Search results for query: *

Yes, a physicist can calculate the needed angles, and speed to put a 1.62oz 1.68" diameter round ball with dimples into a 4.25" diameter hole maybe 100 yards away. Tiger Woods can put in the hole in less than 60 seconds.

Best to get a larger rock of pumice, it will float longer.

I thought the SeaLion was the community spokesperson here. I must not have gotten the memo putting you in charge, guess the WW3, name calling, "done", ignore, distortions, recollections of HS beatdowns, absurd arguments, etc, and now with everyone running away now is because you were having so...

How?

I know, I know, many are, now first take your blood take your blood pressure, then review Thread #145 for your answer, SealionDan will swoon you with LA LA land facts and figures ad infinitum until you slide past 1976, or whenever the last very unique A was built, and finally find the unwatch...

Everyone needs to get the last word in I see, for all those that I figuratively threaten, by all means ignore me, I'm honored.

I deserve no special consideration in the matter, thanks for asking.

Really, because I have read EVERY single reply here, and those (a Lot) that I have disagreed with, I voiced that disagreement. I have clearly stated my case at nearly every raised contention, and asked for an explanation often for those contentions that are unclear. It does not matter how many...

"In argumentation and informal logic, reductio ad absurdum (RAA) is a method of refuting a claim by extending the logic of the opponent's argument to a point of absurdity. Also known as the reductio argument and argumentum ad absurdum."

You know how those Chess geniuses that play against 6 opponents simultaneously, I feel I'm playing checkers against two tag teams of 12 members each. And you can't get blood out of a rock. :lol:

I assume that is a sincere invitation, so thank you. But based on my experience, they ultimately figuratively turn into rock throwing soap boxes where nobody is really listening or interested in another's perspective on any matter, and the primary objective is to rant and change everyone else's...

I can, but why play games here, you designed it, share it with us, and we can move on? I disagree with your premise that I have no idea what it should be for, and that is your useless assumption. So spill the beans.

Let's get it down to a more, word of the day, granular level to help sort out the confusion or whatever above..

I'm game, now please be specific in what is not clear that you read or I shared. Your major in college was? I was given an "A" in technical writing my sophomore year, but I might have lost a bit off my speedball in the decades since. So where were we, you are going to point out where I lose you...

Como?

Taken a bit out of context The nomenclature used is inaccurate, my suggestion implied is fix it. :thumbsup: Thanks for asking. I usually let my lawyer make my demands, so as not allow for any confusion here, and just to be very clear. For something so many have claimed to not care about...

ad hominem, so you got nothing else to add?:rolleyes:

:wtf:

Your highness, I only concede it was moved.

Then you haven't read the entire thread, which is OK, it's rather circuitous at this point. I addressed/questioned the arbitrariness of the existing divide a ways back, and by implication, if enough parts interchange across the entire spectrum, if one arbitrary divide is OK, why not more...

Because it was intended to be a welcomed suggestion (and why there is a Suggestion/Comments forum at the very top opening menu/listing) that might help improve the site, for those in charge or the owners to ponder, they know the bottom line, the limits of their system, the target audience they...

I, many replies ago, addressed what seemed to be the reason for rod ends as a lower LCA cross brace connection.. Mainly there is no "real estate" available in the existing area to weld (which would be a horrible very unfriendly user solution) or bolt a multi axis robust restraint bracket to...

I repect passon, not numbers, because I have nothing to sell, I want nothing from anybody, and I am not running for office.

Because the reason for combining is by your response the cars in question do share a lot of parts that fit, , so if early A's and A's also share a lot of parts that fit, their separation comes into question other than "history" you mention that few seem to understand, know of or care about.

Your advice is not without merit, garnted, but the negative often emotional response here has itself been rather informative. Obviously, we disagree with what defines "messing with" and likely what the real purpose of a dedicated "suggestion forum" is on a website other than maybe window dressing.

So while you are on fire figuratively, now share with us all the items of current "Early A"s that also "fit" non early "A's".

At some point we need to post here a complete list of the brilliant moronic claims of the commentator, but not yet. I just watched it again. :rofl:

Lookee there, I finally got one green thumb up, the seed is planted, my job is done, Hallelujah:thankyou:

I already have guessed with reasoning, but I see no similarity in the issues at hand, in that monte Carlo bars usually have lots of "real estate" to make a restricted connection, the lower suspension brace does not. So enlighten me.

That is the Mopar spoof equivalent of The Steven Colbert Report from 2004 on. It's f'ing funny, I loved it. There are so many classic tropes I'd love to quote, but I don't want to spoil it. That is definitely a 1 of 1 "Charger" Enjoy.