www.Usenet.com
www.Usenet.com
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Ryan) writes:
> Johnny, I've asked you before to give me permission
> to access your Carleton transcripts and student
> records.
>
> Why won't you do it?
>
>
> ----
>
>
> The Carleton designation for their degree is
> "Bachelor of Engineering" not "B. Eng."
>
> Registered engineers in Canada as elsewhere designate
> themselves after their names as "R. Eng."
>
> Turmel's designation of himself after his name as "B.
> Eng." is what in other contexts would be called a
> "deceptive trade practice" by inferring that he is a
> registered professional engineer to those who do not
> look closely and do not suspect fraud.
>
> In every jurisdiction it is illegal to refer to
> yourself as an engineer if you are not registered.
>
> In many jurisdictions it is a criminal offense to
> refer to yourself as an engineer if you are not
> registered.
>
Would that be a locamotive engineer or a MSCE?
It is possible that education and experience are of more import than
certain "Engineer" certifications.
Dhu
> Turmel has repeatedly demonstrated that he is a con
> man, a scammer and a clown.
>
>
> ---
>
> A few points in closing:
>
> Of the five hypothetical examples, three from Turmel,
> one from myself -
>
> The right side up bowl, the upside down bowl and the
> ball rolling along the plane, and the terminal
> velocity example -
>
> Arguably, not one of them demonstrates any type of
> feedback properly defined.
>
> The two real world examples that I supplied
> definitely do: the clock escapement and the triode
> amplifier that demonstrate the beneficial effects of
> *positive* feedback that revolutionized the world we
> live in. The first for the first time enabled
> navigation across open oceans. The second enabled
> modern communications. Turmel's assertion that
> "positive feedback is always unacceptably unstable"
> is proven to be complete nonsense beyond the
> shadow of doubt.
>
> He furthermore claims that *interest* is positive
> feedback in the physical sense, which it definitely
> isn't. It is feedback only in the social sense that
> it is information that flows to entrepreneurs and
> their financiers. It is defined by consumer choice
> in free markets. It is measured through the rules of
> accounting. No analogy from the physical world
> therefore is relevant.
>
> Now on to the question of Turmel's honesty:
>
> He has repeatedly claimed to be an engineer, and
> continues to do so. In answer to an earlier
> challenge from me, he replied that he has a four-year
> B.S. in electronics engineering diploma from
> Carleton, I believe. In further query he admitted
> that he has never been employed even for a single day
> as an engineer, that he has always been self-employed
> as a professional gambler. He admitted that he has
> never been recognized as an engineer through the
> registration process in Alberta or anywhere else.
>
> But--
>
> This is how he styles himself that you can see at the
> "bowl" link:
> http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/bankmath.htm
>
> "John C. Turmel, B. Eng."
>
> It is what in business and law we would call a
> "deceptive trade practice." Registered professional
> engineers style themselves "R. Eng." Presumably,
> Turmel hangs on the technicality that the "B" derives
> from the B.S. in engineering that he claims he
> possesses. But there is no accreditation anywhere in
> the world that styles itself, "B. Eng." Possibly in
> the history of the world no one has every styled
> himself "B. Eng." except for John Turmel. Purely and
> simply it is concocted to deceive, to fool those who
> don't look closely into believing he is really an
> engineer.
>
> --
>
>
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Ryan) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> Okay, I found "bowl."
>>
>> <**>If you have a bowl and you put a ball in it and
>> then give the ball a little shove, it will travel up
>> one side, gravity will bring it down and it will rock
>> back and forth until it settles back to the middle.
>> That's how engineers use negative feedback to bring
>> back things which have been pushed out of normal
>> operation back to normal.<**>
>> --------------------
>> Which is a demonstration of the concept of "stable"
>> equilibrium. Turmel has failed to direct our
>> attention to the source of "negative feedback" in
>> this demonstration, however. There is merely
>> momentum countervailed by gravity. No feedback.
>>
>> Turmel continues to claim that he is an "engineer."
>> In response to an earlier question he said he was a
>> graduate of Carleton, I think. Will he give me
>> permission to access his Carleton transcript and
>> student records so I might confirm his claim?
>> --
>>
>> <**>If you turn the bowl upside down and put the ball
>> at the top, one small push and the gravity will make
>> the ball fall faster and faster. That's unstable. If
>> you put the ball on a platform and give it a push,
>> without friction, it will just continue in rolling
>> steady state.<**>
>> --------------------
>> Which merely demonstrates the concept of "unstable"
>> equilibrium. There is also no feedback in this
>> demonstration, merely the effects of gravity.
>> --
>>
>> <**>Both zero and negative feedback are acceptable
>> while positive feedback is always unacceptably
>> unstable.<**>
>> --------------------
>> Which does not follow from the two examples because
>> neither contains feedback. Turmel arbitrarily
>> asserts, "both zero and negative are acceptable" and
>> "positive feedback is always unacceptably unstable."
>> Both assertions are complete nonsense.
>> --
>>
>> Drag on a falling object is *negative* feedback that
>> increases to the square of the object's velocity, so
>> is therefore "exponential." It will increase to the
>> point where the force from drag and the force from
>> gravity equal. From that point downward the object
>> is falling at its "terminal" velocity which is
>> constant. So the change to that point is
>> "exponential" but from that point downward there is
>> nothing "exponential" about it whatsoever.
>>
>> But this is negative feedback that this eminent
>> "engineer" says is "acceptable." I wonder if he will
>> admit that it also demonstrates that negative
>> feedback can be "exponential."
>>
>> What is it about the clock escapement that feeds
>> energy into the pendulum that keeps it going with
>> each tick of the clock that makes it "always
>> unacceptably unstable"? Will this eminent "engineer"
>> please supply an answer? It is definitely an example
>> of positive feedback that for the first time made
>> navigation across open oceans possible.
>>
>> What is it about the triode tube that makes it
>> "always unacceptably unstable"? There is positive
>> feedback from plate to grid which revolutionized
>> communications, making possible the ultimate
>> development of the very computers we use to scribble
>> and view these messages.
>>
>> "Edwin Howard Armstrong enrolled in electrical
>> engineering at Columbia, and in 1913, while still an
>> undergrad, made his first great discovery,
>> regeneration...Armstrong discovered that the gain of
>> a triode amplifier could be enormously increased by
>> feeding some of the amplifier output back into the
>> input, i.e. by using positive feedback. Given enough
>> feedback, the amplifier became a stable and powerful
>> oscillator, perfect for driving radio transmitters.
>> Given a little less feedback, the amplifier became a
>> more sensitive radio receiver than anything else at
>> the time."
>> --
>>
>> <**>His latest assertion is that I'm wrong when I say
>> positive feedback generates an exponential output.
>> Like I said, Ryan's certifiably irrational. I have a
>> gift for explaining super-sophisticated engineering
>> really simply.
>> --------------------
>> The gifts are the gifts of the glib and successful
>> con man. Turmel 1) falsely claims to be an
>> "engineer," which gives him the aura of someone who
>> knows what he is talking about to whom we must defer
>> even though we don't understand what this "genius" is
>> talking about; and 2) he lies with a straight face.
>> He is indeed good at what he does.
>> --
>>
>> More to the point is the assertion that interest is
>> feedback. It is feedback in the informational sense
>> only and derives from the conventions of accounting.
>> Interest is merely the name that we give to profit
>> going to the financier, which includes most of us
>> through pension, insurance and mutual funds.
>>
>> Profit is "positive feedback" and loss is "negative
>> feedback" because it informs us whether or not what
>> we are doing is satisfying the demands of consumers.
>> It is the very basis of the system of free
>> enterprise.
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Turmel) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> > >Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 18:32:52 -0500
>> > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Daniel Morin)
>> > >Subject: Money, Interest and Prosperity
>> > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> >
>> >
>> > JCT: Dan, this post based on your questions has really
>> > stirred up a lot of debate on the USENET groups.
>> > can.politics and alt.fan.john-turmel get it all and you can
>> > even use Google search Groups for turmel sorted on date and
>> > you'll find almost 30 articles.
>> >
>> > Most are from Dan Parker beating up on Bill Ryan. Bill's a
>> > wonderful shill to beat up on. He uses big words that are
>> > gibberish and some people take him seriously so using him as
>> > a foil is a lot of fun. Dan Parker's enjoying showing Ryan
>> > wrong as much as I did.
>> >
>> > I had 18 posts debating with Bill Ryan that I can refer you
>> > to which I've published and can be found online with a
>> > search for turmel and ryan and social credit or at the
>> > Turmel's Latest Posts page from my home page:
>> > http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/ryan1.htm
>> > http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/ryan4.htm
>> > http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/ryan6.htm
>> > http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/ryan8.htm
>> > http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/ryan10.htm
>> > http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/ryan14.htm
>> >
>> > By the end, he was so badly beaten up that he became
>> > demented and has been unable to stop bad-mouthing me all
>> > these years after his drubbing.
>> >
>> > So go check the Google Groups. Step in if you'd like to make
>> > a fool of Ryan too. It's not too often you get an opponent
>> > who doesn't realize he's beaten and keeps getting up so you
>> > can keep smashing him down.
>> >
>> > His latest assertion is that I'm wrong when I say positive
>> > feedback generates an exponential output. Like I said,
>> > Ryan's certifiably irrational. I have a gift for explaining
>> > super-sophisticated engineering really simply. He's arguing
>> > I'm wrong when I can explain positive, negative and zero
>> > feedback with a ball and a bowl. See:
>> > http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/bankmath.htm and search for
>> > bowl. Once you get it, then you'll really enjoy seeing Crazy
>> > Bill baying at the moon.
>> >
>> > Again, he's fun to beat up on but only for educational
>> > purposes. Check it out.
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Turmel) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> Jct: I've just noticed that Bill "Never-take-a-bet" Ryan been
>> mouthing off that I have no right to sign myself as
>> "John C. Turmel, B. Eng." and has been posting his
>> diatribe as a response to everyone of my posts on USENET.
>>
>> So be it.
>>
>> I bet $1000US to $100 if Bill Ryan will put it up that
>> Carleton University will back me up as to my graduation
>> with a Bachelor of Engineering (Electrical) [B.Eng.]
>> degree.
>>
>> I'd love to say "put up or shut up" but Bill Ryan
>> never ever put up and never ever shut up.
>>
>> I won't be bothered with Mr. "Never-put-money-where-his-
>> mouth is" until he calls my raise in stakes.
>>
>> The chicken.
>> Again, visit http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/lp.htm for
>> my debates crushing him years ago which accounts for his
>> dementia now.
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Turmel) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
>> Bill Ryan ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) writes:
>> > The Carleton designation for their degree is
>> > "Bachelor of Engineering" not "B. Eng."
>> >...
>> > Turmel has repeatedly demonstrated that he is a con
>> > man, a scammer and a clown.
>> >
>> >> So be it.
>> >> I bet $1000US to $100 if Bill Ryan will put it up that
>> >> Carleton University will back me up as to my graduation
>> >> with a Bachelor of Engineering (Electrical) [B.Eng.]
>> >> degree.
>> >>
>> >> I'd love to say "put up or shut up" but Bill Ryan
>> >> never ever put up and never ever shut up.
>> >>
>> >> I won't be bothered with Mr. "Never-put-money-where-his-
>> >> mouth is" until he calls my raise in stakes.
>> >>
>> >> The chicken.
>> >> Again, visit http://www.cyberclass.net/turmel/lp.htm for
>> >> my debates crushing him years ago which accounts for his
>> >> dementia now.
>>
>> Jct: Bill Ryan's mouth won't shut up though he won't put up
>> and call my bet. I wonder why if he's so certain? I'm certain
>> enough to bet. Why isn't the mouthy coward?
--
***********************************************
All persons named herein are purely fictional victims
of the Canidian Beagle Breader's Association.
Save the Beagle!
I keep getting anonymous mail from my "Fans".
Don't be anonymous.
To send me a private message, goto:
https://www.neotext.ca/cgi-bin/pub.gtx.sh?&COLS=48&ROWS=8&PROC=message&SERVICE_ADDR=campbell
***********************************************
| <-- __Chronological__ --> | <-- __Thread__ --> |
