, dealer call for service manual check)) each time you want to use 1/3rd of the can ... and finally again when you are finished cleaning and install the new plugs. May be good for practice though. After this is in the engine and you have cut it off, you let the engine sit turned off with the internals soaking in the seafoam for 15-30-45 minutes (depending on how dirty you think it is). Then start it back up and gradually rev it to half way up the rpm limit until the engine is up to normal operating temp and then rev it near redline. Keep modulating the throttle when you rev it. The more modulation the better (idle to mid-rpms to idle to redline --- repeat). If your engine is really filthy, you will not only see smoke BILLOWING out of you tail pipe as if the engine ... or your entire neighborhood .... were on fire .... but you will start to see a lot of black carbon desposits blackening the ground by the tail pipe. If this happens, especially the black on the ground - especially if there are chunks of it, then you know your engine needed it and you WILL notice a difference in emissions and running. You keep doing this revving until there isn't any more smoke coming out the tail pipe (maybe 10 minutes, but it all depends on how clean or dirty the internals of the engine are. It is also good to take the car for a spin and floor it a few times so that the engine is revving under load -- just be careful of the speed law and bystanders of course. The more smoke and carbon (black crap) that appeared, the more logical it is to do the whole process again until there is less smoke and little to no more fresh "black crap" coming out the tail pipe. It is all of this "black crap" that you don't want to foul new spark plugs .... which is why you use your old plugs for this. It is all of this "black crap" that was effecting performance (including power and gas mileage) and emissions ("smog"). ***Also, in SOME (in my experience, RARE) cases the Catalytic Converter and or 02 sensor can get clogged or fouled if there was A LOT of carbon that got spit out of your engine and the way those parts are designed and located happen to increase the chance. However, I will say that even the dirtiest engine I ever cleaned did not foul the cat or 02. But, you should consider replacing those afterwards anyways - especially if you have smog issues - as they can also DRASTICALLY effect performance and emissions. See # 8, below. 2) Clean the EGR Valve. . Use Carb Cleaner (3$ a can at local generic auto parts store) and whatever brush, rag, Q-Tip etc that is helpful. 3) Fuel Filter (10-20$ at local generic auto store). 4) Fuel Injector cleaner (1-5 dollars per container at local generic auto store or even a gas station). Poor it in your gas tank and go. *You MAY want to do this before installing the new plugs, because even though injector tips are often cleaned by the Seafoam, internal clogging in the line/injectors can be ejected and foul the plug .... but this is rare. 5) Spark Plugs (10-20$ at local generic auto store) and Spark Plug Wires (10-20$ at local generic auto store), just to pass smog. *Make sure to gap them properly. A gap maker/measurer/coin is easily found at your local generic auto store for 50 cents or so and easy to use. 6) Air Intake Filter (10-20$ at local generic auto store). 7) Engine Oil change (about 3-6$ per quart), and Engine Oil Filter change (about 5-10$). You want all the dirt remaining in the engine oil/crank case cleaned out. *Consider adding 1/2 quart or 1 full quart of Engine Restore, which is is also about 10-25$ at local generic auto store, and can improve compression by helping to "bandage" cylinder walls and piston rings. Some people also call this "snake oil" and "scam" but I have done Compression Tests before and after that show improvement worth the price .... so it does in fact benefit engine that need it ... and it is easy and cheap to add. But if you use this be careful again with the total enging crank case/fluid capacity. 8) IF necessary or desired, Catalytic Converter (50-80$ at local generic auto store) and 02 sensor (50-150$ at local generic auto store). Catalytic Converter is installed in the middle of the exhaust pipes and 02 sensor screws into headers or downpipe immediately after the engine block and has a wire running from it ( EFI cars). 02 sensors can throw off Air/Fuel ratios and thus cause poor emissions and performance. Clogged Catalytic converters can restrict exhaust flow and thus cause poor performance or not breakdown the engine emissions enough and thus cause poor emissions. Your car COULD be DRASTICALLY IMPROVED at this point in both power performance, fuel economy and emissions ... depending on what the previous condition was.
  14. This, plus the rest of your post all about how to be ruthlessly litigious by not only getting the guy to court any way possible but trying for every claim possible to get every penny possible from him. Wow. I've liked you for your username alone and for a positive contribution you made in my first thread, if I recall correctly. However, this post of yours somewhat pisses me off. The litigious society we live in is one the most immature, frivilous, tyrannical and just shamefully disfunctional parts of life. Not that there still can't be justice through it, but it is too often abused as a ridiculous tyranny tool. It somewhat annoyed me that before even inquiring why this is really worth be litigious about ....discerning whether you can take the ideal road - diffuse the situation to keep it out of court- like it might not be if it was an honest mistake and or "as is" purchase (granted, you finally mentioned "as is" at the end of your post) or even if the cost, time, hassle involved is not worth 1000$ and or the price to smog the car properly due to preference or work time ... or like if the details prove the person who sold him the car is an illogical, scamming asshole who diserves litigation yet was not a smart enough scammer to sell "as is" and or not smart enough to defend it as such (he'd truly probably have to be brain dead). But that wasn't what really pissed me off. What really pissed me off was your advice to look up if the legal jurisdiction he lives in has asinine laws that need to wiped off the books but aren't, like making it illegal to drink on your own front porch - as you said, and advise him to essentially entrap the seller and hope he gets arrested for it so he can hopefully get the rest of the seller's info from the arrest details. :aholesign: Only a tyrannical bastard would do that. Only the utmost scammer would deserve it. It has not been established that the seller is the utmost scammer. You would be a pathetic low life if you did that without having been totally intentionally scammed with no non-litigious resolution.
  15. Bump. As somebody thinking of buying their first external HD, this interests me.