Terence McCann

I'll take Jim's que and bow out as well. It's time to turn the lights out, good night.

Read and understood Mike. However if you look back upon the posts the only person that started to bring politics and religion into the thread was Caoimhín. Nobody brought these things into the mix before him. That is an indisputable fact.

It's OK.... This type of thing is good - it clears the air.

A ladder would get the tech up there no problem. Those units would be a piece of cake to work on as most everything is waist high. Some of the rooftop units I worked on were in such a bad location - oy vey. I remember taking a panel off a rooftop unit and the wind ripping it out of my hands. All I could think of was "please don't let it hit the Presidents car!!".

There's confrontation and there's consultation. Marc Sorry Jim – You’re on the wrong side of objective facts (again). Confrontation or consulation Marc?

Chad, I agree but please leave it go on. All these things that are being discussed were first brought up by Caoimhin. It's only when people push back that it makes others uneasy. He shouldn't get away with making such broad stroke comments. It's ok to push back. Also, when intelligent folks Google around they should be able to look at a discussion like this and make up their own mind.

Protect & shelter? Perhaps we should leave that to Mike O. He's good at it and he does it in a civil manner. Nothing wrong with sending him a PM suggesting the censor of a post with inflammatory material. Marc You missed the point Marc.

At this juncture I must say thanks to Mike et al. for letting this play out. They could have easily pulled the plug stating numerous infractions of forum policy while trying to protect and shelter. Takes big brass ones - thanks.

And politics... I was thinking of the lesser used definition of religion: something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience, and yes AGW warming politics is, to me, included within that definition. Sorry Bob - I thought you were refering to this post where Caoimhín brought his religion into the mix: Look, if you are advocating the stewardship of the Earth, then I’m all on-board. As a Catholic, my church has been advocating stewardship of the Earth and her resources for over 2,000 years. Catholics are the original “Conservationists.â€

Sorry Jim – You’re on the wrong side of objective facts (again). There is NOT general agreement in the scientific community that GW is real. There is general agreement in the Hollywood community, in the Democratic Party and on The Left – but the general agreement in the scientific community is that there is NO SUCH THING as Global Warming. Sorry mate, I hate to tell you this, Al Gore is not a scientist. Cheers! Caoimhín P. Connell Forensic Industrial Hygienist www.forensic-applications.com (The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates. The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.) AMDG This was the first post where politics got dragged into the mix - hence the strawman argument. It provides a window of opportunity to not only throw Jim under the bus (because he happens to disagee, therefore the very classy statement: Sorry Jim – You’re on the wrong side of objective facts (again)) but to turn the topic around to include Hollywood, the Democrats, the Left and just for good measure link Jim, in an obtuse way, as stating Al Gore is/was a scientist. Very clever.

It just looks odd - like the chimney is coming straight down into the room with the window. Plus the height of the chimney off the roof is way off. You'd expect to see a brick chimney mich higher than that. What appliance was using the chimney?

And politics...

You sure that's a chimney Mike? Did you enter the room directly undeneath it - the one with the window?

Because he has a flair for writing. If you drill down it doesn't hold up but it impresses those easily impressed. So, some of us are, what...simple? Dude, not kewl! ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike I'm sorry Mike, in no way did I mean to infer that you were easily impressed [:-bigeyes. Wasn't my intention at all. If that were the case you'd be singing my song (something that has never happened).

Because he has a flair for writing. If you drill down it doesn't hold up but it impresses those easily impressed.

It's neither funny nor entertaining Mike although I understand your meaning. It's a shame that people like Caoimhín use forums, like this, to dupe the consumer for personal gains. However it is what is it is and the good fight continues.

I did, and was surprised by what I found. Scroll down to post #5. Very telling. I never saw that post but pretty funny all in all.... [^]

I do believe that Caoimhín is from the Emerald Isle. So is my Grandfather - and that means?

Kurt - I have nothing but the utmost respect for you as construction runs in your veins. Nothing said here is meant as a personal attack. Do not confuse my distaste for a another poser as a frame of reference towards you.

Ya, ya we do Kurt. Sometimes we need to go head to head with those that expound based on idyllic gain but not necessarily the truth. Sometimes your idols don't hold the flame test albeit they instill what you want/wish to believe.

OK – but you won’t like it. “Objectiveâ€

This is from another one of your post Caoimhín: By this statement you infer that Jim, somewhere along the line, made reference to Al Gore. To the best of my recollection Jim never mentioned Al Gores name. Please show us where Jim had mentioned Al Gores name, in reference to "global warming" prior to "outing" him as an Al Gore lover. If you can not show me/us where Jim used Al Gores name in this reference then it is truly a Strawman argument as stated prior.

Sorry Jim – You’re on the wrong side of objective facts (again). You didn't answer the question Caoimhín I specifically asked you to reference past posts/threads where, as you stated, that Jim was on the wrong side of the objective facts (again). Shouldn't be hard to do. If you accuse him of this you must have specific memory's/examples of this readily at hand. We will start with this one first.