Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2007 20:35:45 GMT
From: still me <>
Subject: Re: Octane ratings.....what's the truth?

On 20 Apr 2007 02:44:14 GMT, Dave Hinz <> wrote: >I was hoping for unbiased sources. Obviously you are incapable of >providing same. Wrong conclusion. Once again, I invite you to do your own research. >At least you're nearing self-awareness. Let me guess - I've plonked you >before and you've nym-shifted yet again, right? Aside from the fact that "plonking" is a habit of the truly lame, you're even lamer - because you claim to plonk people and never do. >> Let me repeat: what happened in the 70's is irrelevant. What is today, >> is. > >Riiiiight. So. One last try there sparky. Why should I believe this >batch of idiots more than the batch of idiots 20 years ago? They both >seem to have the same basic ideas, but with opposite results. What's >the real deal, and why? Hint: if you respond with abuse, that weakens >your credibility. Just so you know. Let me try one more time: what people said 20 years ago has no bearing on the scientific realities today. Continually claiming that it does really makes you look very foolish.

Return to Main Index

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2020 - The Saab Network -
For usage guidelines, see the Mission and Purpose Page.
[Contact | Site Map | on Facebook | on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]