| Tomu Breidah |
|
No Problems, Only Solutions
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 08/14/04
|
|
Posts: 6815
|
|
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
effing cold
#319724 - 01/03/14 05:33 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
You've got 3 degrees I'm missing.
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319735 - 01/03/14 09:21 PM
|
|
|
> It's f*cking cold (14º F) where I'm at. How 'bout you?
>
> http://thefuckingweather.com/
>
>
> I know, it's old. But man is it sofa king cold.
Also, closed roads and my damn furnace just died.
|
|
|
|
14 above... phhhhh
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319737 - 01/03/14 09:33 PM
|
|
|
It's supposed to be -75 wind chill this weekend. I think the beach party is off...
|
|
|
| Jdurgi |
|
Regular
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 1009
|
|
Loc: NEW England, CT
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319742 - 01/03/14 11:03 PM
|
|
|
> It's f*cking cold (14º F) where I'm at. How 'bout you?
>
> http://thefuckingweather.com/
>
>
> I know, it's old. But man is it sofa king cold.
12º F (or -11.1º C for the rest of the world) where I am. The blowing snow got into the lock on my shed where my snowblower, salt, and shovels are. Had to break out a propane torch to melt the ice out of there in order to unlock the lock. Damn it's cold out, and we're getting sub-zero temperatures overnight. Going to be brutal.
|
--------------------------------------------------
I am just a worthless liar.
I am just an imbecile.
I will only complicate you.
Trust in me and fall as well.
|
|
| redk9258 |
|
Regular
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 3968
|
|
Loc: Troy, Illinois USA
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319747 - 01/04/14 12:50 AM
|
|
|
Was 1º F this morning when I left for work. Forecast says 10º below 0 Sunday night after 6-12" of snow.
|
|
|
| redk9258 |
|
Regular
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 3968
|
|
Loc: Troy, Illinois USA
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: You've got 3 degrees I'm missing.
[Re: TriggerFin]
#319748 - 01/04/14 12:52 AM
|
|
|
> Also, closed roads and my damn furnace just died.
Did you get it fixed? What are the symptoms?
|
|
|
|
Re: You've got 3 degrees I'm missing.
[Re: redk9258]
#319749 - 01/04/14 01:12 AM
|
|
|
> > Also, closed roads and my damn furnace just died.
>
> Did you get it fixed? What are the symptoms?
Symptoms: 1. breaking out the electric heater for the basement, gotta keep the pipes warm. 2. Burying myself in all the blankets I can find. 3. Cursing the cost of heating oil that has left me nothing in the budget for repairing the thing that uses said oil.
Okay, um... not lighting. I know to bleed the line from the tank when needed. Also, someone else looked at it, and proceeded to %$#@ing bust the damn ignition button, %$@# %$#@%$#!
|
|
|
italie |
|
MAME owes italie many thank yous, hah
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/20/03
|
|
Posts: 15243
|
|
Loc: BoomTown
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319759 - 01/04/14 05:32 AM
|
|
|
> It's f*cking cold (14º F) where I'm at. How 'bout you?
>
> http://thefuckingweather.com/
>
>
> I know, it's old. But man is it sofa king cold.
High of -8 on Monday. Oh joy...
|
|
|
| italie |
|
MAME owes italie many thank yous, hah
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/20/03
|
|
Posts: 15243
|
|
Loc: BoomTown
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: You've got 3 degrees I'm missing.
[Re: TriggerFin]
#319760 - 01/04/14 05:43 AM
|
|
|
> > > Also, closed roads and my damn furnace just died.
> >
> > Did you get it fixed? What are the symptoms?
>
> Symptoms: 1. breaking out the electric heater for the basement, gotta keep the pipes
> warm. 2. Burying myself in all the blankets I can find. 3. Cursing the cost of
> heating oil that has left me nothing in the budget for repairing the thing that uses
> said oil.
>
> Okay, um... not lighting. I know to bleed the line from the tank when needed. Also,
> someone else looked at it, and proceeded to %$#@ing bust the damn ignition button,
> %$@# %$#@%$#!
Right there with you...
Furnace dead last night. House got to 45F by morning.
Got the furnace running this morning fiddling with the thermostat, went to work.
Wife calls me around 3PM...house is 87F.
Buy a thermostat after work. Install it. New thermostat dead. Too late to return it.
Twisting red and white wires together every 30 minutes...seems to do the job.
|
|
|
| DMala |
|
Sleep is overrated
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 05/09/05
|
|
Posts: 3989
|
|
Loc: Waltham, MA
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: You've got 3 degrees I'm missing.
[Re: italie]
#319761 - 01/04/14 06:18 AM
|
|
|
> Right there with you...
>
> Furnace dead last night. House got to 45F by morning.
> Got the furnace running this morning fiddling with the thermostat, went to work.
> Wife calls me around 3PM...house is 87F.
> Buy a thermostat after work. Install it. New thermostat dead. Too late to return it.
> Twisting red and white wires together every 30 minutes...seems to do the job.
Thermostats are such garbage these days, unless you spring for the $400 "home automation" BS. I just replaced one where the batteries were impossible to get out, and I ended up bending the contacts all out of shape. It would seem to be fine, then you close a door or walk by too heavily, and it would die. I woke up a couple of mornings on the verge of being able to see my breath. The new one is better, but not much. Makes me want to go back to the kind that is basically just a sealed vial of mercury. You don't get any fancy programming, but at least the damned thing works.
Here it's currently 0 F and still falling, BTW.
Edited by DMala (01/04/14 06:19 AM)
|
|
|
|
Re: You've got 3 degrees I'm missing.
[Re: DMala]
#319762 - 01/04/14 06:40 AM
|
|
|
> Thermostats are such garbage these days, unless you spring for the $400 "home
> automation" BS.
Speaking of which... I bought one of those Nest Learning Thermostats last year and I fucking LOVE it. I was very hesitant to drop $250 on it, but it really is nice, and I'm glad I did.
|
GroovyMAME support forum on BYOAC
|
|
| redk9258 |
|
Regular
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 3968
|
|
Loc: Troy, Illinois USA
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: You've got 3 degrees I'm missing.
[Re: DMala]
#319763 - 01/04/14 07:15 AM
|
|
|
I have a 25 year old thermostat that was made with a mercury switch. Works perfectly.
It is programmed like this: My daughters fuck with the setting, I change it back. Thought about being a dickhead and buying one of those locking plastic covers buy decided not to.
|
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319767 - 01/04/14 08:55 AM
|
|
|
|
|
| Jdurgi |
|
Regular
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 1009
|
|
Loc: NEW England, CT
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: Jdurgi]
#319768 - 01/04/14 08:58 AM
|
|
|
> > It's f*cking cold (14º F) where I'm at. How 'bout you?
> >
> > http://thefuckingweather.com/
> >
> >
> > I know, it's old. But man is it sofa king cold.
>
> 12º F (or -11.1º C for the rest of the world) where I am. The blowing snow got into
> the lock on my shed where my snowblower, salt, and shovels are. Had to break out a
> propane torch to melt the ice out of there in order to unlock the lock. Damn it's
> cold out, and we're getting sub-zero temperatures overnight. Going to be brutal.
To make things worse, as I was leaving for the pubs earlier tonight, I heard a LOT of creaking and cracking in the trees around my house. Apparently, the sudden onset of sub-zero (FATALITY) temperatures is causing the internals of the trees around me to shatter and crack as they freeze. Had a tree drop yesterday that made the house shake as it hit the ground. I will likely spend tomorrow photographing all my valuables and sending those to my homeowners insurance company. I have enough collectibles where it's worth paying extra for insurance if I have to. 
|
--------------------------------------------------
I am just a worthless liar.
I am just an imbecile.
I will only complicate you.
Trust in me and fall as well.
|
|
| Andrew |
|
Girl Watcher
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 5081
|
|
Loc: Boston, Mass.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319782 - 01/04/14 07:28 PM
|
|
|
-8 F here this morning at 7:30am. Brrrr!
 
|
--
A story of one man and his obsession with the female anatomy.
|
|
| Tomu Breidah |
|
No Problems, Only Solutions
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 08/14/04
|
|
Posts: 6815
|
|
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Record Breaking Temps, Polar Vortex, F-f-f-f-fu*orz
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319840 - 01/05/14 04:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
| redk9258 |
|
Regular
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 3968
|
|
Loc: Troy, Illinois USA
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
|
Effing coldest I remember in a long time...
-7ºF - Real Feel -32º.
[ATTACHED IMAGE]
|
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319871 - 01/06/14 05:15 PM
|
|
|
> It's f*cking cold (14º F) where I'm at. How 'bout you?
>
> http://thefuckingweather.com/
>
>
> I know, it's old. But man is it sofa king cold.
Bitter cold and a lot of snow here today. This is the first time I can remember the local meteorologists getting the forecast wrong in the other direction. Normally, when they predict several inches of snow we end up with a dusting. Yesterday they forecast 4-8" and we got 13.
That was enough to shut down the whole county, so no work for me today. 
|
|
|
| redk9258 |
|
Regular
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 3968
|
|
Loc: Troy, Illinois USA
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
|
Damn, the sun comes up and it gets colder?
[ATTACHED IMAGE]
|
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#319875 - 01/06/14 07:40 PM
|
|
|
> It's f*cking cold (14º F) where I'm at. How 'bout you?
>
> http://thefuckingweather.com/
>
>
> I know, it's old. But man is it sofa king cold.
18F here in Morgantown, WV. It's messed up that I had to visit the states before I saw snow, and I live in fricking Stockholm.
|
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: redk9258]
#319891 - 01/07/14 12:54 AM
|
|
|
That's ALWAYS the case in Japan, late January and pretty much all of February. From about mid honshu on up...
not that freaking cold, but it seems to get colder after the sun comes up.
|
Just broke my personal record for number of consecutive days without dying!
|
|
|
Re: effing cold
[Re: URherenow]
#319892 - 01/07/14 12:59 AM
|
|
|
> That's ALWAYS the case in Japan, late January and pretty much all of February. From
> about mid honshu on up...
>
> not that freaking cold, but it seems to get colder after the sun comes up.
Yeah, there's some lag before the winter sun can overtake the cooling effects.
|
|
|
|
|
Good day to be in the park today. This was just one of many 
[ATTACHED IMAGE - CLICK FOR FULL SIZE]
|
|
|
| Tomu Breidah |
|
No Problems, Only Solutions
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 08/14/04
|
|
Posts: 6815
|
|
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Yeah, yeah. Our winter is your summer. [nt]
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#320183 - 01/11/14 11:56 AM
|
|
|
no need to rub it in. 
|
LEVEL-4
|
|
| italie |
|
MAME owes italie many thank yous, hah
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/20/03
|
|
Posts: 15243
|
|
Loc: BoomTown
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
It's a polar vortex of another color...tis all. <nt>
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#320189 - 01/11/14 04:33 PM
|
|
|
> Good day to be in the park today. This was just one of many
|
|
|
GatKong |
|
Tetris Mason
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 04/20/07
|
|
Posts: 5904
|
|
Loc: Sector 9
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
TIME mag blamed "global cooling" on polar vortexes in 1974.
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#320192 - 01/11/14 05:22 PM
|
|
|
TIME Article
Quote:
Scientists have found other indications of global cooling. For one thing there has been a noticeable expansion of the great belt of dry, high-altitude polar winds —the so-called circumpolar vortex—that sweep from west to east around the top and bottom of the world.
As a kid, I recall one of our gradeschool projects was to draw Earth in the future, and how we could adapt to live out the coming ice age if man didn't curb carbon emissions. I drew us all as basically Eskimos living in igloos with flying cars.
Basically, the Earth's temperature fluctuates... and what ever it's doing at the time the agenda-ists blame on us.
|
|
|
|
Re: TIME mag blamed "global cooling" on polar vortexes in 1974.
[Re: GatKong]
#320197 - 01/11/14 06:00 PM
|
|
|
> with flying cars.
Because all your life, some con artist has been promising flying cars. And all your life, everyone has believed, because we want to fly.
By "some," I mean "one particular," for pretty much the entire time.
Yesterday, I found myself glad I use Fahrenheit, as the temperature would have still been "freezing" in Celsius when I checked it.
|
|
|
|
What are you on about?
[Re: TriggerFin]
#320198 - 01/11/14 06:42 PM
|
|
|
There have been flying cars for decades. Sure you need to be rich and have a pilot's license, but still... They exist and a few people actually use them.
First one that actually did fly was made in 1946!
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/flying-car1.htm
|
|
|
|
Re: What are you on about?
[Re: URherenow]
#320249 - 01/12/14 08:03 AM
|
|
|
> There have been flying cars for decades. Sure you need to be rich and have a pilot's
> license, but still... They exist and a few people actually use them.
>
> First one that actually did fly was made in 1946!
>
> http://auto.howstuffworks.com/flying-car1.htm
As the last paragraph of that page says, none of those ever developed a viable flying car. Also, "flying car" is not the same as "roadable aircraft." A plane that can have its wings removed or collapsed is not a flying car, but a driving plane. To know "what I'm on about," just turn to page three: "Paul Moller has spent 40 years and millions of dollars developing his Skycar." That's "millions of dollars" of other people's money. He was sued a decade ago, and his current plans go back to something akin to his original design, capable of hovering at 10 feet, and not at all suitable for transportation.
|
|
|
|
potāto, potăto
[Re: TriggerFin]
#320255 - 01/12/14 09:57 AM
|
|
|
not viable just means nobody was successful in mass producing yet. When the vehicles "drove" they were NOT driven by thrust, therefore they were Cars that were converted to aircraft, NOT drivable aircraft.
No aircraft has a driveshaft that drives the wheels. ALL of them use thrust to move. The only thing that comes close to your description is an ultra-light.
|
|
|
|
Re: potāto, potăto
[Re: URherenow]
#320263 - 01/12/14 01:35 PM
|
|
|
> not viable just means nobody was successful in mass producing yet. When the vehicles
> "drove" they were NOT driven by thrust, therefore they were Cars that were converted
> to aircraft, NOT drivable aircraft.
>
> No aircraft has a driveshaft that drives the wheels. ALL of them use thrust to move.
> The only thing that comes close to your description is an ultra-light.
Have you seen this article? It describes all the supposed "flying cars" in question.
#1: never flew.
#2: tiny three-wheeled plane with detachable bits, never produced. There's a picture linked.
#3: "Fulton adapted a plane for the road."
#4: crashed, abandoned.
#5: Couldn't drive it, and it didn't actually "fly."
#6: Finally, a car with wings. But what rules does it fly under? if it were produced, you'd have to drive to an airstrip and follow all the rules for planes. Probably not street legal, either, so where are you driving to?
All of the vehicles above are not flying cars. Fanciers of them are described in the article as "roadable aircraft enthusiasts." That's what they call themselves, because they know what these things are.
Now, look at the Jetsons. Flying cars. They fly, they never use roads, only touching down at their destination. Flying cars. See Moller's Skycar? It flies, and never uses roads. Well, if it ever actually flew. These are flying cars. And they don't exist yet.
|
|
|
|
Re: potāto, potăto
[Re: TriggerFin]
#320264 - 01/12/14 01:53 PM
|
|
|
I'm with you there. It's the 21st fucking century. My phone has more power than all the computers in the world a few decades ago. Where's my fucking flying car?
|
|
|
| Tomu Breidah |
|
No Problems, Only Solutions
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 08/14/04
|
|
Posts: 6815
|
|
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: potāto, potăto
[Re: Vas Crabb]
#320267 - 01/12/14 04:14 PM
|
|
|
Guys... Guys...
If you want the topic about driving and getting high.... 
Here's a sign for you.
> I'm with you there. It's the 21st fucking century. My phone has more power than all
> the computers in the world a few decades ago. Where's my fucking flying car?
eta:
Edited by Tomu Breidah (01/12/14 04:48 PM)
|
|
|
|
You can't win this one
[Re: TriggerFin]
#320269 - 01/12/14 04:23 PM
|
|
|
If you don't drive it on the road, it's not a car. What you want is for everyone to own an aircraft. I like the words that article used: Personal Air vehicle. That's what you want, not a "flying car". That's how what the Jetsons use would be classified.
A "CAR" is a specific type of motorized vehicle with 4 wheels and an engine that (directly or indirectly) drives them.
"1. a road vehicle, typically with four wheels, powered by an internal combustion engine and able to carry a small number of people"
Street legal cars that can also fly do exist. Sure, the propeller and wings don't come off of the following example, but it still has 4 wheels and the engine drives the wheels (RWD, in this case).
You can see all kinds on youtube. Don't hate because they're not mass produced and you (nor anyone here probably) can afford one, or could be bothered having to get an FAA license and drive to the air strip to fly with it.
|
|
|
| Tomu Breidah |
|
No Problems, Only Solutions
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 08/14/04
|
|
Posts: 6815
|
|
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: You can't win this one
[Re: URherenow]
#320271 - 01/12/14 04:43 PM
|
|
|
I think the idea (if we're taking notes from the Jetsons) is to have a car that hovers. 'Plane cars' have to pick up speed to become airborne. You can't have stop and go (air) traffic in planes... Not in mid air. Unless science produces a sort of anti-gravity vehicle. 
Besides, that would be chaotic anyways. There'd be nothing to guide people where to go. Unless there was some sort of invisible grid or GPS was enabled to enforce any sort of boundaries.
|
|
|
|
Re: You can't win this one
[Re: Tomu Breidah]
#320272 - 01/12/14 05:03 PM
|
|
|
Again, the Jetsons don't use cars. A car is a ROAD vehicle. Technology that takes care of your noted issues already exists as well (not the stop 'n go bit). Smart cars that sense when you're falling asleep, so they make a quick jerk to wake you up (latest Benz? BMW? forgot which). GPS leads the way. External sensors, already used for parking assist, in addition to the traffic info that can be broadcasted via radio waves can be used to prevent collisions. The newest premium Garmin GPS has lifetime free HD traffic. It receives updated traffic info every 30 seconds. Of course, it doesn't exactly work in 3 dimensions but it would be trivial to equip them with a type of barometric altimeter. IF you have enough money, it can be done.
Don't forget the video posted here not too long ago where they used sound to suspend stuff and move it around in mid-air. Perhaps there's something to the awkward humming noise in the old movies when a UFO was flying around...
|
|
|
| Tomu Breidah |
|
No Problems, Only Solutions
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 08/14/04
|
|
Posts: 6815
|
|
Loc: Neither here, nor there.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
car/vehicle, whatever... flying thing [nt]
[Re: URherenow]
#320274 - 01/12/14 05:20 PM
|
|
|
You know what I mean. 
|
|
|
|
Re: You can't win this one
[Re: URherenow]
#320299 - 01/12/14 11:19 PM
|
|
|
> If you don't drive it on the road, it's not a car. What you want is for everyone to
> own an aircraft. I like the words that article used: Personal Air vehicle. That's
> what you want, not a "flying car". That's how what the Jetsons use would be
> classified.
"You can't win this one." "I like the words that article used:" "roadable aircraft." That's what all those things are. Driving to the airport is nearly opposite in concept to flying home.
Is the "Skycar" not a "car?" The definition you cited is bull. "Car" is a shortening of "carriage," specifically "motorized carriage." "Carriage" meaning "a means of conveyance." So, everything; planes, trains, whatever, if it is a box around you with a motor attached. What makes the thing we call a "car" what it is, is that we have it with us at the place we are, and then have it still at the place we go to. A "flying car" needs to carry you from origin to destination, flying. And I'll accept that those things are true of those roadable aircraft.
> You can see all kinds on youtube. Don't hate because they're not mass produced and
> you (nor anyone here probably) can afford one, or could be bothered having to get an
> FAA license and drive to the air strip to fly with it.
Not mass produced? That's the whole point: "...drew us all as basically Eskimos living in igloos with flying cars." If these planes were mass produced, and I could get my training and license at the Walmart next to the dealership for a fiver, they would still never work.
It can NEVER be practical for everyone to have an airplane in their driveway to use when commuting to work, shopping, or going to dinner. Those things are ONLY useable as airplanes that must be used as such, except that you can park them at home if you don't live too far from the airport.
If I had one, with all the training, and all the licensing, I would need to drive to the nearest small airstrip (a couple towns south), take off, and land... where? Back at the same place, since Aeroflex is the nearest place to my normal destinations. JFK? Yeah, I want to go the city, so I fly there, and can't use it on NYC's streets, so I leave it there and take a bus. Now put a million of them there.
Only a vehicle that can cope with traffic, that doesn't need to queue up to take off and land, and that can use preapproved air "lanes" as local as any road, rather than just major highways, can be something everyone could have and use. Yes, it is a "personal air vehicle," just as the thing in the driveway now is a "personal ground vehicle." Using a definition of "car" that was designed to describe the thing we use now is just semantics. If they were what we came to use, the definition would change to fit them, because the root meaning has been abandoned already.
|
|
|
|
Pick your dictionary
[Re: TriggerFin]
#320305 - 01/13/14 12:42 AM
|
|
|
Merriam Webster:
Full Definition of CAR
1
: a vehicle moving on wheels: as
a archaic : carriage, chariot
b : a vehicle designed to move on rails (as of a railroad)
c : automobile
2
: the passenger compartment of an elevator
3
: the part of an airship or balloon that carries the passengers and cargo
I guess you could use the last part of the definition loosely, but it's describing a PART of an AIRSHIP, not the whole thing.
In the video, the guy drives out of his garage, drives around town, fills it up at a standard gas station, then he goes to the airport and flies somewhere. It's real. He uses it. It's street legal. It's a flying car.
The aerial vehicle you are proposing can not and will not exist in our lifetime, and nobody has ever proposed that exact idea could be created and made available en masse. What you saw in the video is what has always been proposed and attempted, except for what is sited on Wikipedia as a project who's goal was to have something similar to your idea of a flying car by 2015.
So in your defense, Wikipedia does use the terminology you are talking about (roadable vehicle). In my defense, anybody can make entries on Wikipedia and no college allows that site as a reference for ANYTHING. I'm trying to stick more with the logical side on this one.
|
|
|
|
Re: Pick your dictionary
[Re: URherenow]
#320312 - 01/13/14 01:30 AM
|
|
|
Oh stop arguing semantics. "Flying car" has come to mean the kind of technologically unfeasible vehicle depicted in The Jetsons, Back to the Future, etc. Roadable aircraft are called such because they do not fit the mould of what the public thinks of when you talk about "flying cars". This whole conversation makes me want to rape all your mothers, using Smit's voice.
|
|
|
|
now that shi* was funny (nt)
[Re: Matty_]
#320315 - 01/13/14 02:19 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Pick your dictionary
[Re: URherenow]
#320316 - 01/13/14 02:50 AM
|
|
|
> Merriam Webster:
>
> Full Definition of CAR
>
>
> 1
>
> : a vehicle moving on wheels: as
>
> a archaic : carriage, chariot
>
> b : a vehicle designed to move on rails (as of a railroad)
>
> c : automobile
>
> 2
>
> : the passenger compartment of an elevator
>
>
> 3
>
> : the part of an airship or balloon that carries the passengers and cargo
>
>
> I guess you could use the last part of the definition loosely, but it's describing a
> PART of an AIRSHIP, not the whole thing.
>
> In the video, the guy drives out of his garage, drives around town, fills it up at a
> standard gas station, then he goes to the airport and flies somewhere. It's real. He
> uses it. It's street legal. It's a flying car.
>
>
> The aerial vehicle you are proposing can not and will not exist in our lifetime, and
> nobody has ever proposed that exact idea could be created and made available en
> masse. What you saw in the video is what has always been proposed and attempted,
> except for what is sited on Wikipedia as a project who's goal was to have something
> similar to your idea of a flying car by 2015.
>
> So in your defense, Wikipedia does use the terminology you are talking about
> (roadable vehicle). In my defense, anybody can make entries on Wikipedia and no
> college allows that site as a reference for ANYTHING. I'm trying to stick more with
> the logical side on this one.
Car means anything anyone wants it to mean and doesn't need a dictionary, as it logically includes all the things called cars, like I said. It especially doesn't need a definition from a dictionary that thinks "meter" is a unit of mass. (Ref: dekameter)
Again, it HAS been proposed, in the incarnation of the Moller Skycar, which vehicle, as we began this, has been smoke and mirrors for four decades and millions of dollars of other people's money. The fact that it "can't" work is a good part of the point.
|
|
|
Index 
Threaded 
effing cold
Reply
[Re: 
