🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul25.174836.4853@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> gl8f@fermi.clas.Virginia.EDU (Greg Lindahl) writes:
>In article <1992Jul25.171557.4574@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> crb7q@kelvin.seas.Virginia.EDU (Cameron Randale Bass) writes:
>
>>     Only two big problems.  1) It is not economical to do so,
>>     2)  Hydrogen go boom.
>
>Gee, Dale, I've seen both of these arguments addressed in recent
>Scientific American articles. I'm glad that you're an expert on the
>topic of hydrogen fuel, just like you're an expert on electrical power
>generation, but could you be bothered to support your arguments
>instead of just spouting them? Also, could you pick a better
>newsgroup? Thank you.

     Gee, Greg.  Once again you insist on implying that these
     objections have been *successfully* addressed rather than
     making the arguments yourself.  Is this simply laziness, or
     is it a realization that the counterarguments are weak? 

     I will repeat my last response to this type of obfuscation,
     to wit, 'implications and insinuations should not be mistaken
     for actually having made the argument.'

                                 dale bass

     P.S.  exploding hydrogen is a wonderful topic for this newsgroup.

--
C. R. Bass                                           crb7q@virginia.edu
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
University of Virginia
Charlottesville, Virginia                            (804) 924-7926