AutosTalk Forums  

OT# Hey Scott in Florida

Toyota Discussions related to Toyota cars and trucks (alt.autos.toyota)


Discuss OT# Hey Scott in Florida in the Toyota forum.



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old   
Jeff
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 11:24 AM







"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
In article <hQoWh.2098$no.653@trnddc02>, "Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com
wrote:

"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:question*mark-7FA55E.08573321042007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com...
In article <P5idnYtKraT8YrTbnZ2dnUVZ_jednZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com>,
"mark_digital©" <XXX-976 (AT) commacast (DOT) com> wrote:


If all my talk about dimmers has upset your stomach, I'm sorry dbu.

Where in heavens sake did you get that idea? I am just trying to
educate you.

You are education us. On how people, such as yourself, who don't have a
clue
and are totally misinformed can draw such stupid conclusion.

You're proving the old computer adage: garbage in, garbage out.

Jeff

Jeff, your constant rubbish talk about GWB our President and Iraq as
told to you by your puppet masters is enough to make a maggot
regurgitate.
You're wrong about this. I don't have a puppet master. I make my own
conclusions.

Quote:
I can only assume you are narrow minded, and an easily led
minion of the far left wing extremists, moveon.org and others.
Assuming makes an ass out of you. More accurately, you make an ass out of
yourself.

--"I'm also not very analytical. You know I don't spend a lot of time
thinking about myself, about why I do things." G.W. Bush, June 4, 2003
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030604-3.html).

So we have a President who makes decisiosn that affect millions of lives,
including the lives of countries that we invade, and he doesn't think about
why he does things.

I think that, and the fact that you susport this asshole, says it all.

Jeff

Quote:
--



Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old   
Jeff
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 11:25 AM







"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote

Quote:
"mark_digital©" <XXX-976 (AT) commacast (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:AIudnckA65MjebTbnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com...

snipped
Don't use dimmers. They generate globs of RFI. Some brands are better
than others but they are all dirty.
--


Radio Frequency Interference? As far as I can tell, dimmers haven't been
a problem. Light fixture/motion detector combo units (screw detector in
first and then screw light bulb into detector) caused verifiable
interference with my FAX/phone unit and another telecommunication piece
of equipment.

Like I said, dimmers haven't been a problem. As a matter of fact, every
single GE and Phillips sunlight spectrum incandescent that's connected to
the dimmers have lasted longer than any fluorescents. Dimmers extend
longevity.

I understand there's a finite limit of tungsten, so finding a good
substitute ahead of time isn't unreasonable. What is unreasonable is for
the government to get everyone excited about digital TV, and yet so far
they use many more times the amount of electricity than a typical CRT.
And for every watt that produces heat it takes two watts to cool. Some
politicians may think they are showing and advocating, but it's from the
heart and not the mind.
Are you still with me or did I lose you after the first sentence?

Bruce B is a lot more knowledgeable about this subject than I am, but
I'lll give it a shot anyway.

The motion detector probably causes interference because it is
transmitting a signal that some other electronic devices pick up.

My understanding is that dimmers extend the life of incandescent bulbs
because they reduce the voltage to the bulbs, so they produce less heat
and light, which extends the life of the filaments. Someone once
suggested that using bulbs rated for 240 volts would last longer because
they are effectively working at half of their rated voltage in household
use.
They also provide 1/4th the rated light output.

Jeff

Quote:
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)



Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old   
Jeff
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 11:42 AM




"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
In article <F0qWh.569$nR1.70@trnddc06>, "Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com
wrote:



Assuming makes an ass out of you. More accurately, you make an ass out of
yourself.

--"I'm also not very analytical. You know I don't spend a lot of time
thinking about myself, about why I do things." G.W. Bush, June 4, 2003
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030604-3.html).

So we have a President who makes decisiosn that affect millions of lives,
including the lives of countries that we invade, and he doesn't think
about
why he does things.

I think that, and the fact that you susport this asshole, says it all.

Jeff

You are more guilty of assuming things than I am.

Where is the open mindedness of the liberal? Can't stand to have
someone disagree with you?
You're welcome to disagree with me. So is anyone else.

Quote:
You think your ideas are the only right
ones?
No, I don't. And they sometimes turn out to be wrong.

Quote:
Again, you are just a narrow minded minion with blinders.
At least I am able to analyze myself. Even Bush says he is not analtyical.
His comments confirm this.

Jeff
Quote:
--



Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old   
Jeff
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 12:08 PM




"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
In article <mhqWh.574$nR1.525@trnddc06>, "Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com
wrote:

"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:question*mark-D5BB33.10372821042007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com...
In article <F0qWh.569$nR1.70@trnddc06>, "Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com
wrote:



Assuming makes an ass out of you. More accurately, you make an ass out
of
yourself.

--"I'm also not very analytical. You know I don't spend a lot of time
thinking about myself, about why I do things." G.W. Bush, June 4, 2003
(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...030604-3.html).

So we have a President who makes decisiosn that affect millions of
lives,
including the lives of countries that we invade, and he doesn't think
about
why he does things.

I think that, and the fact that you susport this asshole, says it all.

Jeff

You are more guilty of assuming things than I am.

Where is the open mindedness of the liberal? Can't stand to have
someone disagree with you?

You're welcome to disagree with me. So is anyone else.

You think your ideas are the only right
ones?

No, I don't. And they sometimes turn out to be wrong.

Again, you are just a narrow minded minion with blinders.

At least I am able to analyze myself. Even Bush says he is not
analtyical.
His comments confirm this.

Jeff
--


Have a nice day jeff.
--

You too.



Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old   
Bruce L. Bergman
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 02:17 PM



On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 15:22:17 -0400, "mark_digital©"
<XXX-976 (AT) commacast (DOT) com> wrote:


Quote:
I would like to point out something I learned recently from my electrician
when I told him my florescent tubes were failing prematurely. He said the
tubes must be kept on. (Left, instead of kept, if you like)
Fluorescents are rated for 12K hours at 4 hours a start, IIRC.
Reduce that run time to a half-hour per start, and they drop off
dramatically - there are only so many starts in the lamp, and either
the filaments or the ballast electronics take a crap.

Left on all the time like they are in emergency stairwells, and that
same lamp will last for double or triple the rated hours, or more.
They usually fail when the filaments do - but if the filaments fail
while the lamp is lit it will stay lit until the power flickers and
the arc goes out. Or the ballast fails.

Quote:
I use toggle wall dimmers in certain rooms and it took much effort to
educate the rest of the family as to the hazards of substituting
fluorescents I had in stock for the burned out incandescent. Will they
remember? I'm not about to spring for the even more expensive fluorescents
that can handle variable power.
Read the packages carefully: Almost all Compact Fluorescent Lamps
can NOT be dimmed, just like regular permanently installed fluorescent
light fixtures. And the ones that can be dimmed are not cheap to set
up, they require special dimmers and special ballasts designed to work
together, and sometimes special lamps.

And every time you change the lamps in one of those special dimmed
fluorescent fixtures you have to burn in the new lamps for a week by
running them at full brightness before you try dimming them, or you
will have early lamp failures.

They have made Compact Fluorescent Lamps (the one piece curly bulbs)
in the past that were supposed to be dimable with standard consumer
grade incandescent dimmers, but all the ones I've seen have been
discontinued - they usually don't live long. And I've heard of a few
fires and melted lamps, don't even try.

For the most efficiency in an incandescent fixture, get the quartz
halogen capsule lamps like the Phillips Halogena - they are the best
compromise that can be easily dimmed.

And try not to run them dimmed way down for too long at a stretch,
the whole idea of the design is to keep the vaporized tungsten in
suspension in the halogen gases till you turn off the power, when it
redeposits on the filament.

If you run the lamps too cool by being severely dimmed most of the
time, the tungsten will deposit on the glass instead, and you get the
typical silvery inner coating on the lamp glass... Ramp them up to
full brightness for about a minute to get good and hot before you shut
them off.

--<< Bruce >>--



Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old   
mack
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 08:11 PM




"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
In article <WsadndUY34TtnrTbnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com>,
"mark_digital©" <XXX-976 (AT) commacast (DOT) com> wrote:

What do you think of this attempt in Congress to ban incandescent light
bulbs?
I think it's a shame those who are pushing for it haven't done their
homework.

Will we have to apply for an exemption 30-60 days before Christmas?
Will we have to forego a light bulb in the microwave oven?

I think we're being LED down the wrong path I tell ya.

This is part of the global warming panic, set up by none other than
algore and his cheap flick.
Right ...that's the movie all right. The one you wouldn't see because
you're so smart you know better....

Pompous ass.




Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old   
mack
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 08:12 PM




"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
In article <_9aWh.7141$ya1.1995 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny>,
"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:question*mark-B756BF.16160320042007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com...
In article <WsadndUY34TtnrTbnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com>,
"mark_digital©" <XXX-976 (AT) commacast (DOT) com> wrote:

What do you think of this attempt in Congress to ban incandescent
light
bulbs?
I think it's a shame those who are pushing for it haven't done their
homework.

Will we have to apply for an exemption 30-60 days before Christmas?
Will we have to forego a light bulb in the microwave oven?

I think we're being LED down the wrong path I tell ya.

This is part of the global warming panic, set up by none other than
algore and his cheap flick. Look for more cockamamie ideas being
floated. Why hell, just this week I read they're proposing to put
catalitic converters on lawnmowers. It will first start in California
and the rest will follow. It is amazing how easy people are led.
--



Can you think of at least one valid and proven reason to reduce
emissions,
assuming global warming was not an issue?

Just one. It's easy.

Why should I answer one of your questions when you refuse to answer
mine. Take a hike.

Face it, you don't have an answer, pompous ass.




Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old   
JoeSpareBedroom
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 08:27 PM



"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
In article <132la47m5acqm58 (AT) corp (DOT) supernews.com>,
"mack" <mackerel (AT) dslextreme (DOT) com> wrote:

"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:question*mark-B944EF.16443420042007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com...
In article <_9aWh.7141$ya1.1995 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny>,
"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:question*mark-B756BF.16160320042007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com...
In article <WsadndUY34TtnrTbnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com>,
"mark_digital©" <XXX-976 (AT) commacast (DOT) com> wrote:

What do you think of this attempt in Congress to ban incandescent
light
bulbs?
I think it's a shame those who are pushing for it haven't done
their
homework.

Will we have to apply for an exemption 30-60 days before Christmas?
Will we have to forego a light bulb in the microwave oven?

I think we're being LED down the wrong path I tell ya.

This is part of the global warming panic, set up by none other than
algore and his cheap flick. Look for more cockamamie ideas being
floated. Why hell, just this week I read they're proposing to put
catalitic converters on lawnmowers. It will first start in
California
and the rest will follow. It is amazing how easy people are led.
--



Can you think of at least one valid and proven reason to reduce
emissions,
assuming global warming was not an issue?

Just one. It's easy.

Why should I answer one of your questions when you refuse to answer
mine. Take a hike.

Face it, you don't have an answer, pompous ass.

LOL mack you are a treasure. I hope you have a nice comfortable weekend.
--

So, you noticed his comment, but you're unable to answer MY message, in
which I pointed out that you can't show anyone the questions you think I
don't answer. Nice job.




Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old   
Scott in Florida
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 08:43 PM



On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 00:27:58 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
<dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

Quote:
"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:question*mark-E64508.19184121042007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com...
In article <132la47m5acqm58 (AT) corp (DOT) supernews.com>,
"mack" <mackerel (AT) dslextreme (DOT) com> wrote:

"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:question*mark-B944EF.16443420042007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com...
In article <_9aWh.7141$ya1.1995 (AT) news02 (DOT) roc.ny>,
"JoeSpareBedroom" <dishborealis (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

"dbu.," <question*mark (AT) einp (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:question*mark-B756BF.16160320042007 (AT) comcast (DOT) dca.giganews.com...
In article <WsadndUY34TtnrTbnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com>,
"mark_digital©" <XXX-976 (AT) commacast (DOT) com> wrote:

What do you think of this attempt in Congress to ban incandescent
light
bulbs?
I think it's a shame those who are pushing for it haven't done
their
homework.

Will we have to apply for an exemption 30-60 days before Christmas?
Will we have to forego a light bulb in the microwave oven?

I think we're being LED down the wrong path I tell ya.

This is part of the global warming panic, set up by none other than
algore and his cheap flick. Look for more cockamamie ideas being
floated. Why hell, just this week I read they're proposing to put
catalitic converters on lawnmowers. It will first start in
California
and the rest will follow. It is amazing how easy people are led.
--



Can you think of at least one valid and proven reason to reduce
emissions,
assuming global warming was not an issue?

Just one. It's easy.

Why should I answer one of your questions when you refuse to answer
mine. Take a hike.

Face it, you don't have an answer, pompous ass.

LOL mack you are a treasure. I hope you have a nice comfortable weekend.
--


So, you noticed his comment, but you're unable to answer MY message, in
which I pointed out that you can't show anyone the questions you think I
don't answer. Nice job.

You are not important....or so it seems......




--

Scott in Florida





Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old   
Ray O
 
Posts: n/a

Default Re: OT# Hey Scott in Florida - 04-21-2007 , 11:16 PM




"Jeff" <news (AT) googlemail (DOT) com> wrote

Quote:
"Ray O" <rokigawaATtristarassociatesDOTcom> wrote in message
news:bf719$462a27b4$47c2b532$16539 (AT) msgid (DOT) meganewsservers.com...

"mark_digital©" <XXX-976 (AT) commacast (DOT) com> wrote in message
news:AIudnckA65MjebTbnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d (AT) comcast (DOT) com...

snipped
Don't use dimmers. They generate globs of RFI. Some brands are better
than others but they are all dirty.
--


Radio Frequency Interference? As far as I can tell, dimmers haven't been
a problem. Light fixture/motion detector combo units (screw detector in
first and then screw light bulb into detector) caused verifiable
interference with my FAX/phone unit and another telecommunication piece
of equipment.

Like I said, dimmers haven't been a problem. As a matter of fact, every
single GE and Phillips sunlight spectrum incandescent that's connected
to the dimmers have lasted longer than any fluorescents. Dimmers extend
longevity.

I understand there's a finite limit of tungsten, so finding a good
substitute ahead of time isn't unreasonable. What is unreasonable is for
the government to get everyone excited about digital TV, and yet so far
they use many more times the amount of electricity than a typical CRT.
And for every watt that produces heat it takes two watts to cool. Some
politicians may think they are showing and advocating, but it's from the
heart and not the mind.
Are you still with me or did I lose you after the first sentence?

Bruce B is a lot more knowledgeable about this subject than I am, but
I'lll give it a shot anyway.

The motion detector probably causes interference because it is
transmitting a signal that some other electronic devices pick up.

My understanding is that dimmers extend the life of incandescent bulbs
because they reduce the voltage to the bulbs, so they produce less heat
and light, which extends the life of the filaments. Someone once
suggested that using bulbs rated for 240 volts would last longer because
they are effectively working at half of their rated voltage in household
use.

They also provide 1/4th the rated light output.

Jeff

--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)

Since using a bulb rated for 240 volts at a lower voltage is that same as
using a dimmer, that makes sense.
--

Ray O
(correct punctuation to reply)




Reply With Quote
Reply




Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.