One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register ☰
General Chit-Chat (non-political talk)
How To Win Any Argument, by Dave Barry
Page 1 of 2 next>
May 10, 2018 20:47:09   #
slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas
 
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry, a Pulitzer Prize-winning American author and columnist who wrote a nationally syndicated humor column for the Miami Herald from 1983 to 2005. He has also written numerous books of humor and parody, as well as comic novels. It was originally printed in the 80's, and appears to be a very sound guide for debates, so all on OPP should find it useful :

QUOTE (Dave Barry)

I argue very well. Ask any of my remaining friends. I can win an argument on any topic, against any opponent. People know this, and steer clear of me at parties. Often, as a sign of their great respect, they don't even invite me. You too can win arguments. Simply follow these rules:

* Drink Liquor.

Suppose you're at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding on the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're drinking some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, afraid to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. But if you drink several large martinis, you'll discover you have STRONG VIEWS about the Peruvian economy. You'll be a WEALTH of information. You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights and possibly upsetting furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room.

* Make things up.

Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are underpaid, and you're damned if you're going to let a bunch of Peruvians be better off. DON'T say: ``I think Peruvians are underpaid.'' Say: "The average Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level.''

NOTE: Always make up exact figures.

If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up, too. Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford Commission published May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?'' Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say "You left your soiled underwear in my bath house.''

* Use meaningless but weightly-sounding words and phrases.

Memorize this list:

o Let me put it this way
o In terms of
o Vis-a-vis
o Per se
o As it were
o Qua
o So to speak

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.,'' "e.g.,'' and "i.e.'' These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you do not.''

Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say: "Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have enough money.''

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say: "Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D.''

Only a fool would challenge that statement.

* Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks.

You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at your opponents when they make valid points. The best are:

You're begging the question.
You're being defensive.
Don't compare apples and oranges.
What are your parameters?

This last one is especially valuable. Nobody, other than mathematicians, has the vaguest idea what "parameters'' means.

Here's how to use your comebacks:

You say: "As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873...''
Your opponent says: "Lincoln died in 1865.''
You say: "You're begging the question.''

OR

You say: "Liberians, like most Asians...''
Your opponent says: "Liberia is in Africa.''
You say: "You're being defensive.''

* Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler.

This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say: "That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say'' or "You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler.''

So that's it: you now know how to out-argue anybody.

WARNING: Do not try to pull this on people who generally carry weapons.

Reply
May 10, 2018 21:42:23   #
DaWg44
 
Thanks. Has been a long hard day, needed a laugh.

Reply
May 10, 2018 21:51:37   #
Manning345 Loc: Richmond, Virginia
 
DaWg44 wrote:
Thanks. Has been a long hard day, needed a laugh.


Right! Barry seems to be a parameter-free oligarch of the third kind, steeped in the morass of popular nonsense. QED?

Reply
 
 
May 11, 2018 05:21:03   #
crazylibertarian Loc: Florida by way of New York & Rhode Island
 
slatten49 wrote:
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry, a Pulitzer Prize-winning American author and columnist who wrote a nationally syndicated humor column for the Miami Herald from 1983 to 2005. He has also written numerous books of humor and parody, as well as comic novels. It was originally printed in the 80's, and appears to be a very sound guide for debates, so all on OPP should find it useful :

QUOTE (Dave Barry)

I argue very well. Ask any of my remaining friends. I can win an argument on any topic, against any opponent. People know this, and steer clear of me at parties. Often, as a sign of their great respect, they don't even invite me. You too can win arguments. Simply follow these rules:

* Drink Liquor.

Suppose you're at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding on the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're drinking some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, afraid to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. But if you drink several large martinis, you'll discover you have STRONG VIEWS about the Peruvian economy. You'll be a WEALTH of information. You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights and possibly upsetting furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room.

* Make things up.

Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are underpaid, and you're damned if you're going to let a bunch of Peruvians be better off. DON'T say: ``I think Peruvians are underpaid.'' Say: "The average Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level.''

NOTE: Always make up exact figures.

If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up, too. Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford Commission published May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?'' Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say "You left your soiled underwear in my bath house.''

* Use meaningless but weightly-sounding words and phrases.

Memorize this list:

o Let me put it this way
o In terms of
o Vis-a-vis
o Per se
o As it were
o Qua
o So to speak

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.,'' "e.g.,'' and "i.e.'' These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you do not.''

Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say: "Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have enough money.''

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say: "Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D.''

Only a fool would challenge that statement.

* Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks.

You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at your opponents when they make valid points. The best are:

You're begging the question.
You're being defensive.
Don't compare apples and oranges.
What are your parameters?

This last one is especially valuable. Nobody, other than mathematicians, has the vaguest idea what "parameters'' means.

Here's how to use your comebacks:

You say: "As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873...''
Your opponent says: "Lincoln died in 1865.''
You say: "You're begging the question.''

OR

You say: "Liberians, like most Asians...''
Your opponent says: "Liberia is in Africa.''
You say: "You're being defensive.''

* Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler.

This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say: "That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say'' or "You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler.''

So that's it: you now know how to out-argue anybody.

WARNING: Do not try to pull this on people who generally carry weapons.
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry,... (show quote)




Another approach is from Prof. Irwin Corey, the World's Greatest Authority. He used to ramble on saying nothing of consequence using phrases like Barry suggests.

Reply
May 11, 2018 06:20:31   #
Betta
 
Dave Barry is outright crazy hilarious. Used to read his stuff and get a good gut laugh every time. He's got dems pegged to a T.


slatten49 wrote:
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry, a Pulitzer Prize-winning American author and columnist who wrote a nationally syndicated humor column for the Miami Herald from 1983 to 2005. He has also written numerous books of humor and parody, as well as comic novels. It was originally printed in the 80's, and appears to be a very sound guide for debates, so all on OPP should find it useful :

QUOTE (Dave Barry)

I argue very well. Ask any of my remaining friends. I can win an argument on any topic, against any opponent. People know this, and steer clear of me at parties. Often, as a sign of their great respect, they don't even invite me. You too can win arguments. Simply follow these rules:

* Drink Liquor.

Suppose you're at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding on the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're drinking some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, afraid to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. But if you drink several large martinis, you'll discover you have STRONG VIEWS about the Peruvian economy. You'll be a WEALTH of information. You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights and possibly upsetting furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room.

* Make things up.

Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are underpaid, and you're damned if you're going to let a bunch of Peruvians be better off. DON'T say: ``I think Peruvians are underpaid.'' Say: "The average Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level.''

NOTE: Always make up exact figures.

If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up, too. Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford Commission published May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?'' Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say "You left your soiled underwear in my bath house.''

* Use meaningless but weightly-sounding words and phrases.

Memorize this list:

o Let me put it this way
o In terms of
o Vis-a-vis
o Per se
o As it were
o Qua
o So to speak

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.,'' "e.g.,'' and "i.e.'' These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you do not.''

Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say: "Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have enough money.''

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say: "Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D.''

Only a fool would challenge that statement.

* Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks.

You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at your opponents when they make valid points. The best are:

You're begging the question.
You're being defensive.
Don't compare apples and oranges.
What are your parameters?

This last one is especially valuable. Nobody, other than mathematicians, has the vaguest idea what "parameters'' means.

Here's how to use your comebacks:

You say: "As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873...''
Your opponent says: "Lincoln died in 1865.''
You say: "You're begging the question.''

OR

You say: "Liberians, like most Asians...''
Your opponent says: "Liberia is in Africa.''
You say: "You're being defensive.''

* Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler.

This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say: "That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say'' or "You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler.''

So that's it: you now know how to out-argue anybody.

WARNING: Do not try to pull this on people who generally carry weapons.
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry,... (show quote)

Reply
May 11, 2018 06:58:02   #
slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas
 
crazylibertarian wrote:
Another approach is from Prof. Irwin Corey, the World's Greatest Authority. He used to ramble on saying nothing of consequence using phrases like Barry suggests.

Thanks for reminding me of Professor Irwin Corey...one of my favorites from the past.

https://video.search.yahoo.com/search/video?fr=tightropetb&p=professorirwincorey#id=8&vid=4b6b66f51d4

Reply
May 11, 2018 09:08:24   #
lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas
 
slatten49 wrote:
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry, a Pulitzer Prize-winning American author and columnist who wrote a nationally syndicated humor column for the Miami Herald from 1983 to 2005. He has also written numerous books of humor and parody, as well as comic novels. It was originally printed in the 80's, and appears to be a very sound guide for debates, so all on OPP should find it useful :

QUOTE (Dave Barry)

I argue very well. Ask any of my remaining friends. I can win an argument on any topic, against any opponent. People know this, and steer clear of me at parties. Often, as a sign of their great respect, they don't even invite me. You too can win arguments. Simply follow these rules:

* Drink Liquor.

Suppose you're at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding on the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're drinking some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, afraid to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. But if you drink several large martinis, you'll discover you have STRONG VIEWS about the Peruvian economy. You'll be a WEALTH of information. You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights and possibly upsetting furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room.

* Make things up.

Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are underpaid, and you're damned if you're going to let a bunch of Peruvians be better off. DON'T say: ``I think Peruvians are underpaid.'' Say: "The average Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level.''

NOTE: Always make up exact figures.

If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up, too. Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford Commission published May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?'' Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say "You left your soiled underwear in my bath house.''

* Use meaningless but weightly-sounding words and phrases.

Memorize this list:

o Let me put it this way
o In terms of
o Vis-a-vis
o Per se
o As it were
o Qua
o So to speak

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.,'' "e.g.,'' and "i.e.'' These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you do not.''

Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say: "Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have enough money.''

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say: "Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D.''

Only a fool would challenge that statement.

* Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks.

You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at your opponents when they make valid points. The best are:

You're begging the question.
You're being defensive.
Don't compare apples and oranges.
What are your parameters?

This last one is especially valuable. Nobody, other than mathematicians, has the vaguest idea what "parameters'' means.

Here's how to use your comebacks:

You say: "As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873...''
Your opponent says: "Lincoln died in 1865.''
You say: "You're begging the question.''

OR

You say: "Liberians, like most Asians...''
Your opponent says: "Liberia is in Africa.''
You say: "You're being defensive.''

* Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler.

This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say: "That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say'' or "You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler.''

So that's it: you now know how to out-argue anybody.

WARNING: Do not try to pull this on people who generally carry weapons.
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry,... (show quote)


I've always found it to be most efficient to win arguments before they begin. The method for this type of victory, consists of saying a bunch of stuff no one understands, leaving them speechless. It is important to run away immediately after uttering the last word - some people assume they've been insulted and try to kill you.

Reply
 
 
May 11, 2018 09:57:52   #
bahmer
 
slatten49 wrote:
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry, a Pulitzer Prize-winning American author and columnist who wrote a nationally syndicated humor column for the Miami Herald from 1983 to 2005. He has also written numerous books of humor and parody, as well as comic novels. It was originally printed in the 80's, and appears to be a very sound guide for debates, so all on OPP should find it useful :

QUOTE (Dave Barry)

I argue very well. Ask any of my remaining friends. I can win an argument on any topic, against any opponent. People know this, and steer clear of me at parties. Often, as a sign of their great respect, they don't even invite me. You too can win arguments. Simply follow these rules:

* Drink Liquor.

Suppose you're at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding on the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're drinking some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, afraid to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. But if you drink several large martinis, you'll discover you have STRONG VIEWS about the Peruvian economy. You'll be a WEALTH of information. You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights and possibly upsetting furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room.

* Make things up.

Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are underpaid, and you're damned if you're going to let a bunch of Peruvians be better off. DON'T say: ``I think Peruvians are underpaid.'' Say: "The average Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level.''

NOTE: Always make up exact figures.

If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up, too. Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford Commission published May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?'' Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say "You left your soiled underwear in my bath house.''

* Use meaningless but weightly-sounding words and phrases.

Memorize this list:

o Let me put it this way
o In terms of
o Vis-a-vis
o Per se
o As it were
o Qua
o So to speak

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.,'' "e.g.,'' and "i.e.'' These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you do not.''

Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say: "Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have enough money.''

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say: "Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D.''

Only a fool would challenge that statement.

* Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks.

You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at your opponents when they make valid points. The best are:

You're begging the question.
You're being defensive.
Don't compare apples and oranges.
What are your parameters?

This last one is especially valuable. Nobody, other than mathematicians, has the vaguest idea what "parameters'' means.

Here's how to use your comebacks:

You say: "As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873...''
Your opponent says: "Lincoln died in 1865.''
You say: "You're begging the question.''

OR

You say: "Liberians, like most Asians...''
Your opponent says: "Liberia is in Africa.''
You say: "You're being defensive.''

* Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler.

This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say: "That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say'' or "You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler.''

So that's it: you now know how to out-argue anybody.

WARNING: Do not try to pull this on people who generally carry weapons.
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry,... (show quote)


There are a number on OPP that have this book memorized and they are all liberals.

Reply
May 11, 2018 11:50:34   #
badbobby Loc: texas
 
slatten49 wrote:
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry, a Pulitzer Prize-winning American author and columnist who wrote a nationally syndicated humor column for the Miami Herald from 1983 to 2005. He has also written numerous books of humor and parody, as well as comic novels. It was originally printed in the 80's, and appears to be a very sound guide for debates, so all on OPP should find it useful :

QUOTE (Dave Barry)

I argue very well. Ask any of my remaining friends. I can win an argument on any topic, against any opponent. People know this, and steer clear of me at parties. Often, as a sign of their great respect, they don't even invite me. You too can win arguments. Simply follow these rules:

* Drink Liquor.

Suppose you're at a party and some hotshot intellectual is expounding on the economy of Peru, a subject you know nothing about. If you're drinking some health-fanatic drink like grapefruit juice, you'll hang back, afraid to display your ignorance, while the hotshot enthralls your date. But if you drink several large martinis, you'll discover you have STRONG VIEWS about the Peruvian economy. You'll be a WEALTH of information. You'll argue forcefully, offering searing insights and possibly upsetting furniture. People will be impressed. Some may leave the room.

* Make things up.

Suppose, in the Peruvian economy argument, you are trying to prove Peruvians are underpaid, a position you base solely on the fact that YOU are underpaid, and you're damned if you're going to let a bunch of Peruvians be better off. DON'T say: ``I think Peruvians are underpaid.'' Say: "The average Peruvian's salary in 1981 dollars adjusted for the revised tax base is $1,452.81 per annum, which is $836.07 before the mean gross poverty level.''

NOTE: Always make up exact figures.

If an opponent asks you where you got your information, make THAT up, too. Say: "This information comes from Dr. Hovel T. Moon's study for the Buford Commission published May 9, 1982. Didn't you read it?'' Say this in the same tone of voice you would use to say "You left your soiled underwear in my bath house.''

* Use meaningless but weightly-sounding words and phrases.

Memorize this list:

o Let me put it this way
o In terms of
o Vis-a-vis
o Per se
o As it were
o Qua
o So to speak

You should also memorize some Latin abbreviations such as "Q.E.D.,'' "e.g.,'' and "i.e.'' These are all short for "I speak Latin, and you do not.''

Here's how to use these words and phrases. Suppose you want to say: "Peruvians would like to order appetizers more often, but they don't have enough money.''

You never win arguments talking like that. But you WILL win if you say: "Let me put it this way. In terms of appetizers vis-a-vis Peruvians qua Peruvians, they would like to order them more often, so to speak, but they do not have enough money per se, as it were. Q.E.D.''

Only a fool would challenge that statement.

* Use snappy and irrelevant comebacks.

You need an arsenal of all-purpose irrelevant phrases to fire back at your opponents when they make valid points. The best are:

You're begging the question.
You're being defensive.
Don't compare apples and oranges.
What are your parameters?

This last one is especially valuable. Nobody, other than mathematicians, has the vaguest idea what "parameters'' means.

Here's how to use your comebacks:

You say: "As Abraham Lincoln said in 1873...''
Your opponent says: "Lincoln died in 1865.''
You say: "You're begging the question.''

OR

You say: "Liberians, like most Asians...''
Your opponent says: "Liberia is in Africa.''
You say: "You're being defensive.''

* Compare your opponent to Adolf Hitler.

This is your heavy artillery, for when your opponent is obviously right and you are spectacularly wrong. Bring Hitler up subtly. Say: "That sounds suspiciously like something Adolf Hitler might say'' or "You certainly do remind me of Adolf Hitler.''

So that's it: you now know how to out-argue anybody.

WARNING: Do not try to pull this on people who generally carry weapons.
I recently came across this article by Dave Barry,... (show quote)


uhhuh what's your parameter on all this?


Reply
May 11, 2018 23:06:32   #
slatten49 Loc: Lake Whitney, Texas
 
badbobby wrote:
uhhuh what's your parameter on all this?


"Nobody, other than mathematicians, has the vaguest idea what 'parameters'' means."

Reply
May 12, 2018 10:48:56   #
badbobby Loc: texas
 
slatten49 wrote:
"Nobody, other than mathematicians, has the vaguest idea what 'parameters'' means."


I certainly don't
but it sounds impressive

Reply
 
 
May 12, 2018 11:30:41   #
bahmer
 
badbobby wrote:
I certainly don't
but it sounds impressive


Here you go now you can ponder this for the rest of the day.

pa·ram·e·ter
pəˈramədər/Submit
nountechnical
plural noun: parameters
a numerical or other measurable factor forming one of a set that defines a system or sets the conditions of its operation.
"the transmission will not let you downshift unless your speed is within the lower gear's parameters"
MATHEMATICS
a quantity whose value is selected for the particular circumstances and in relation to which other variable quantities may be expressed.
STATISTICS
a numerical characteristic of a population, as distinct from a statistic of a sample.

Reply
May 12, 2018 11:42:20   #
badbobby Loc: texas
 
bahmer wrote:
Here you go now you can ponder this for the rest of the day.

pa·ram·e·ter
pəˈramədər/Submit
nountechnical
plural noun: parameters
a numerical or other measurable factor forming one of a set that defines a system or sets the conditions of its operation.
"the transmission will not let you downshift unless your speed is within the lower gear's parameters"
MATHEMATICS
a quantity whose value is selected for the particular circumstances and in relation to which other variable quantities may be expressed.
STATISTICS
a numerical characteristic of a population, as distinct from a statistic of a sample.
Here you go now you can ponder this for the rest o... (show quote)


that's very clear bahm
do you understand it??
methinks those explanations need a parameter


Reply
May 12, 2018 11:47:58   #
bahmer
 
badbobby wrote:
that's very clear bahm
do you understand it??
methinks those explanations need a parameter



Since I was a project engineer for a large automatic punch press company
as well as a project engineer for a robotic company as well yes I do.
YOu should as well because when you shifted gears in that 1908 ford you had to be in a
certain range of motor RPM to make it work and that is a parameter.

Reply
May 12, 2018 12:06:43   #
badbobby Loc: texas
 
bahmer wrote:
Since I was a project engineer for a large automatic punch press company
as well as a project engineer for a robotic company as well yes I do.
YOu should as well because when you shifted gears in that 1908 ford you had to be in a
certain range of motor RPM to make it work and that is a parameter.
Since I was a project engineer for a large automat... (show quote)


er-ah
the model T's
As I remember my dad had one
it didn't have gears(per se)just forward and backward

it had a belt to make it go forward or backward
I remember the belt would break at times and have to be replaced or repaired somehow
it's possible my memory is off
but that's the way I remember it

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
General Chit-Chat (non-political talk)
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use | DMCA
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.