Arny "Slapdash" Krueger wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com
Arny "Slapdash" Krueger wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
oups.com

There is a mechanical property of metals that most of
the qualities in a rod is concentrated in the narrow
section of the rim.

Wrong.

Another idiot who calls himself an engineer who has never
heard of Timoshenko's Strength of Materials.

Wrong again. I've cited it in another recent post.

This is a lie, Krueger. You didn't "cite" Timoshenko. *I* gave a
reference to his book. You looked up the book on Google to check that
it exists. If you had ever read it, you wouldn't make foolish
statements like this one:

The properties of a homogenious rod are well,
homogenious.

That sentence is offensive in three ways. 1. It is of course
linguistically a tautology and therefore barbaric; it is intended to
deceive and therefore an immoral use of the language. 2. It is an
insult to our intelligence to think that we would not notice such a
transparent debating trade trick as a false tautology. 3. It is an
insult to science and physics because it demonstrates Slapdash
Krueger's contempt for the laws of physics. Let's see it again:

The properties of a homogenious rod are well,
homogenious.

Sure thing, Slapdash, if a metal rod rod were "homogenious", its
properties would be "homogenious". And if it were homosexual, as likely
in physics as that its strength would be homogenously distributed, it
would be, well, homosexual.

But the point is that the qualities described in Timoshenko, as you
would know if you ever read it, or knew the least thing about materials
science (every hotrodder knows more than you do, on this evidence!), is
that "homogenious" strength distribution in rods are excluded by the
laws of physics.

Of course you will now argue that you presupposed a "homogenious" rod,
and that your conclusion relates only to this "homogenious" rod. It is
this sort of juvenile timewasting by you that makes the name of Krueger
a byword for pettiness and uselessness.

One can see you have never been in company where such big
words are used, Krueger. It is spelt like it is said,
"homogenous" or if you want to be pedantic,
"homogeneous". There is no "i" in the word, and no "i"
sound in pronouncing it.

It is well known that it is a true sign of defeat when someone starts
picking at minor errors in spelling and punctuation.

I wanted to attract your attention to a sentence that in this context
publicly demonstrates your contempt for the laws of physics and for the
etiquette of scientific discourse, to give you a chance to withdraw the
sentence. It is the Christian thing to do to give even a proven,
malicious fool like you a second, a third, an umpteenth chance. You
failed the test, Krueger. For the umpteenth time.

I'm sorry for you, Krueger.

Andre Jute
This is the season for exposing heathen hypocrites skulking in the pews.