Page 9 of 11

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Posted: Thu Aug 13, 2015 7:52 pm
by TonyWilliams
lorenfb wrote:Really sorry to have offended you so significantly. We all have offending egos, including me, but some
more than others and that's human nature. Indicating that one has a greater manifesting ego than others
hardly compares with some of the offensive language posted in this thread by some.

If I ever again decide to attend a Leaf gathering with my future FCEV, I'll provide my personal apology.
I have plenty of ego, as would anybody who has a list of accomplishments. Wilting flowers tend to get squished!!!

I whole heartily accept your future personal apology.

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Posted: Fri Aug 14, 2015 9:20 am
by lorenfb
ydnas7 wrote:
that fuel cell i linked to is a bus fuel cell
So you like to reference irrelevant data and "play games", right?

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2015 6:22 pm
by TonyWilliams
epirali wrote:First I have no interesting in convincing you or anyone.

That's good. I'd say that you're succeeding, by a huge margin. Congrats, and keep up the good work!

Second only people interested in fact, reason and rational analysis are ones that are worth engaging in discussions.

Which would make your diatribe quite silly and useless then, eh?

Third I have not attacked anyone here, and I challenge you to prove otherwise. On the other hand I can show many examples of your baseless personal attack, misstatements and various uncivil posts. For example the repeated bs of "EV advocates are hindering adoption" instead of "EV PURISTS hindering adoption," which is completely different.

Exactly the kind of respond I would expect. I have kids, and I think I've heard every kind of this argument. At least it brought a smile to my face.

And btw what does this post have anything to do with Hydrogen and FCEV? This entire post seems like nothing more than a personal attack on a thread about FCEVs. Or maybe I don't "get" what the topic of this thread is about?

You said it, pal. I couldn't agree more.

Re: Hydrogen and FCEVs discussion thread

Posted: Sun Aug 16, 2015 6:27 pm
by epirali
TonyWilliams wrote:
epirali wrote:First I have no interesting in convincing you or anyone.

That's good. I'd say that you're succeeding, by a huge margin. Congrats, and keep up the good work!

Second only people interested in fact, reason and rational analysis are ones that are worth engaging in discussions.

Which would make your diatribe quite silly and useless then, eh?

Third I have not attacked anyone here, and I challenge you to prove otherwise. On the other hand I can show many examples of your baseless personal attack, misstatements and various uncivil posts. For example the repeated bs of "EV advocates are hindering adoption" instead of "EV PURISTS hindering adoption," which is completely different.

Exactly the kind of respond I would expect. I have kids, and I think I've heard every kind of this argument. At least it brought a smile to my face.

And btw what does this post have anything to do with Hydrogen and FCEV? This entire post seems like nothing more than a personal attack on a thread about FCEVs. Or maybe I don't "get" what the topic of this thread is about?

You said it, pal. I couldn't agree more.
I am sorry, I am trying to take you seriously and respond in a productive manner, but I think I'll just resort to asking for moderators to step in please.

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:59 am
by edatoakrun
Repost of my 8/27 post moved from this thread, to the FCV thread where it is already buried under ~five pages, IMO, consisting largely of the virtual equivalent of primates hurling feces at each other:

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.p ... start=2830

So, to assist that moderator in his quest to see that every post on every MNL thread is entirely on-topic, I suggest you restrict any of your replies to why the Mirai in particular is such a lousy, inefficient subsidy-sucking-mobile.
edatoakrun wrote:
="GRA"... a universal car needs to be able to do everything that an ICE can do...
Well then, BEVs are indeed doomed to failure.

The cost of equipping my leaf with a device spewing 30 or 40 gallons of CO2 laced with trace poisonous gasses, for every mile I drove, would of course be prohibitively expensive...
="GRA"...I assume we're both California taxpayers, and consider $200m from the state spread over 10 years to be chicken feed...
I have no Idea where you got that figure, implying that the total cost to California taxpayers for FCEV support will be limited to $200 million over the next decade, if a substantial number of FCEVs ever actually are to see the road.

Care to explain?

On the other hand, I don't think there is any doubt that if California decided to spend ~$200 million, collected from any user base (ratepayers, taxpayers, or drivers) over ~ten years, that expenditure could result in ~500 DC charge stations, each capable of refueling ~ten to twenty BEVs simultaneously, located at suitable business locations located along California's highways.

This initially subsidized DC network would be largely sufficient to support the first ~million BEVs on California's roads, after which, I have little doubt we could depend on free-market developments to supply the next twenty to thirty million California BEVs.

There is no doubt in my mind that many of those promoting FCVs, both in both the ICEV and petroleum industries, are well aware of this reality.

And it largely explains those corporations enthusiasm in spending other peoples money to subsidize the development and sales of, and supporting infrastructure for, what can only be accurately described as POS vehicles, such as the Mirai.

Re: Toyota Mirai Fuel Cell

Posted: Mon Aug 31, 2015 9:18 am
by epirali
edatoakrun wrote:Repost of my 8/27 post moved from this thread, to the FCV thread where it is already buried under ~five pages, IMO, consisting largely of the virtual equivalent of primates hurling feces at each other:

http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.p ... start=2830

So, to assist that moderator in his quest to see that every post on every MNL thread is entirely on-topic, I suggest you restrict any of your replies to why the Mirai in particular is such a lousy, inefficient subsidy-sucking-mobile.
edatoakrun wrote:
="GRA"... a universal car needs to be able to do everything that an ICE can do...
Well then, BEVs are indeed doomed to failure.

The cost of equipping my leaf with a device spewing 30 or 40 gallons of CO2 laced with trace poisonous gasses, for every mile I drove, would of course be prohibitively expensive...
="GRA"...I assume we're both California taxpayers, and consider $200m from the state spread over 10 years to be chicken feed...
I have no Idea where you got that figure, implying that the total cost to California taxpayers for FCEV support will be limited to $200 million over the next decade, if a substantial number of FCEVs ever actually are to see the road.

Care to explain?

On the other hand, I don't think there is any doubt that if California decided to spend ~$200 million, collected from any user base (ratepayers, taxpayers, or drivers) over ~ten years, that expenditure could result in ~500 DC charge stations, each capable of refueling ~ten to twenty BEVs simultaneously, located at suitable business locations located along California's highways.

This initially subsidized DC network would be largely sufficient to support the first ~million BEVs on California's roads, after which, I have little doubt we could depend on free-market developments to supply the next twenty to thirty million California BEVs.

There is no doubt in my mind that many of those promoting FCVs, both in both the ICEV and petroleum industries, are well aware of this reality.

And it largely explains those corporations enthusiasm in spending other peoples money to subsidize the development and sales of, and supporting infrastructure for, what can only be accurately described as POS vehicles, such as the Mirai.
I guess as one of the "monkeys" you so fondly describe how is any of this related to the Mirai, except, you know using the work Mirai at the end? I guess I am just too stupid to get it.

Re: Central Locking can you use your smartkey to shut the windows?

Posted: Tue Sep 08, 2015 10:54 am
by XeonPony
How utterly useless does some one need to be, to have the "need" for remote windows? The fact they think their users are so mentally dimwitted that they need a "auto" window is insulting enough! it pisses me off more then any thing, I know what I want!

There is no replacement to using ones brain and thinking ahead! I hope such an utterly useless function is never added to the leaf, or if there is an option to physically remove it entirely.


To answer the OPs question there is a very reliable trick: Use brain, think, then act.

Somes times you'll be cuaght off guard and seat gets a bit wet it is not the end of the world.

Re: Essay writing help

Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 6:54 am
by Stoaty
Looks like this guy needs some help from his own service. ;)

Re: Essay writing help

Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 11:17 am
by LeftieBiker
I'm sure that if I need to translate Chinese into mediocre English I can rely on some internet spammer to do the job right for me.

Re: Essay writing help

Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 2:49 pm
by dhanson865
locking this one but leaving it up in case people really want to make fun of it. I did remove the hot URL and ban the posting account.