Die Hummer die.
You will not be missed.

GM to End Hummer (http://www.philly.com/philly/business/85314812.html)


_-=

The brand could have been revived with 4wd Voltec technology. GM's rugged, off-road vehicle division.

The original Hummer was an impressive vehicle.. very macho.

Die Hummer die.
You will not be missed.

GM to End Hummer (http://www.philly.com/philly/business/85314812.html)
_-=

Don't you have any empathy for testosterone starved morons?

The H1 was a very capable vehicle for off-road situations. Not many vehicles can claim to be "combat-proven". To get an H1 just to drive around town would be absurd.

IMO, the H2 and H3 shared virtually none of the mechanics of the H1, and were little more than pale imitations, suitable for poseurs unable to afford the real deal.

Raser Tech was doing conversions of Hummer vehicles using their in hub motors. Maybe they will buy the Hummer tooling.

The hummer was a great vehicle for off road use. Driving them regularly in any other situation is just stupid.

A series hybrid Hummer would be ideal for running over those ugly prius things. Maybe even scratch the paint on a few volts just to prove a point. :eek:

A series hybrid Hummer would be ideal for running over those ugly prius things. Maybe even scratch the paint on a few volts just to prove a point. :eek:

When I posted about testosterone starved morons, I meant the OTHER testosterone starved morons. Hope you weren't offended.

When I posted about testosterone starved morons, I meant the OTHER testosterone starved morons. Hope you weren't offended.

None taken! I struggle to understand monster truck rallies and nascar. A good baja race can keep your attention though!

We're all in the battle for using NO foreign oil. It's my primary reason for supporting EV/ PHEV vehicles. It's mind boggling the trillions of dollars we send overseas considering what we have here in wind energy potential. Makes no sense to me.

http://www.theonion.com/content/amvo/gm_closing_hummer

None taken! I struggle to understand monster truck rallies and nascar. A good baja race can keep your attention though!

We're all in the battle for using NO foreign oil. It's my primary reason for supporting EV/ PHEV vehicles. It's mind boggling the trillions of dollars we send overseas considering what we have here in wind energy potential. Makes no sense to me.

Wouldn't it be terrific to seen those $ trillions to the U.S. wind power supply chain: farmers, O&M organizations, and manufacturers (GE, Nordic Wind, Northern Power, and Clipper Wind)? The fuel is free and the O&M can not be outsourced.

Today, we are funding terrorists, ensuring billions in profits flow to Exxon and making China the world leader in renewable energy. Drill baby drill... a hole in the empty skull of the Republican Party.

http://www.theonion.com/content/amvo/gm_closing_hummer

Ahhh the Onion! One of the finest news websites ever!:D

Wouldn't it be terrific to seen those $ trillions to the U.S. wind power supply chain: farmers, O&M organizations, and manufacturers (GE, Nordic Wind, Northern Power, and Clipper Wind)? The fuel is free and the O&M can not be outsourced.

Today, we are funding terrorists, ensuring billions in profits flow to Exxon and making China the world leader in renewable energy. Drill baby drill... a hole in the empty skull of the Republican Party.

Free power? That's quite the concept. If you don't already work in marketing, maybe you should take it up.

"Free Power!!! After Mining, materials, construction, shipping, permits, tax and maintinance agreement!!! But... no it's free arn't you listening to me? That's why everyone has it!!!! (that was sarcasm if you didn't catch it)

While I wouldn't consider myself belonging to either political party, "Democrats" seem to continually show how dim they are time and time again. It's begining to bias me into thinking most (supporters anyway) aren't too bright. *sigh*

It can be fun to watch Obama at times. He uses tact and deception to rally support. (ends justify the means type of deal.) I just get a kick out of the changing supports that don't relize what's really going on. In the end though, mabye that's what we need from a leader.

Free power? That's quite the concept. If you don't already work in marketing, maybe you should take it up.

"Free Power!!! After Mining, materials, construction, shipping, permits, tax and maintinance agreement!!! But... no it's free arn't you listening to me? That's why everyone has it!!!! (that was sarcasm if you didn't catch it)

While I wouldn't consider myself belonging to either political party, "Democrats" seem to continually show how dim they are time and time again. It's begining to bias me into thinking most (supporters anyway) aren't too bright. *sigh*

It can be fun to watch Obama at times. He uses tact and deception to rally support. (ends justify the means type of deal.) I just get a kick out of the changing supports that don't relize what's really going on. In the end though, mabye that's what we need from a leader.

I said free fuel, not free power. And you claim Democrats are dim! A third grader reads better than you. Let me explain: fuel and power aren't the same!

Can you tell me what the word "mabye" means, oh brilliant one?

Regarding Obama, you simply prove your ignorance.

http://www.theonion.com/content/amvo/gm_closing_hummer

This was about a year and a half ago, but I think many of us would get a good laugh from it.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/189054/october-23-2008/difference-makers---the-national-hummer-club

This was about a year and a half ago, but I think many of us would get a good laugh from it.

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/189054/october-23-2008/difference-makers---the-national-hummer-club

Not sure if the Hummer Hogs are fonder of their Hummers or double-cheese burgers. Most of these guys looked like candidates for the sty.

Can you tell me what the word "mabye" means, oh brilliant one?


I can't.

What does mabye mean??

Is it what you say when your leaving your mom??

I can't.

What does mabye mean??

Is it what you say when your leaving your mom??

You would need to ask AndyOx what mabye means since he's the one who thinks it is a word. My guess it is what Andy Ox says to his mother, Mrs. Ox, on the way out the door.

My point to Mr. Ox was that anyone not smart enough to read and understand the difference between free fuel and free power, shouldn't be throwing stones regarding intelligence.

Yes, wind is still free fuel, despite the digging, manufacturing, engineering, and erecting necessary to build a wind farm.

Free power? That's quite the concept. If you don't already work in marketing, maybe you should take it up.

While I wouldn't consider myself belonging to either political party, "Democrats" seem to continually show how dim they are time and time again.

This research contends that liberals have a 6 to 11 point IQ advantage over conservatives.

"The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop, and how some people's behaviors come to be."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/index.html?hpt=C2

This research contends that liberals have a 6 to 11 point IQ advantage over conservatives.

"The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop, and how some people's behaviors come to be."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/index.html?hpt=C2

". . . he did find a general trend that social conservatives (those who wanted to ban abortion and gay marriage) weren't as gifted as students with a more progressive take on gender roles. But he found the exact opposite pattern with anti-regulation attitudes: The conservatives/libertarians (yay guns boo taxes) appeared to be smarter than their commie compatriots. Kemmelmeier found this crossover "particularly surprising" and says, "It highlights (yet again) that ‘conservatism' is not necessarily a coherent construct, but that you have to distinguish at minimum social conservatism and economic conservatism (libertarianism)."
Excerpt from article at:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brainstorm/200809/conservatives-are-dumber-and-smarter-liberals (http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brainstorm/200809/conservatives-are-dumber-and-smarter-liberals)

"Not all conservatives are stupid, but all stupid people are conservative."

There is more than a shred of truth to this. Just take a drive through rural Kansas.

"Not all conservatives are stupid, but all stupid people are conservative."

There is more than a shred of truth to this. Just take a drive through rural Kansas.

Seriously? Spend some time in America's inner cities. You will see that stupidity thrives there as well. Some of the stupidest people in the world, making the stupidest life choices live in the inner cities of America. The urban center is the backbone of the progressive movement, without their consistent, unwavering, unquestioning support, the Democratic party would die. So, I think that just like America, the stupid population is split 50/50. Conservatives need the moronic hill folk and Liberals need the moronic city folk.

This research contends that liberals have a 6 to 11 point IQ advantage over conservatives.

"The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points -- and the data should not be used to stereotype or make assumptions about people, experts say. But they show how certain patterns of identifying with particular ideologies develop, and how some people's behaviors come to be."

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/index.html?hpt=C2

The irony is that the progressives the first ones to cry and yelp that the IQ test is flawed and not to be trusted.

Conservatives need the moronic hill folk and Liberals need the moronic city folk.

What do you call a Liberal living in the hills:

A scene from "Deliverance".

Wouldn't it be terrific to seen those $ trillions to the U.S. wind power supply chain: farmers, O&M organizations, and manufacturers (GE, Nordic Wind, Northern Power, and Clipper Wind)? The fuel is free and the O&M can not be outsourced.

Today, we are funding terrorists, ensuring billions in profits flow to Exxon and making China the world leader in renewable energy. Drill baby drill... a hole in the empty skull of the Republican Party.

I agree with AndyOx1, you really aren't that bright. The way you've written your paragraph, you are talking about wind power in terms as free electricity or "fuel". Nice of you to back peddle and then continue to try to hide your stupidity by posting several more times throwing insults him. :rolleyes:

Something tells me you're going to come back with insults for me, to further prove your point on how right you think you are.

The brand could have been revived with 4wd Voltec technology.

Time will tell.

I agree with AndyOx1, you really aren't that bright. The way you've written your paragraph, you are talking about wind power in terms as free electricity or "fuel". Nice of you to back peddle and then continue to try to hide your stupidity by posting several more times throwing insults him. :rolleyes:

Something tells me you're going to come back with insults for me, to further prove your point on how right you think you are.

Oh, so I was suggesting that wind power is free, as opposed to what I really said in my post? What part of "free fuel and O&M that can't be outsourced" don't you understand?

Free fuel means minimal variable operating costs for wind. It also means no fuel price risk. Both have significant value compared to other electric power sources such as oil and natural gas.

Quite frankly, I don't really care whether you think I'm bright or not. I don't value your opinion at all. Trust me, I'm bright enough to be very successful. And you?

I agree with AndyOx1, you really aren't that bright. The way you've written your paragraph, you are talking about wind power in terms as free electricity or "fuel". Nice of you to back peddle and then continue to try to hide your stupidity by posting several more times throwing insults him. :rolleyes:

Something tells me you're going to come back with insults for me, to further prove your point on how right you think you are.

It just came to me! You really don't understand that the only fuel for a wind turbine is wind! Let me explain. Wind turbines have large blades. When the "free wind" moves them, the wind turbine generates electricity. This is in contrast to thermal generation. With thermal generation, you need a fuel to burn to create heat and generate electricity.

Sorry for assuming you were actually smart enough to get this on your own.

Oh, so I was suggesting that wind power is free, as opposed to what I really said in my post? What part of "free fuel and O&M that can't be outsourced" don't you understand?

Free fuel means minimal variable operating costs for wind. It also means no fuel price risk. Both have significant value compared to other electric power sources such as oil and natural gas.

Quite frankly, I don't really care whether you think I'm bright or not. I don't value your opinion at all. Trust me, I'm bright enough to be very successful. And you?

Keep tooting your own horn, as it's the only one filling the void that's between your ears.

Thanks for proving my point. :D

It just came to me! You really don't understand that the only fuel for a wind turbine is wind! Let me explain. Wind turbines have large blades. When the "free wind" moves them, the wind turbine generates electricity. This is in contrast to thermal generation. With thermal generation, you need a fuel to burn to create heat and generate electricity.

Sorry for assuming you were actually smart enough to get this on your own.

OOHHHH, REALLY!? :rolleyes:

That's a good one. Glad you could continue to toot your horn. You must have a leak with the need to blow it often.

I've noticed a good percentage of your posts are insults directed at others here. What are you trying to hide?

OOHHHH, REALLY!? :rolleyes:

That's a good one. Glad you could continue to toot your horn. You must have a leak with the need to blow it often.

I've noticed a good percentage of your posts are insults directed at others here. What are you trying to hide?

So, you think it is OK to misquote someone in a post that simply made a case for the benefit of wind power? And, the Ox not only misquoted me, but went on to say how stupid liberals are?

As the saying goes, humoring stupid people only makes you more stupid. Why don't you offer up some of your successes in life?

So, you think it is OK to misquote someone in a post that simply made a case for the benefit of wind power?

I have no issue with wind power. I don't think Andy0x does either. He directly quoted exactly what you said. So, please where is the misquote?



... but went on to say how stupid liberals are?

Who cares? I don't. The discussion isn't about liberals. It's about what you said, Andy0X's reply and your total disrespect for anyone here with your egotistical attitude. I really don't care for it and I wonder why anyone else does.

My bet is you're again, going to come back and try to insult me. Likely something about getting some thick skin, stupid comments or whatever. So, again, what are you trying to hide??



As the saying goes, humoring stupid people only makes you more stupid. Why don't you offer up some of your successes in life?

Another one of your attempted witty and degrading comments? Did you read that in a book??



Why don't you offer up some of your successes in life?

So, what will that do? Attempt to tell people how much better and smarter you think you are? Give me a break. This isn't kindergarten. :rolleyes:

Insider said: "I have no issue with wind power. I don't think Andy0x does either. He directly quoted exactly what you said. So, please where is the misquote? "

Greenman said: "Wouldn't it be terrific to see those $ trillions to the U.S. wind power supply chain: farmers, O&M organizations, and manufacturers (GE, Nordic Wind, Northern Power, and Clipper Wind)? The fuel is free and the O&M can not be outsourced."

Mr. Ox said:

Free power? That's quite the concept. If you don't already work in marketing, maybe you should take it up.

"Free Power!!! After Mining, materials, construction, shipping, permits, tax and maintinance (sic) agreement!!! But... no it's free arn't you listening to me? That's why everyone has it!!!! (that was sarcasm if you didn't catch it)

"Democrats" seem to continually show how dim they are time and time again. It's begining to bias me into thinking most (supporters anyway) aren't too bright. *sigh*

Greenman says to Insider: No wonder Mr. Ox relies on you to shill for him. I stand by my statement that it was a reckless misquote of what I said. I actually think you are one and the same, Mr. Ox/Insider. Why else would you study my posts to make such silly comments? Yes, little man, I have accomplished much. I'm wealthy. I'm successful. And I believe in alternative energy and global warming. And you? Do you live in your brother-in-laws basement too?

It just came to me! You really don't understand that the only fuel for a wind turbine is wind! Let me explain. Wind turbines have large blades. When the "free wind" moves them, the wind turbine generates electricity. This is in contrast to thermal generation. With thermal generation, you need a fuel to burn to create heat and generate electricity.

Sorry for assuming you were actually smart enough to get this on your own.

And by that coin I suppose "Gasoline" is free too!!! Free oil that's in the ground. You only need to extract, process, transport, etc etc.. but the actual oil is free...

BioFuels? Oh those must be free too!!!

Greenman; perhaps you need to look up the word "cost", and feel free to ask a 3rd grader to help you with this.

P.S. That same 3rd grader may even have been able to help you figure out: mabye is maybe mistyped... I know it was quite the puzzle there, not many people stumble on that, lets just call you 'special'.

And by that coin I suppose "Gasoline" is free too!!! Free oil that's in the ground. You only need to extract, process, transport, etc etc.. but the actual oil is free...

BioFuels? Oh those must be free too!!!

Greenman; perhaps you need to look up the word "cost", and feel free to ask a 3rd grader to help you with this.

P.S. That same 3rd grader may even have been able to help you figure out: mabye is maybe mistyped... I know it was quite the puzzle there, not many people stumble on that, lets just call you 'special'.

So you just can't admit that you misquoted me. That's ok. I have never said anything except fuel is free. It is free for both wind and solar. You seem to brush this off as being inconsequential. Well, for the narrow, weak mind that doesn't want to understand energy financing, you are right.

And by that coin I suppose "Gasoline" is free too!!! Free oil that's in the ground. You only need to extract, process, transport, etc etc.. but the actual oil is free...

BioFuels? Oh those must be free too!!!

Greenman; perhaps you need to look up the word "cost", and feel free to ask a 3rd grader to help you with this.

P.S. That same 3rd grader may even have been able to help you figure out: mabye is maybe mistyped... I know it was quite the puzzle there, not many people stumble on that, lets just call you 'special'.

Even though I have an MBA from a top-ten business school, I looked up the cost of wind and sun. I couldn't find a cost for either. Perhaps, you should ask your third grader what they are willing to pay. Or, if you prefer, I'll sell you all the wind and sun you can buy for only $1 million.

So you just can't admit that you misquoted me. That's ok. I have never said anything except fuel is free. It is free for both wind and solar. You seem to brush this off as being inconsequential. Well, for the narrow, weak mind that doesn't want to understand energy financing, you are right.

Can't or won't? Bad Grammar Greenman.

I can understand it's hard for you to admit you are wrong.

"Powering the planet with solar fuel."

"Powering the planet with solar power."

"Powering the planet with wind fuel."

"Powering the planet with wind power."

There will be no interchanging of words on Greeman's watch. (It confuses him too much.)


Or, if you prefer, I'll sell you all the wind and sun you can buy for only $1 million.

Really? OK, so I don't really like how it gets dark so early here. Please sell me some of this 'free' sunshine you shoot from your as$.

Something tells me you couldn't afford to deliver on this as the COST would be too great for the amount of sunlight I would want.

Sure, you call it free until you don't have any....

Since you did specify $1 million. How much sunshine will that get me? 24/7 un-interrupted.

I have a feeling $1 million isn't going to go very far.

P.S. Your mom must be proud of your MBA. I know we all are.

cheers

Can't or won't? Bad Grammar Greenman.

I can understand it's hard for you to admit you are wrong.

"Powering the planet with solar fuel."

"Powering the planet with solar power."

"Powering the planet with wind fuel."

"Powering the planet with wind power."

There will be no interchanging of words on Greeman's watch. (It confuses him too much.)



Really? OK, so I don't really like how it gets dark so early here. Please sell me some of this 'free' sunshine you shoot from your as$.

Something tells me you couldn't afford to deliver on this as the COST would be too great for the amount of sunlight I would want.

Sure, you call it free until you don't have any....

Since you did specify $1 million. How much sunshine will that get me? 24/7 un-interrupted.

I have a feeling $1 million isn't going to go very far.

P.S. Your mom must be proud of your MBA. I know we all are.

cheers

Why don't you just admit that you didn't understand the difference between free fuel to generate electricity and free power? If you did so, you wouldn't have to go on being so stupid. By the way, where is your sidekick, the so-called Insider/AndyOx.

Regarding my MBA, where did you get your degree in being stupid?

Can't or won't? Bad Grammar Greenman.

I can understand it's hard for you to admit you are wrong.

"Powering the planet with solar fuel."

"Powering the planet with solar power."

"Powering the planet with wind fuel."

"Powering the planet with wind power."

There will be no interchanging of words on Greeman's watch. (It confuses him too much.)


Nice list. But, the context was free fuel vs. free power. Yes, weak minded people who don't understand context, use it as the basis for their attacks. If you can find anywhere where I have implied that wind power is free or solar power is free, please point it out.

I stand by my statement that your rant - based on my assertion that with wind the fuel is free - was just that... a rant. And, you were reckless in misquoting me. I give you your due in that it wasn't with forethought, only a result of your stupidity.

Let's be technically correct in this discussion. The word "fuel" has a specific meaning in this context.

"1 a : a material used to produce heat or power by burning b : nutritive material c : a material from which atomic energy can be liberated especially in a reactor"

From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fuel (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fuel)

Let's be technically correct in this discussion. The word "fuel" has a specific meaning in this context.

"1 a : a material used to produce heat or power by burning b : nutritive material c : a material from which atomic energy can be liberated especially in a reactor"

From http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fuel (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fuel)

So, since solar PV and wind turbines have no fuel except wind and sun, they are fuel free, not free fuel. Or, because it is fuel free, they have no fuel at all?

Using definition a, does a "fuel" cell using hydrogen qualify as a fuel, or is it not really a "fuel" cell because it doesn't burn fuel? Is a chemical contributing to a chemical reaction a fuel, even if it doesn't burn?

Suggestion: if you take definition a and b, you can refer to a turbine needing "nutritive material" to generate electrical energy (power). So, I will refer to the nutritive material for a wind farm as being free nutritive material.

Thanks, Altazi.

So, since solar PV and wind turbines have no fuel except wind and sun, they are fuel free, not free fuel. Or, because it is fuel free, they have no fuel at all?
Looking at the whole picture, I would say that the "fuel" behind solar, hydro, wind, etc., is hydrogen as it is fused into helium in the sun's core. That's how I think of it, anyway. I call all of these power sources "remote nuclear power." ;)


Using definition a, does a "fuel" cell using hydrogen qualify as a fuel, or is it not really a "fuel" cell because it doesn't burn fuel? Is a chemical contributing to a chemical reaction a fuel, even if it doesn't burn?
Combustion is nothing more than a specific chemical reaction. A fuel cell also uses a chemical reaction. Same difference to me.



Suggestion: if you take definition a and b, you can refer to a turbine needing "nutritive material" to generate electrical energy (power). So, I will refer to the nutritive material for a wind farm as being free nutritive material.

Nutritive? Uhh . . . that's kind of a reach . . .


Thanks, Altazi.

Sure. :)

Looking at the whole picture, I would say that the "fuel" behind solar, hydro, wind, etc., is hydrogen as it is fused into helium in the sun's core. That's how I think of it, anyway. I call all of these power sources "remote nuclear power." ;)

Combustion is nothing more than a specific chemical reaction. A fuel cell also uses a chemical reaction. Same difference to me.


I'm just glad that no one has figured out how to put a price on "remote nuclear power." So, I guess it is free. Yes, combustion is just a chemical reaction but I don't think it fits the definition of burning. Remember, dictionaries are for common usage, not necessarily engineering.

So, my whole point in this "silly" argument is that "remote nuclear power" is free. It has significant ramifications in energy investment, especially considering the cost of fossil fuel. It's as simple as upfront investment capital (fixed) versus variable O&M costs. Even if you disregard carbon in the atmosphere, the costs of fossil fuel in terms of environmental destruction and economic impact are immense (wars are just one example). And, as the cost of fossil fuels go up, you will pay.

Sunlight and Wind have "Value" as a "fuel" (What does it take for Sunlight or wind to actually BE a fuel? Are you saying, they just are? In other words, if you step outside, you feel the fuel in your face?)

Interestingly; You "Value" this sunlight and Wind at $0.00

If you continue to contest that Sunlight and Wind have no 'cost' then your simply implying that you are not paying for them which is obvious.

Any entity constructing a facility for the purpose of harnessing this source of energy, cough I mean "fuel"? (I think Altazi already corrected you on this,) is going to assign a COST to it.

Sunlight isn't free, and if you want it, it's going to cost money.

Good Luck gathering it in your basement.

I think it's safe to say that, while the "remote nuclear power" energy sources such as wind, hydro, and solar are freely available, the technology required for converting the energy to electricity is most definitely NOT free. It ultimately comes down to financial cost ($/MWh) and environmental cost - which may also include financial costs of their own. The myriad details on these points are beyond the scope of this post.

I would like to see less reliance on fossil fuels and more reliance on modern nuclear power supplemented with wind and solar where practical. I do think that financial subsidies from taxpayers should be minimized, though.

I think it's safe to say that, while the "remote nuclear power" energy sources such as wind, hydro, and solar are freely available, the technology required for converting the energy to electricity is most definitely NOT free. It ultimately comes down to financial cost ($/MWh) and environmental cost - which may also include financial costs of their own. The myriad details on these points are beyond the scope of this post.

Yes, the comment above is EXACTLY the essence of what I said in my post before Mr. Ox attacked. I said "free fuel" not "free power." The difference in thinking is, perhaps, Mr. Ox thinking automotive, not as a renewable energy advocate. I have never met anyone who thinks that renewable energy of any kind is free power.

Free power does not exist for most practical applications. The cost structures in the production of power are significantly different and should be understood by anyone who wants to have a meaningful discussion.

I assume Mr. Ox just flew off the handle (probably a bad day at the shop).

The original post was exactly right. The Hummer was an unreliable piece of junk that cost GM billions. Just another stupid move by inept GM executives that should have been fired long before they destroyed the company.

Yes, the comment above is EXACTLY the essence of what I said

I guess Altazi simply has more tact in pointing out you're an idiot then I do :) I'm glad you agree... finally... But as you pointed out, the essence is there ;)

Maybe next you can move on to the differences between numbers and letters, you're making progress Greenman.

I guess Altazi simply has more tact in pointing out you're an idiot then I do :) I'm glad you agree... finally... But as you pointed out, the essence is there ;)

Maybe next you can move on to the differences between numbers and letters, you're making progress Greenman.

Your attempt to declare victory and move on is pathetic. Typical trick for no good scoundrels. You are obviously either stupid or extremely dishonest. I suspect both.

Why don't you and your pretend shill, Insider, go try to make a success out of yourself?

Why don't you and your pretend shill, Insider, go try to make a success out of yourself?

Who says we already aren't a success? The difference is we don't need to come on here to brag about ourselves to try an inflate an ego, unlike you. It's really sad that you have to come on a site like this to get reassurance that you are somebody.

Hate to break it to you, but the "I've got an MBA, graduated from a top ten school, and make lots of money" gig doesn't mean much here or anywhere on the internet.

Oh, and sorry to break your heart, but Andy and I are two different people. Send an email to Lyle. He can verify via IP address in vastly different locations.:p

Eagerly awaiting your insults,
-Insider

The Hummer was an unreliable piece of junk that cost GM billions.

That is a bold statement to make and obviously you've researched and studied it, so please provide us with the facts to prove this. I'd ask you not quote Wikipedia, as you so frequently do, as a source. (Did they teach you that in your top ten school?)

That is a bold statement to make and obviously you've researched and studied it, so please provide us with the facts to prove this. I'd ask you not quote Wikipedia, as you so frequently do, as a source. (Did they teach you that in your top ten school?)

US News and World shows a reliability ranking of 5 out of 10 (JD Power):

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/HUMMER_H3/Reliability/

They couldn't even give the brand away (rumored price of $170 million fell through). I'm sure you think it was another great decision by GM management that only failed because of Acorn.

Insider/Ox, you are a total waste of my time. Please take your lies and GM-inbred stupidity to someone else's posts.

US News and World shows a reliability ranking of 5 out of 10 (JD Power):

http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/HUMMER_H3/Reliability/

Did you read that? It says predicted.



They couldn't even give the brand away (rumored price of $170 million fell through). I'm sure you think it was another great decision by GM management that only failed because of Acorn.

Truth is, the division did make money. Just not enough to keep it a core brand. Hummer will return at some point with Voltec technology.



Insider/Ox, you are a total waste of my time. Please take your lies and GM-inbred stupidity to someone else's posts.

Ooohhh, we are sooo beneath you are we? Sorry if we deflated your ego.

Did you read that? It says predicted.

Truth is, the division did make money. Just not enough to keep it a core brand. Hummer will return at some point with Voltec technology.

Ooohhh, we are sooo beneath you are we? Sorry if we deflated your ego.

Predicted? So you don't know anything about survey methodology either! I'm sure Hummer was a big success with brain dead morons. Yes, you are beneath me. We agree about that. You are less intelligent, less educated, and also of very low character (a liar).

Bye bye, Dumbo.

Did you read that? It says predicted.

Let me explain it so someone with an IQ of 80 can understand it. You see, when JD Power ranks customer satisfaction for something like reliability, they don't actually contact 100% of owners. They do something called "sampling." It uses something called statistics (statistical models to be more precise). So, because they don't poll 100% of the owners, they ask just the controlled sample which represents the larger population and use this sample as a PREDICTION.

You said, "Did you read that? It says predicted." More failure of intellectual. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha... Oh, my stomach aches. Ha Ha Ha... Stop it!!! You're killing me with your wit!!!

Oh, and show me again where I said wind power was free as Mr. Ox so gleefully crowed when he misquoted me.

Predicted? So you don't know anything about survey methodology either! I'm sure Hummer was a big success with brain dead morons. Yes, you are beneath me. We agree about that. You are less intelligent, less educated, and also of very low character (a liar).

Bye bye, Dumbo.

Wow, do you feel better now?

Let me explain it so someone with an IQ of 80 can understand it. You see, when JD Power ranks customer satisfaction for something like reliability, they don't actually contact 100% of owners. They do something called "sampling." It uses something called statistics (statistical models to be more precise). So, because they don't poll 100% of the owners, they ask just the controlled sample which represents the larger population and use this sample as a PREDICTION.

You said, "Did you read that? It says predicted." More failure of intellectual. Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha... Oh, my stomach aches. Ha Ha Ha... Stop it!!! You're killing me with your wit!!!

Oh, and show me again where I said wind power was free as Mr. Ox so gleefully crowed when he misquoted me.

You are the one that doesn't get it. Better research your info on "predicted". Come back with some better data. Put your glasses on next time. It's there. I can only lob you a soft ball so many times.

I predict, you'll continue to throw insults in an attempt to inflate your ego as you always do.

They use 'predicted' because they are using surveys of past reliability to predict how reliable they will be in the future. It has nothing to do with sampling error, and it also doesn't imply anything bad about the report.

They use 'predicted' because they are using surveys of past reliability to predict how reliable they will be in the future. It has nothing to do with sampling error, and it also doesn't imply anything bad about the report.

JD Power is by far the most respected gauge of satisfaction in the auto industry with the possible exception of Consumer Reports.

Thanks for adding some sanity to this inane exchange.

And, yes. A score of 5 out of 10 is abysmal.

They use 'predicted' because they are using surveys of past reliability to predict how reliable they will be in the future.

Bingo. I love how greenman thinks he knew that. :rolleyes: That's why I said go back and find the right answer.

JD Power is by far the most respected gauge of satisfaction in the auto industry with the possible exception of Consumer Reports.

Thanks for adding some sanity to this inane exchange.

And, yes. A score of 5 out of 10 is abysmal.

Consumer Reports is a joke. They are about as biased as it gets. Talk about selective surveys.

You post a link to a page with 2010 reliability data which is at best a guess. It's based on past info as ambulator pointed out. Then spew some nonsense on surveys, sampling and statistics as why the 2010 info is "predicted". Because they only interviewed a few people, not 100%. You fail to realize they haven't even begun to gather the 2010 data.

Bingo. I love how greenman thinks he knew that. :rolleyes: That's why I said go back and find the right answer.

"Past performance is not indicative of future results." At least, that's what the financial investment prospectuses (prospecti?) say.