quentron.com

[sarkeizen]

maybe its because you like to hear me repeat myself over and over again?

Just told you that you were pretty boring.  Anyway, you don't repeat yourself.  You always say different things and almost never clearly answer a direct question.  If you read the question carefully, moving your lips if you need to.  Then fashioned your answer in the same form as the question.  You might start sounding coherent.  I won't hold my breath though.

how many times must i tell you that it doesnt matter how long the thing lasts-as long as it lasts the lifespan of the ipod right?

Not if your argument is "It will last forever".  80 years is exactly one "forever" short of forever.  It's simple math.  The fact that a battery might last 80 years seems entirely beside both your original statement, quentron nonsense and your point about 2LOT.

you know of any oxford bells that can power an ipod for 80years?

No idea, however it's actually unimportant.  Your primary point was "Textbooks say it will run an ipod forever", I said you could not support that.  Now say you were lying.  Fine.  I win.

i just challenged you to use textbooks to show us how a textbook battery goes dead and you wont do it

Why would I need to?  Since a) It's not the point I was arguing against, b) you agree that it does.  c) I'm not making any claims about textbooks.  So what's to discuss moron-boy?

@sarkeizen,you wont because you cant.its you who,s being hammered here buddy

It really seems like it's you.  Didn't you just admit that I was right about the point concerning "The textbooks say it will last forever".  You just said it won't.   That would imply "that you cannot support it with textbooks" (unless you want to weaken your textbook argument to the point that it's useless).

,wakeup.i can use a textbook to show you how an oxford zinc-carbon goes flat anytime :-)

...and I'm sure your mom is proud.  In fact if you put that on your resume.  You might get a job at "Mister Donut".

[profitis]

B)my argument was that textbooks support and predict a kelvin-buster.thats exactly what i showed.C) 3 years is all we need from the above said kelvin-buster.should it decide to go on for eternity then thats its own decision.its not up to you or me @sarkeizen.(although we,l make sure that it rusts after 3years in the panasonic labs).D)huh? E)huh!

[sarkeizen]

B)my argument was that textbooks support and predict a kelvin-buster.

Actually your argument was "textbooks demonstrate the existence and ability to construct batteries which will run an ipod continuously forever".  Again I can show you exactly where you say or imply this and I have several times.

Unless that's no longer your argument.  I mean you should just say that.  Which of course means you lost that argument.  Right? If you're willing to admit that then there's at least room to move on to something else but if you're just going to play the same game if I crush whatever your current argument is then.  Yawn.  Sorry, not interested.

You might think you have agreed that I won that round but it's hard to tell when a) You don't say things clearly and b) You start talking about your battery *deciding* to run forever, perhaps it's talking to you too?

C) 3 years is all we need from

3 years, 2 years, 1 year, 100 years.  It's irrelevant if your argument is still "forever".  If it's not, I'd like to hear you say that you can't support "forever".  That was what you were arguing so you would lose that one right?

should it decide to go on for eternity then thats its own decision.

Your battery is also conscious....it *decides* things?  I think whatever you're smoking...you should cut back.

D)huh? E)huh!

Your English is pretty bad, I get that.  How about formulating questions that aren't simply grunts?

[Philip Hardcastle]

Hi All.


Please go to


www.quentron.com


for some interesting reading.


Regards
Phil

[Qwert]

A collectible for $5000?