Posted by vaughn on May 31, 2010, 6:55 pm
> So you can't name something that you promoted that worked?
> <<<
> I haven't promoted anything
Lie! "News" relentlessly promoted the failure known as the Aircar for several
years on this very group.
>you senile old coot!
Names again? Is that the best you've got?
Vaughn
Posted by vaughn on May 31, 2010, 10:03 pm
>>> I haven't promoted anything
>>
>> Lie! "News" relentlessly promoted the failure known as the Aircar
> Nonsense I only reported the engine and any progress.
Daily, why continually arguing about what a great idea it was, whilst studiously
ignoring those who tried to teach you a bit of physics regarding the use of
compressable gasses as a storage medium..
A decade + later, you still can't buy an Aircar.
> You said it wouldn't move not me.
I challenge you to find any reference where I said it would not move.
Vaughn
Posted by vaughn on June 4, 2010, 12:43 pm
> You looked at your How Things Work books and laughably said it WOULD NOT WORK
> at all.
As is typical in the dishonest way you operate, you snipped the below two lines,
so I thought I would restore it for you:
............................
>>> You said it wouldn't move not me.
>>I challenge you to find any reference where I said it would not move.
..............................
Proof? All we need is a link to the post where I said what you claim. Until
then, you still lie.
THE TRUTH:
I first used air motors over 50 years ago, so I KNOW they work and they can be
very powerful for their size. Even I could build an-air powered car that could
drive around a parking lot long enough to dupe a few reporters, investors, and
Internet "experts". Unfortunately, the problem is not the motor, the problem is
in the thermal inefficiencies involved in using compressed gasses as a storage
medium, and the low energy density of the storage.. I gave you reasons why air
is not a good storage medium for an automobile, and why the Aircar could not
work as advertised and (frankly) looked like a scam.. Sure enough! 10+ years
later, you still can't buy an Aircar and they have never yet released any
prototype for 3rd party review to verify their claims. (Don't bother telling us
about Tata, nothing has come of that either. Even Tata is not big enough to
change the laws of physics.).
So far, you are STILL batting ZERO...but that won't stop you from claiming
otherwise...or snipping out facts that you find inconvenient.
Vaughn
Posted by vaughn on June 4, 2010, 9:17 pm
>> Even I could build an-air powered car that could drive around a parking lot
>> long enough to dupe a few reporters, investors, and Internet "experts".
> Could you dupe one of the largest auto makers in the world who own Jaguar and
> Land Rover?
To date, it appears that somebody did.
1) Go to any Tata dealership. Try to buy an air-powered car. None right?
2) OK. Now go to the search box on the Tata home page; enter your choice of
"aircar", "MDI". or "AIRpod". No matter, you will get zero results. Now look
under their "innovations" tab for anything air related. Nothing right?
3) Now go to Google and find all of the rosy 2008 and 2009 articles about how
the new Tata AirCar was soon to hit USA shores. Seen any?
I rest my case.
I also predict that yet again, just as you have done for the last 10+ years of
consistently being wrong; you will claim that somehow you were right all along.
Vaughn
Posted by vaughn on June 5, 2010, 11:55 am
> Have you contacted this large auto makers and told them they haven't got a
> clue because your How Thing Work Books say it can't work?
Have you bothered to read and understand any of the physics involved here?
...Of course you haven't.
Vaughn
>
> <<<
> I haven't promoted anything