Posted on 06/23/2015 6:45:47 AM PDT by don-o
That comment was simply raising the question of how anyone could know what those cones were marking. Thankfully, most Freepers can actually comprehend what words mean.
First you claim I was commenting on the matter of evidence cones weeks ago. (Being pinged to a post is not commenting - I typed that real slow for ya). I ask for proof.
Then you post a link to a comment I made two days ago.
Your fail is epic. I know you will keep trying.
Nice try worm tongue...you’ve been pinged a half a dozen times over the past few weeks to similar evidence cone photos designed to show the police in a bad light and you never once questioned any of them.
When I called you out on it, you tried to weasel out by saying ‘I never “participated” in those discussions’.
Which is kind of the whole point isn’t it...you only “participated” in the discussion when the evidence cone photo posted didn’t support your inane version of events.
Do you deny getting pinged repeatedly with photos showing evidence cones near supposed police positions?
Do you deny never once questioning those evidence cone photos?
Do you deny immediately questioning similar evidence cone photos twice when a link to them or a photo was posted?
I didn't get you a birthday present either.
My comments of two days ago were just to make the point that no one (except the police) can KNOW what the cones are marking.
I see the it now, thanks.
When one of the two inner cylinders fires, it forces the adjacent inner cylinder down
Those moving "inner cylinders" are not called cylinders, those are called pistons absolutely not to be confused with cylinders, regardless of them being cylindrically shaped (and sized) to fit the bore of the "cylinder".
But what led you to the video of the strange V-8?
On your way to encountering that, had you discovered what a knife and fork conrod arrangement (common to Harley-Davidson v-twins) was? It has to be that way to share the same crank journal, or else the cylinder arrangements would need to be offset by a conrod [crankshaft end] width, and perhaps then a skosh more for clearance. Unless perhaps conrods were angled (which introduces potential problems while attempting to solve another) or else designed to be zig-zagged (SS lightening bolt?) shape to reach adjacent offset crank journals, but the bends even if cast and forged into shape would introduce weakness, so the conrods would need to be overbuilt to compensate.
How about the numbers "45" "315" and "405" expressed as degrees of arc? Mean anything to you?
I doubt it, but you could fire up (pun intended) a google-mobile and go look it up. It could take up some of your spare time and help keep you out of the bingo parlors. So you could have that going for you ... while playing on the freeway either coming or going from one of those places.
Nice excerpt omitting the previous sentence pointing out the pistons in the diagram ...
” those are called pistons absolutely not to be confused with cylinders, regardless of them being cylindrically shaped (and sized) to fit the bore of the “cylinder”.”
A look at the parts you cut out of my post:
Looking at one bank, there are four pistons. If you look closely, you will see that the inner pair is locked together ... and those two pistons force the two outer pistons up (compression and exhaust)!
If I were playing your game and I am not, I could post something from you like:
Now everyone knows that it is the pistons that move, not the cylinders that move like what would be indicated in an excerpt. That is just an example. I am not implying that you don’t know the difference. I am sure that you do.
Usage of the wording "adjacent inner" was poor description for what was going on. If you had written adjacent outer cylinder, (and this occurring respectively on either "bank" of four cylinders) even there not more accurately using the word "piston" I doubt I would have commented at all. But for having done that, along with wording suggesting "cylinders going down" (when cylinders don't go anywhere, or else it's not be using anything resembling conventional headgasket) along with how you placed the word "firing" in the mix, introduced misleading description at that point, in several different ways at once.
Adjacent "inner cylinder"??? The adjacent "inner" cylinders are paired with one another, but separately on opposing banks. The way you worded things, it would be as if one of side-by-side adjacent of the pair was on power stroke, while the adjacent "inner" cylinder would be on intake stroke. Now that may possibly be, but if so, then go ahead and tell me what the firing order is.
Perhaps you missed my statement.... “Looking at one bank ...”
Learn to acknowledge what others are saying before going on to always demand they look at something else.
You have a large backlog of that type of thing.
Go F yourself bitch. Seriously
Please: NO profanity, NO personal attacks, NO racism or violence in posts.
“I see now that the word “piston” was used once,”
Actually, I used the word three times.
I'm not going to be generous and allow for a this or that, then go and sift through what you said, to see if I could be generous --- while you continue to give nothing in return (except for self-justifying bullshit).
Try listening, for a change. And then, respond logically, in kind. Hardly anyone here wants to hear yet more of your lop-sided bullshitting.
But this little meaningless sidebar is something of an example for just how you go about interacting with others here, having offended many, with no apology.
I'd wager you'd get the time of day screwed up (if you could), which could then screw things up for someone else (if they listened to you) but then act all innocent when it was pointed out to you, "hey! See what you did there?".
I'd give a lot to have missed every single word you'd ever had to say.
How much do I have to give (and where should I send it) to never hear or think of you again?
Me:Actually, I used the word three times.
“I’m not even going to bother to go look, but I’m certain you did not in the first comment”
Perhaps you should look. I used it three times in the first comment and later pasted that original directly to you.
This is hilarious.
You want me to focus upon potentially exculpatory evidence but you haven't yet once extended that same courtesy to some number of the 177 who were arrested, all of them having been charged with being complicit in planning and intending to commit crimes, all 177 being also charged with doing these deeds (and pre-planning to do them) while part of a on-going criminal conspiracy?
You murdered the truth in a few sentences. Why should it matter if you were possibly a friend to it elsewhere?
How's it feel to be accused?
You are guilty of what I charged you with, much more precisely than some number of those arrested are guilty of what Waco PD charged them with using John Doe, fill in the blank arrest warrant ----
Yet you continue to assert are all guilty as charged?
Learn to give that which you would desire to receive from others. And maybe then I won't despise you so entirely & thoroughly.
“”How’s it feel to be accused”
LOL. Do you really think that what you say impacts my life in the least?
Impact your life?
Not like the overcharging and damnable lies told by the LEO's you support effect other people's life, that's for sure.
Open you eyes, and see yourself.
“You still don’t get it.”
I get it. Almost 200 members of biker gangs converged for a shootout at a family plaza on a Sunday afternoon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.