60th Anniversary Schwinn titanium price

On 3/28/2021 4:17 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 08:15:23 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

Thank you Frank. Jay should believe a mechanical engineer if not me.
He wouldn't believe me if I said that the Sun will come up tomorrow.

I also would not believe you. The sun does not "come up" or "go
down". That would imply that the sun is moving relative to the Earth,
which is not the case. The geocentric model of the solar system, with
the Earth at the center of the solar system, fell out of favor in
about the 17th century, after several heroic last stands and scientist
incinerations by the papacy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism
Today, the accepted geometry is a heliocentric model, with a Sun at
its proper location at the center of the solar system. Unfortunately,
we are still left with the rather unscientific description where the
sun, moon, constellations, and stars might rise or fall. It should
have changed when we switched to a heliocentric model, but didn't.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no universally recognized
correct description. Something like these might be candidates:
"The sun comes into view as the earth rotates"
"The sun comes into view"
"The apparent motion of the rising sun"
or something similar. All of these are scientifically correct, but
sound awful, which is probably why nothing has changed. Still, this
is a technical group, where personal opinions involving science,
engineering, mechanics, and bicycles are expected to be technically
accurate. Therefore, I suggest you avoid using "come up" or "rising
sun" and replace them with a scientifically accurate description.

Well: Over the last few years I've developed an interest in sundials, a
subject that turned out to be far more complicated than I anticipated. I
ended up reading a couple books on the subject, most prominently Albert
Waugh's _Sundials, Their Theory and Construction_. The book is technical
enough to contain extensive tables, dozens of technical illustrations,
trigonometric equations and calculations etc.

But as early as page 6, Waugh says "In our treatment of the matter we
shall ordinarily describe things as they seem rather than as they really
are. We shall thus speak of the sun's "rising in the east"... etc.

I think it's far more pertinent and important to work out why have
clipless pedals that we clip into.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 11:28:46 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 3/28/2021 10:48 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 8:31:15 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 7:22:07 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/27/2021 4:59 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, March 26, 2021 at 5:57:33 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, March 26, 2021 at 6:43:28 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote:
FYI: https://www.roadbikereview.com/threa...ramount.27828/

-- Jay Beattie.
Thanks. I had not seen that thread yet. Learned some more specific information pertaining to Serotta and this frame.
As far as I've been able to determine, titanium bike literally live forever. If there are no failures due to workmanship errors in the first several months they are fine and since titanium has no fatigue life, they just go on forever.

I have an assortment of breaker tube (wrench extender) from
broken Ti frames. And we have sent another dozen to metal
recycling.

Very expensive titanium handcycle for a cripple:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/hand14.html
Note multiple cracks. Mo

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bicycle+ti...es&ia=image s
Titanium is particularly difficult to weld. Virtually all titanium failures are at or very near welded joints. The SLIGHTEST O2 in the area being heated will cause TiO2 to form which has the strength of a saltine cracker. I'm not sure but I think that even N2 can react with it as well. And often it is invisible because it is on the inside of the tube. ANY dirt, oil or anything else that can shield the atmosphere around the weld from 99.999% argon can form inclusions. So the early titanium frames had inclusions that could cause breakage. Even in new frames you have to continue to inspect them for weeks after you begin riding. I think I told you the story of a guy I was riding with bought a new Lynsky. I saw a cracked head tube from 3 feet away. He was rather put off but Lynsky knows that absolute cleanliness isn't possible in closed tubing and so simply replaced it without comment. This guy is a very careful assembler and put the bike together. Just the pressure of the headset ove
r a couple of days cause the headtube failure. The new frameset has had 10,000 miles put on it and no problems.

Aluminum must have care taken with the welds as well but nothing like titanium
What causes fatigue in bicycles? These are almost entirely shock loadings and these are mitigated by tires, wheels and the way you sit on a bike. The higher your weight the higher the shock loadings of course because the higher the pressure you have to retain in your tires. This is why bicycle as a rule do not fail from fatigue as much as mechanical failures. By this I mean that the as resins age from time or exposure to UV light, thy develop cracks in their surface which can gradually fork their way through the material enough that it no longer supports the composite. If the material has thick enough layup, such as fiberglas boat hulls, it never gets to the mount that the material is materially weakened. But bicycles are made to be light as possible and that means that destruction of the resin is fairly easy (comparatively). Shock loadings on aluminum are the same sort of problem. They can eventually start cracking. But these days with 28 mm tires I wouldn't expect this to happen
. the shock are simply too low. I have never seen a higher end steel bike fail from anything other than a rather serious accident.

Think about this, if you bend a steel rebar back and forth enough times it will break but that has no relationship to fatigue life. But that same rebar in sufficient quantities set into a concrete overpass will last forever.


Another large group are cracks perpendicular to or across
the weld line from internal stress during weld of a closed
figure.

Re welding aluminum and titanium.

Aluminum, at least in the Air Force for a certified welder's
certificate, was welded with a conventional TIG setup, without backup
gas. Tungsten was welded in a chamber completely purged with an inert
gas and the slightest color was reason for the test to be failed. Some
time after I certified the last time a civilian friend who was working
at an Air Force Depot told me that they had successfully welded
titanium using TIG with high gas flow and separate backup gas.

"Backup gas" is what we called the technique of a separate gas flow to
flood the back sides of the weld material to avoid oxidation while
welding.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 17:55:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Well: Over the last few years I've developed an interest in sundials, a
subject that turned out to be far more complicated than I anticipated. I
ended up reading a couple books on the subject, most prominently Albert
Waugh's _Sundials, Their Theory and Construction_. The book is technical
enough to contain extensive tables, dozens of technical illustrations,
trigonometric equations and calculations etc.

Out of curiosity, how do you handle daylight savings time on a
sundial?

But as early as page 6, Waugh says "In our treatment of the matter we
shall ordinarily describe things as they seem rather than as they really
are. We shall thus speak of the sun's "rising in the east"... etc.

Tradition wins over science. That may explain why we still seem to be
crawling out of the dark ages.

I think it's far more pertinent and important to work out why have
clipless pedals that we clip into.

Well, if you insist. The explanation is rather simple and best
introduced with an analogy. When horse drawn wagons were the common
mode of transportation, someone would sit in the wagon, and make
cracking noises with a whip, which inspired the horses or oxen to move
forward or stop. Said person became known as the "driver". The
process was known as "driving" or "to drive".

Somewhat later, inventors began replacing the horses and oxen pulling
the wagon with internal and external combustion engines. The operator
remained the "driver". Although know whip was necessary, the process
became known as "driving". Adherence to tradition was punctuated by
the long life of the buggy whip socket.

Today, we "drive" an automobile without horses, oxen. The whip has
been replaced by a horn, which also makes loud noises and is intended
to inspire competing "drivers" to move forward or stop. Not much has
changed here except the engine, so all the descriptive buzzwords
remain unchanged.

It's much the same with the clipless pedal. Removing the toe clip was
much the same as removing the horse. The resultant clipless mechanism
was much the same as the original with toe clips. Therefore, the
process of activating the device retained the name as in "clip into"
the pedal.

It's like that for any evolving technology. There is a certain
resistance to adopting new terminology when only a small part of the
technology has changed. If a different name had been selected for the
clipless pedals, I'm sure there would be more confusion than just
"clipless" as everything attached would also change. Best to stay
with the familiar, than to venture in the wilds of radical changes.

I forgot to mention the problem with "clipless". While the original
clip type pedals had "toe clips", the new and improved "clipless"
pedals did not have toe clips, but do require the riders foot to be
secured to the pedal by a locking mechanism. A new name would be
needed for such a locking mechanism. Since "clip" was already taken,
some marketing lunatic lacking in imagination stupidly selected
"clipless". If past history is any indication of the future, we're
going to be stuck with the "clipless" name forever.


--
Jeff Liebermann
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 2:43:07 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 16:01:22 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 3/28/2021 3:17 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
There has also been some biblical evidence that the sun failed to come
into view at expected times. We are currently celebrating the
Passover holiday, where one of the 10 plagues was three days of total
darkness:
Then the LORD said to Moses, "Stretch out your hand toward
the sky so that darkness will spread over Egypt darkness
that can be felt." So Moses stretched out his hand toward
the sky, and total darkness covered all Egypt for three
days. No one could see anyone else or leave his place for
three days.
- Exodus 10:21-23
Or the sun could just go nuts and do the herkey jerkey as at
Fatima 1917.
Things humans can imagine just might happen. Or not.
http://francismary.org/miracle-of-th...ness-accounts/
I don't know much about Fatima, but I have seen some rather weird
weather related phenomenon:
https://www.google.com/search?q=strange+clouds&tbm=isch
along with the usual Photoshop fakes.

Reverse engineering biblical events is always fun. For Moses in
Egypt, three days of total darkness ignores that Passover is
celebrated on the full moon, which suggests that Moses negotiating
with Pharaoh happened around the same time. The Hebrew calendar is a
lunar not a solar calendar. If the full moon was shining, there would
be plenty of available light, regardless of what the sun was doing.

Only someone as highly educated as you doesn't think that the sun doesn't come up in the morning or sets at night. I sure wish everyone would be a smart as you are. Oh, wait, they are - they voted for Biden who as one of his first orders of business invaded Syria. Then the media with all of the intelligence you have printed that they had made a missile attack on the Americans. Funny how there were only military adviser forces left and they weren't in any range of missile attacks. With all of that Jeff-like intelligence Biden just said that illegal immigrants always increase around Christmas. Too bad that the actual numbers show exactly the reverse.

Yep, Jeff, you make morons seem highly intelligent. Play that roll you have given yourself.

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 08:48:23 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 8:31:15 AM UTC-7, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 7:22:07 AM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
On 3/27/2021 4:59 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Friday, March 26, 2021 at 5:57:33 PM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, March 26, 2021 at 6:43:28 PM UTC-5, jbeattie wrote:
FYI: https://www.roadbikereview.com/threa...ramount.27828/

-- Jay Beattie.
Thanks. I had not seen that thread yet. Learned some more specific information pertaining to Serotta and this frame.
As far as I've been able to determine, titanium bike literally live forever. If there are no failures due to workmanship errors in the first several months they are fine and since titanium has no fatigue life, they just go on forever.

I have an assortment of breaker tube (wrench extender) from
broken Ti frames. And we have sent another dozen to metal
recycling.

Very expensive titanium handcycle for a cripple:
http://www.yellowjersey.org/hand14.html
Note multiple cracks. Mo

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=bicycle+ti...es&ia=image s
Titanium is particularly difficult to weld. Virtually all titanium failures are at or very near welded joints. The SLIGHTEST O2 in the area being heated will cause TiO2 to form which has the strength of a saltine cracker. I'm not sure but I think that even N2 can react with it as well. And often it is invisible because it is on the inside of the tube. ANY dirt, oil or anything else that can shield the atmosphere around the weld from 99.999% argon can form inclusions. So the early titanium frames had inclusions that could cause breakage. Even in new frames you have to continue to inspect them for weeks after you begin riding. I think I told you the story of a guy I was riding with bought a new Lynsky. I saw a cracked head tube from 3 feet away. He was rather put off but Lynsky knows that absolute cleanliness isn't possible in closed tubing and so simply replaced it without comment. This guy is a very careful assembler and put the bike together. Just the pressure of the headset over
a couple of days cause the headtube failure. The new frameset has had 10,000 miles put on it and no problems.

Aluminum must have care taken with the welds as well but nothing like titanium
What causes fatigue in bicycles? These are almost entirely shock loadings and these are mitigated by tires, wheels and the way you sit on a bike. The higher your weight the higher the shock loadings of course because the higher the pressure you have to retain in your tires. This is why bicycle as a rule do not fail from fatigue as much as mechanical failures. By this I mean that the as resins age from time or exposure to UV light, thy develop cracks in their surface which can gradually fork their way through the material enough that it no longer supports the composite. If the material has thick enough layup, such as fiberglas boat hulls, it never gets to the mount that the material is materially weakened. But bicycles are made to be light as possible and that means that destruction of the resin is fairly easy (comparatively). Shock loadings on aluminum are the same sort of problem. They can eventually start cracking. But these days with 28 mm tires I wouldn't expect this to happen.
the shock are simply too low. I have never seen a higher end steel bike fail from anything other than a rather serious accident.

Think about this, if you bend a steel rebar back and forth enough times it will break but that has no relationship to fatigue life. But that same rebar in sufficient quantities set into a concrete overpass will last forever.

Tommy boy, you have outdone yourself!

You have just exhibited your total lack of comprehension of the
subject that you are talking about for all the world to see.

You see, when you bend a piece of re-bar back and forth enough times
it will break... which is an example of just how fatigue testing is
accomplished.

And (silly boy) the reason that it doesn't break when it is cast into
a concrete overpass is because it isn't being bent back and forth.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 17:06:43 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

Only someone as highly educated as you doesn't think that
the sun doesn't come up in the morning or sets at night.

"31 logical fallacies in 8 minutes"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf03U04rqGQ (8:10)

0:33 Fallacy of Composition
0:42 Fallacy of Division
0:52 The Gambler's Fallacy
1:00 Tu Quoque (Who Are You To Talk?)
1:19 Strawman
1:32 Ad hominem
1:49 Genetic Fallacy
1:56 Fallacious Appeal To Authority
2:15 Red Herring
2:34 Appeal to Emotion
2:48 Appeal to Popularity (Bandwagon)
2:52 Appeal to Tradition
2:56 Appeal to Nature
3:04 Appeal to Ignorance
3:16 Begging the Question
3:32 Equivocation
3:50 False Dichotomy (Black or White)
4:00 Middle Ground Fallacy
4:09 Decision Point Fallacy (Sorites Paradox)
4:29 Slippery Slope Fallacy
4:46 Hasty Generalisations (Anecdotes)
5:05 Faulty Analogy
5:14 Burden of Proof
5:43 Affirming the Consequent
6:10 Denying the Antecedent
6:22 Moving the Goalposts
6:35 False Cause (and Texas Sharpshooter)
6:54 Loaded Question
7:01 No True Scotsman
7:10 Personal Incredulity
7:18 The Fallacy Fallacy

I'm not sure, but I suspect you may have used all 31 logical falacies
in your various failed attempts to engage in a discussion. However,
that doesn't really matter because few of your discussions are worth
reading due to lack of useful content. For example, what is the take
away from your topic switching rant that follows? Can you prove or
substantiate anything?

I sure wish everyone would be a smart as you are.

So do I. It would make for much more interesting discussions.

I really hate it when every one of your messages looks like it came
from a cookie cutter template:
1. Opening insult.
2. Exactly one sentence announcing opposition to someones ideas.
3. Attempt to change the topic to something you find interesting.
4. Multiple off topic claims all without substantiation.
5. Closing insult, often with some spelling and grammar errors.

Oh, wait, they are - they voted for Biden who as one of his first
orders of business invaded Syria. Then the media with all of the
intelligence you have printed that they had made a missile attack
on the Americans. Funny how there were only military adviser forces
left and they weren't in any range of missile attacks. With all of
that Jeff-like intelligence Biden just said that illegal immigrants
always increase around Christmas. Too bad that the actual numbers
show exactly the reverse.

Yep. Cookie cutter template. There are a few common items missing
from the template, but I can add those as needed. I think you might
find the template useful for future topic juggling rants.

Yep, Jeff, you make morons seem highly intelligent. Play that roll
you have given yourself.

The line I used prefer is:
"May you burn in the hell of your own creation".


--
Jeff Liebermann
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 13:17:05 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 08:15:23 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

Thank you Frank. Jay should believe a mechanical engineer if not me.
He wouldn't believe me if I said that the Sun will come up tomorrow.

I also would not believe you. The sun does not "come up" or "go
down". That would imply that the sun is moving relative to the Earth,
which is not the case. The geocentric model of the solar system, with
the Earth at the center of the solar system, fell out of favor in
about the 17th century, after several heroic last stands and scientist
incinerations by the papacy:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heliocentrism
Today, the accepted geometry is a heliocentric model, with a Sun at
its proper location at the center of the solar system. Unfortunately,
we are still left with the rather unscientific description where the
sun, moon, constellations, and stars might rise or fall. It should
have changed when we switched to a heliocentric model, but didn't.

To the best of my knowledge, there is no universally recognized
correct description. Something like these might be candidates:
"The sun comes into view as the earth rotates"
"The sun comes into view"
"The apparent motion of the rising sun"
or something similar. All of these are scientifically correct, but
sound awful, which is probably why nothing has changed. Still, this
is a technical group, where personal opinions involving science,
engineering, mechanics, and bicycles are expected to be technically
accurate. Therefore, I suggest you avoid using "come up" or "rising
sun" and replace them with a scientifically accurate description.

There has been some serious scientific thought given to the
probability of the sun failing to come into view tomorrow.
"Will the sun rise tomorrow?"
https://www.freecodecamp.org/news/will-the-sun-rise-tomorrow-255afc810682/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunrise_problem

There has also been some biblical evidence that the sun failed to come
into view at expected times. We are currently celebrating the
Passover holiday, where one of the 10 plagues was three days of total
darkness:
Then the LORD said to Moses, "Stretch out your hand toward
the sky so that darkness will spread over Egypt darkness
that can be felt." So Moses stretched out his hand toward
the sky, and total darkness covered all Egypt for three
days. No one could see anyone else or leave his place for
three days.
- Exodus 10:21-23

There may also have been an event where the relative motion of the sun
(relative to the earth) froze for a full day, thus extending the
available sunlight so that a battle could be won:
https://biblehub.com/joshua/10-13.htm

Therefore, it is quite possible that the sun might fail to come into
view tomorrow, or be delayed a few hours or days.

Well Rudyard Kipling tells us that "the dawn comes up like thunder
outer China 'crost the Bay!"

--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 16:55:27 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 17:55:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Well: Over the last few years I've developed an interest in sundials, a
subject that turned out to be far more complicated than I anticipated. I
ended up reading a couple books on the subject, most prominently Albert
Waugh's _Sundials, Their Theory and Construction_. The book is technical
enough to contain extensive tables, dozens of technical illustrations,
trigonometric equations and calculations etc.

Out of curiosity, how do you handle daylight savings time on a
sundial?

But as early as page 6, Waugh says "In our treatment of the matter we
shall ordinarily describe things as they seem rather than as they really
are. We shall thus speak of the sun's "rising in the east"... etc.

Tradition wins over science. That may explain why we still seem to be
crawling out of the dark ages.

I think it's far more pertinent and important to work out why have
clipless pedals that we clip into.

Well, if you insist. The explanation is rather simple and best
introduced with an analogy. When horse drawn wagons were the common
mode of transportation, someone would sit in the wagon, and make
cracking noises with a whip, which inspired the horses or oxen to move
forward or stop. Said person became known as the "driver". The
process was known as "driving" or "to drive".

Sounds good, but...

drive (v.)
Old English drifan "to compel or urge to move, impel in some direction
or manner; to hunt (deer), pursue; to rush against" (class I strong
verb; past tense draf, past participle drifen), from Proto-Germanic
*dreibanan (source also of Old Frisian driva"I lead, impel, drive
(away)," Old Saxon driban, Dutch drijven, Old High German triban,
German treiben, Old Norse drifa, Gothic dreiban "to drive"),



Somewhat later, inventors began replacing the horses and oxen pulling
the wagon with internal and external combustion engines. The operator
remained the "driver". Although know whip was necessary, the process
became known as "driving". Adherence to tradition was punctuated by
the long life of the buggy whip socket.

Today, we "drive" an automobile without horses, oxen. The whip has
been replaced by a horn, which also makes loud noises and is intended
to inspire competing "drivers" to move forward or stop. Not much has
changed here except the engine, so all the descriptive buzzwords
remain unchanged.

It's much the same with the clipless pedal. Removing the toe clip was
much the same as removing the horse. The resultant clipless mechanism
was much the same as the original with toe clips. Therefore, the
process of activating the device retained the name as in "clip into"
the pedal.

It's like that for any evolving technology. There is a certain
resistance to adopting new terminology when only a small part of the
technology has changed. If a different name had been selected for the
clipless pedals, I'm sure there would be more confusion than just
"clipless" as everything attached would also change. Best to stay
with the familiar, than to venture in the wilds of radical changes.

I forgot to mention the problem with "clipless". While the original
clip type pedals had "toe clips", the new and improved "clipless"
pedals did not have toe clips, but do require the riders foot to be
secured to the pedal by a locking mechanism. A new name would be
needed for such a locking mechanism. Since "clip" was already taken,
some marketing lunatic lacking in imagination stupidly selected
"clipless". If past history is any indication of the future, we're
going to be stuck with the "clipless" name forever.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 7:55:35 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 17:55:05 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

Well: Over the last few years I've developed an interest in sundials, a
subject that turned out to be far more complicated than I anticipated. I
ended up reading a couple books on the subject, most prominently Albert
Waugh's _Sundials, Their Theory and Construction_. The book is technical
enough to contain extensive tables, dozens of technical illustrations,
trigonometric equations and calculations etc.
Out of curiosity, how do you handle daylight savings time on a
sundial?

Well, most sundials don't account for it at all. Most commercial sundials are of the horizontal
style, are just ornamental and are useless for telling time. For example, to be anywhere near
useful, the gnomon (or shadow casting thing) has to point at the Pole Star, so it must match
one's latitude. They probably match the city in China where they're made.

But there are better ones. At our university is a sundial in memory of Rich Pirko who was a
friend of mine and who ran our planetarium. It's a completely different design, an equatorial
dial. The design allows the hour ring to be shifted for Daylight Saving Time.

My sundial, 99% finished, is a reflecting ceiling sundial - a collection of analemmas painted
on the ceiling. Once I find a company that will provide the labels, it will have the DS time at
the summer end of each analemma and the Eastern Standard time label at the winter end.

- Frank Krygowski

On Sunday, March 28, 2021 at 10:48:30 p.m. UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 28 Mar 2021 17:06:43 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
wrote:

Only someone as highly educated as you doesn't think that
the sun doesn't come up in the morning or sets at night.
"31 logical fallacies in 8 minutes"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qf03U04rqGQ (8:10)

0:33 Fallacy of Composition
0:42 Fallacy of Division
0:52 The Gambler's Fallacy
1:00 Tu Quoque (Who Are You To Talk?)
1:19 Strawman
1:32 Ad hominem
1:49 Genetic Fallacy
1:56 Fallacious Appeal To Authority
2:15 Red Herring
2:34 Appeal to Emotion
2:48 Appeal to Popularity (Bandwagon)
2:52 Appeal to Tradition
2:56 Appeal to Nature
3:04 Appeal to Ignorance
3:16 Begging the Question
3:32 Equivocation
3:50 False Dichotomy (Black or White)
4:00 Middle Ground Fallacy
4:09 Decision Point Fallacy (Sorites Paradox)
4:29 Slippery Slope Fallacy
4:46 Hasty Generalisations (Anecdotes)
5:05 Faulty Analogy
5:14 Burden of Proof
5:43 Affirming the Consequent
6:10 Denying the Antecedent
6:22 Moving the Goalposts
6:35 False Cause (and Texas Sharpshooter)
6:54 Loaded Question
7:01 No True Scotsman
7:10 Personal Incredulity
7:18 The Fallacy Fallacy

I'm not sure, but I suspect you may have used all 31 logical falacies
in your various failed attempts to engage in a discussion. However,
that doesn't really matter because few of your discussions are worth
reading due to lack of useful content. For example, what is the take
away from your topic switching rant that follows? Can you prove or
substantiate anything?
I sure wish everyone would be a smart as you are.
So do I. It would make for much more interesting discussions.

I really hate it when every one of your messages looks like it came
from a cookie cutter template:
1. Opening insult.
2. Exactly one sentence announcing opposition to someones ideas.
3. Attempt to change the topic to something you find interesting.
4. Multiple off topic claims all without substantiation.
5. Closing insult, often with some spelling and grammar errors.
Oh, wait, they are - they voted for Biden who as one of his first
orders of business invaded Syria. Then the media with all of the
intelligence you have printed that they had made a missile attack
on the Americans. Funny how there were only military adviser forces
left and they weren't in any range of missile attacks. With all of
that Jeff-like intelligence Biden just said that illegal immigrants
always increase around Christmas. Too bad that the actual numbers
show exactly the reverse.
Yep. Cookie cutter template. There are a few common items missing
from the template, but I can add those as needed. I think you might
find the template useful for future topic juggling rants.
Yep, Jeff, you make morons seem highly intelligent. Play that roll
you have given yourself.
The line I used prefer is:
"May you burn in the hell of your own creation".
--
Jeff Liebermann
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

If Tom is so bad, why not Killfile him or simply ignore him?

Cheers