mnottertail
Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: InfoMan quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote:
ORIGINAL: InfoMan quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail quote:
ORIGINAL: Real0ne aspiration is a process, and like tommy boy you chose the wrong one, thought you were catching on in a previous post, but I guess not after all. everything is a process. it is a process to obtain intellect, unfortunately you were not given the choice, being born a profound retard, you have never and will never catch on, and it is obvious. You cannot explain why it is not 1) natural, 2) aspired, 3) flame, you can only spout drivel. naturally (without special help or intervention) aspirated (inhaled, drawn in, sniff, snort, gulp, insufflate) fire( combustion or burning, in which substances combine chemically with oxygen from the air and typically give out bright light, heat, and smoke.) This has been explained... Convection requires gravity to function. (needs outside help/intervention) The thermal exchange actually increases pressure, not decreases it (no suction produced) thus - the very functions of fire in and of itself contradicts the statement 'naturally aspirated'. we need gravity to live. plants need gravity, the earth needs gravity, we are all just a fart bubble in a camels ass. (yes the thermal pressure is different from top of flame to bottom. I am ok calling it suction (boyles law and all that, to attempt equilibrium, naturo horror vacui........yeah, close enough for the girls we go with) Fire needs oxygen to function. convection not fire needs conditions The universe needs PI, Plancks constant, e, and many other things to function therefore nothing in our experience is natural except me getting a blowjob. Class dismissed. Schlau, aber nicht wahr. I suggest another course of study. What you are willing to call it does not factor in... It has been explained - it is not natural, it is not aspirated. You cannot use the word-to-word definition then subjectively interpenetrate each of the words to best suit how you want to define it. perhaps when you study the natural sciences, particularly physics, you will find that gravity is natural in the world. Its one of the given components, like the speed of light. People on space ships under controlled conditions starting fires in outer space is not natural. The pedantic semantics displayed, although extremely untutored are nevertheless assumptively incorrect prima facie. You must naturally prove that convection is not natural. Again, I will quote Einstein at Princeton, when allowing a hapless undergraduate trying to explain relativity to a pretty girl in order to impress her, and while extremely eloquent, fundamentally and ubiquitously wrong in all aspects: Schlau, aber nicht wahr. Have someone throw you in a frame of reference, you need to study the natural sciences before commenting.
_____________________________
Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30
|