The new pope is a commie. Religious right OWNED!!

[magley64]

The more you know... http://auto.howstuffworks.com/5-ways-modern-car-engines-differ-from-older-car-engines.htm#page=1

[magley64]

The high pressure Injectors increase the surface area of the fuel, atomization occurs, and increases the rate of vaporizing, that's why you want clean Injectors, if it just squirted a stream in there, your engine would run shitty.

[jbot]

you guys are going to make the weirdest 69 ever.

[mattm]

Injectors don't "vaporize" fuel. They "inject" fuel. Carburetors merely hold fuel while engine vacuum removes it.

Obviously true, but out of all that Magley has presented you chose to focus on this?  He was trying to have a conversation with someone who still believes in the magical carb!  Someone who believes that the efficiency of the internal combustion engine has been suppressed by big oil who have evidently purchased all of the IP around the "magic" carb.  

 

This detail does not invalidate the larger point he was trying to make which is that there is no "cabal" that is preventing the "good stuff" from coming to light.  Belief in this kind of conspiracy theory does nobody any good in a modern society because here is where we end up.  Arguing over injectors and carbs, vs discussing the scientific facts as we know them today.

[mattm]

Your complete faith and trust in all things concerning the science community is amusing at times. You do realize there are things that man cannot explain, and that undoubtedly drives man insane that they cannot figure it out beyond reasonable doubt? You also hopefully realize that the majority of people are naive about many things, and with the technology of making anything seem real and believable these days, it is no wonder why so many are so easily spoon fed bullshit. This planet is so complex, this universe and beyond is so complex, and all of it is very volatile to changes not easily explained or "proven 100%". For every action there is a reaction, problem lies in that we are not always sure what the ultimate cause for the action is or was. There are more hypothesis and theories then anything else, and that is the stalemate. Earth existed before man, and earth has recycled itself time and time again, we are inevitably about to go through a doomsday phase I fear.......man cannot stop it. There are just too many damn people on this planet, and Earth is going to be reducing those numbers sooner than later.

I think we need to break this down.  Science, by definition, is not a belief system.  If it cannot be proven through a testable hypothesis that results in repeatable results, it is not true.  The entire point of science is not to believe in it, but to test the information.  Science can be ridiculed because theories that were once understood to be valid are sometimes invalidated in the light of new testing or new information. This is not a failing of science but THE strength.  The more we discover, the more we can advance knowledge.   In these cases, if science were to have a diety,  the deity exists in repeatable results.  Without the scientific method, almost everything you have grown accustomed to would not exist except for religion.  Any comparison of the two or equating faith with science demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the core principals of science.  

 

I believe everyone can believe what they want, but you cannot equate science with faith as faith is lacking in the 'testable hypothesis' department.  Science is grounded in validation from other people reproducing results from a testable hypothesis.  Faith is based upon believe with no way to test the information.  They are two separate things that CAN coexist, as long as reasonable people can agree to keep faith and science or for that matter, church and state separate.

Edited May 14, 2014 by mattm

[Steve Butters]

He's so full of shit he probably didn't even notice, just used to it.

[Pokey]

I think we need to break this down.  Science, by definition, is not a belief system.  If it cannot be proven through a testable hypothesis that results in repeatable results, it is not true.  The entire point of science is not to believe in it, but to test the information.  Science can be ridiculed because theories that were once understood to be valid are sometimes invalidated in the light of new testing or new information. This is not a failing of science but THE strength.  The more we discover, the more we can advance knowledge.   In these cases, if science were to have a diety,  the deity exists in repeatable results.  Without the scientific method, almost everything you have grown accustomed to would not exist except for religion.  Any comparison of the two or equating faith with science demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the core principals of science.  

 

I believe everyone can believe what they want, but you cannot equate science with faith as faith is lacking in the 'testable hypothesis' department.  Science is grounded in validation from other people reproducing results from a testable hypothesis.  Faith is based upon believe with no way to test the information.  They are two separate things that CAN coexist, as long as reasonable people can agree to keep faith and science or for that matter, church and state separate.

 

I beg to differ, but I will use several links below to prove my point. And so many things that we are told that have been tested over and over and over and told that are bad for us, are retested over and over and over and then found to magically not be bad for us. Science is not infallible, too many things can have practically infinite ways of changing and or even being perceived differently from one person to another,,,,,,,,,, and can never be fully proven. Here are a few good articles below, check them out and see what you think. And there are those like me, that truly believes that one day each and every one of us is going to find out that we have been very wrong about a great many things. So much of science is very much a belief system, and many scientists are atheist or agnostic because they simply cannot believe anything other than what they think they can prove/disprove or replicate. The existence of God or other heavenly beings can not be proven or denied by science, but yet everyone has faith in one direction or another. 

 

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/623043-is-science-a-belief-system/

 

 

http://www.adamkemp.newsvine.com/_news/2007/01/09/513465-the-nature-of-science-why-gravity-is-just-a-theory

 

http://www.ted.com/conversations/9998/science_is_a_religion.html

 

http://www.newmediaministries.org/Science/HasScienceProved_S.html

Edited May 14, 2014 by Pokey

[C-bus]

My Nissan Sentra got a consistent 45 mpg in the 90s. Then Al Gore became VP and now we celebrate 25 mpg.

[magley64]

My Nissan Sentra got a consistent 45 mpg in the 90s. Then Al Gore became VP and now we celebrate 25 mpg.

Your anecdotal mileage isn't the same as EPA rated mileage. My v8 Eldorado consistently gets 30 to 35 mpg, but that's not even close to what it was rated by the epa.

[C-bus]

The EPA lies.

[magley64]

The EPA lies.

No, they have a standard testing method, so they can compare vehicles for a wide range of uses. Your mileage will vary, I know people that routinely double the epa mileage in their cars, still others will never see the numbers as high as the epa rated numbers, there is a ton of variability.

[magley64]

Right. Atomization occurs within the combustion chamber. We've covered this.

Atomization begins at the jet, or at the injector, that's what they are designed to do.

[DAC]

I love this place.  From a commie pope to fuel atomization.  It just doesn't get any better.

[Tonik]

I love this place.  From a commie pope to fuel atomization.  It just doesn't get any better.

 

With a three page global warming detour in the middle!!

[magley64]

Gotta go through government conspiracy theory to get there, but you never know how a trolling thread will get hijacked.

Edited May 14, 2014 by magley64

[Tpoppa]

[smccrory]

I'm deeply, deeply, deeply disappointed that nobody has invoked Hitler or Stalin yet.

[DAC]

I think somebody just did.

[smccrory]

I think somebody just did.

How stalinistic of you to say! This is SO just like 1940s Germany...

[DAC]

Somebody from the Modbureau will be visiting you soon.

[smccrory]

Somebody from the Modbureau will be visiting you soon.

Too late, a family member already turned me in to increase their food rations.

[C-bus]

So wait a second.... We don't believe the whole baby Jesus came down the mountain with the Ten Commandments theory because we can see for ourselves that things aren't so, but we believe the government's MPG reports over our own tried and true....fill it, drive it, measure it, fill it, divide it proof? I'm pretty sure demons possess thee. Send me a check and I shall cast them out. Amen.

[magley64]

So wait a second.... We don't believe the whole baby Jesus came down the mountain with the Ten Commandments theory because we can see for ourselves that things aren't so, but we believe the government's MPG reports over our own tried and true....fill it, drive it, measure it, fill it, divide it proof? I'm pretty sure demons possess thee. Send me a check and I shall cast them out. Amen.

Not sure what you're saying, the epa number is just a reference. It compares the typical fuel usage of 1 vehicle to other vehicles using a standard testing method. Driving habits, traffic conditions, weather, vehicle maintenance, and terrain all have an effect on the mileage any individual driver is going to experience. My Eldorado has a combined mpg rating of 18, and if I did more city traffic with stop and go, and ran the tires at the specified pressure, as well as using the brakes more often, that number would probably be pretty accurate. As it stands, most of my driving is country roads, I anticipate most of my stops and coast to them, and I run my tires at 44 psi. My average mpg is around 30.

[smccrory]

The only thing better than worshiping a benevolent god is worshiping a benevolent state.

He's not talking about worship, he's just recognizing EPA mileage figures for what they are - a baseline prediction based on benchmark conditions. Aviation performance figures published by Cessna, Boeing, etc. are made the same way - takeoff and landing distances, fuel burn per hour and top air speeds are based on altitude/air density, temperature, weight, throttle, etc. and they're even expressed in performance charts instead of two numbers. It's not a conspiracy or representative of worship.

Edited May 15, 2014 by smccrory

[turnone]

Some people try too hard.

Hell, the cars never actually drive and they don't even measure fuel usage per say. They measure tailpipe emmisions and apply a correction factor.

But it is a standard method that would likely be repeatable.

And that's what we got. Most cars aren't even tested. Just a small percentage. The rest are based upon the manufacturer claims.

This is how you get cases like Hyundai last year having to admit on many of their cars that the ratings were too optimistic. They still get great mileage, just not quite as good as they say.

Hyundai gave away free gas cards to cover the difference.

I'm personally happy we get a rating as a baseline. It's likely a car rated at 20 mpg will always get less than one rated at 30 mpg with the same driver and techniques.