Please forward to all your E-mail friends! ****************************************** Install a $6 gas saver in your car!

I increased my gas milage from 28.8 miles to the gallon to 34.1 miles to a gallon in my Ford Probe!

For every 10 gallons I now go an extra 53 miles!!!!!! Since the gas prices have skyrocketed, I decided to look for some kind of gas saver on the internet. I entered the words gas saver in my search engine. Most websites talked about magnets, but all were way over priced.

I went to Home Depot and found all kinds of magnets. I bought 4 magnets, 2 to a package at $2.98 each. Size 1 inch by 2 inch.

I taped 4 of them to my fuel line. One on each side of the fuel line.They have to push away from each other and use black electrical tape to hold them together. I also used 8 inch cable ties to hold them together. I put about a one inch space between the 2 sets. I put them as close to the carburator as I could. Total cost per car $6. What a deal! I have 4 vehicles and just installed magnets in all of them! About 15 minutes to install!

Please forward to your friends!

-- Anonymous, May 08, 2001

Answers

BULL SHIT. What else did you find near the Carb, a Rabbit? Or was that in your hat? Did you find a cheap source for the magic pill that changes water into gasoline that the Oil Companies thought they bought up during the 1930s?

-- Anonymous, May 09, 2001

Doomzies, go ahead and ignore my findings of fact. I don't give a damm what you think. All I know is that it worked for me. It will save me a substantial amount of money per year! A ton of money for a lifetime! Screw you, jerk!

-- Anonymous, May 09, 2001

Aren't you the same guy who insists that colloidal silver prevents disease and increases lifespan?

Somehow, I have no trouble imagining you taping magnets on a fuel line.

The image fits.

-- Anonymous, May 09, 2001

FreeLoad....(load of shit): NAME YOUR CAR. MFGR's EXPECTED MILEAGE, LAST TIME YOU MEASURED IT PRE-MAGNETS and how many times), the last time your had the Carb cleaned out (along with a tuneup) and the number of times you have measured the mileage since then.
REPORT BACK IF YOU CAN.
Then very carefully, after reporting, firmly hold your keyboard and mouse in your hands and shove them up your ass.

-- Anonymous, May 09, 2001

Imagine the mileage you could get if you could somehow magnetize a couple bars of colloidal silver and tape them to your fuel line. Why you might not need to refuel again for months!

-- Anonymous, May 09, 2001

heh. heh heh heh.

Geez, you guys is moiciless.

Ha.

-- Anonymous, May 09, 2001

Unbelievable assholes are on this forum! Freddie tries to do a public service and all he gets from you guys is crap and more crap!

-- Anonymous, May 09, 2001

betty you are correct. Freddie is an unbelievable asshole. there are others on this forum that are believable assholes; and still others that are not assholes at all!

Magnets on a fuel line? keeps rust out of the secondary filter....thats about all. course, if you have rust in your tank, you gots a bigger pro'lem than fuel milage....

knock yourself out, meathead.

-- Anonymous, May 09, 2001

What year is your Probe? I thoought they were all fuel-injected.

-- Anonymous, May 09, 2001

The Main Point Is,

that all this talk about High Gas Prices is nothing more than a

Media-Induced MYTH.

Gas prices right now, ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION, AND IN REAL-DOLLAR TERMS

(did you get that?)

ARE IN THE LOWEST 10TH PERCENTILE IN ALL YEARS SINCE 1918.

Real-dollar terms. That's what all the media geniuses aren't telling us. But that's a VITAL concept, to ANY type of economic analysis. Without real-dollar (constant) comparisons, anything else is pretty much meaningless, when dealing with nominal prices over time.

To wit:

$1.00 in 1975 is equivalent to $3.03 in 1998

http://lycos.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001519.html

The average gas price in 1975 was $0.57/gallon; adjusted for inflation that's $1.79/gallon in February 2000 dollars.

Look at

http://www.api.org/consumer/gaspricecharts.htm

and you'll see that this "high gas price" brouhaha is nothing more than a MYTH.

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

Ah Einstein, you forgot to factor-in technological advancements (computers), productivity(better vehicles) and such in your little "analysis". Take out the increases in taxes over the years and even you can understand just how these factors have made energy cheap.

Your claims fold like tinker toys when one simply asks about supply. Everything being even(ignore the Oil guys in the WH), where are the supply declines to justify even a TEN PERCENT related increase? Hell we have seen 25% at the minimum in 6 months. Have supplies shrunk 25%? One thing is a guarantee, this ain't no random event.

Gas market is as controlled as most. Do not buy the pr bs from the API. Their own data fails to justify anything close to any diversified competitive marketplace as they claim in all their spews for the common-folks.

Again, where are the shortages to justify these increases?

There is plenty of Awl around. Problem is who wants to invest in refineries which will make it even less profitable than it is now? Shortage is in refinery capacity. Thus these manufactured increases to attack the dough. Ain't no crisis, never been that.

BTW, not that you could possibly care, but NG dropped a good chunk recently. Think the poor saps in Cali will see these drops passed onto their power bills? Oh ya that gunna happen.

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

No cretin eyeroller. Gas is cheaper based on hours worked per worker than ever, ever before and not just in real dollars. You mentality is inverted. By now, cars should be getting 50 mpg if only on a 1/1,000 basis vs. the efficiencies obtainable by computerization and automation.

However, there is no "automation" in the manual patterns of driving by FAT, DUMB and HAPPY Americans who didn't learn the lessons of the 2 oil scares of the 1970. Are we supposed to feel sorry for those who must re-fuel their 8 mpg SUVs because they live 50 miles from their jobs? Screw them and let them PAY.

You forgot to calculate the gross waste of millions of gallons for soccer field /pizza/PTA runs by gas guzzling SUVs now cluttering the roads of every burb vs. the lust for lean machines that got 40 mpg inspired by the run of high prices in the late 1970s and early 90s. It seems the current generation forgot about "conservation" in the name of spotted owls. PAY ASSHOLES. You can afford it.

-- Anonymous, May 12, 2001

I love the 8 mpg SUV statement. It has become a mantra. I am sure that they are out there. I do have an SUV. It gets about 19 mpg. The car that I drive to and from work gets 30 to 33 mpg. I tried some of the higher mil. cars. They were either much too small or handled like bricks [Honda Civic or Toyota Coralla would be examples. Nope, I have found the power band on this car and learned, again, that driving a winding road can be fun. Brings back memories of my 1969 Lotus Elan. A nice 5 speed, a good 4 cylinder engine, a winding road; what fun.

Freddie; I have found a better solution. I added ground-up doves to the tank. My mileage went up to 50 mpg. The downside is that the feathers kept plugging the fuel filter.

Very,

Bemused

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2001

The coming end of the "crisis"

Power Industry May Face Boom-Bust Cycle 

Sunday May 13 8:26 AM ET

By Leonard Anderson

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - The U.S. power industry, which has embarked 
on a $140 billion building spree to avoid more California-style 
blackouts, could see that boom turn bust, with too many megawatts 
chasing too little demand, industry analysts warn.

Plans already on the drawing board would add a staggering 305,000 
megawatts of power by 2007 -- electricity for nearly three times the 
number of homes in the entire country, according to industry 
estimates.

But not all the plants will likely be completed, with some canceled 
or pushed into lengthier development schedules.

``A lot of power developers are targeting the same places like 
California, Texas, Arizona, Nevada, New England and the Midwest for 
new plants, but they must balance their ambitions with reality,'' 
said Susan Abbott, a managing director at Moody's Investors Service.

``We find announced plans to build generation that dramatically 
exceed conventionally measured requirements,'' the Electric Power 
Research Institute (EPRI), a utility industry research group in Palo 
Alto, California, said in a study.

``If even half these plants were to be built, we would observe the 
markets swinging from famine to feast, with the pain recently 
experienced by buyers migrating to sellers,'' EPRI warned.

CALIFORNIA FEARS SPARK THE BOOM

California's energy crisis -- which has led to six days of blackouts 
in the state so far this year -- and other states' efforts to 
deregulate their own electricity sectors have triggered the rush to 
build new generating plants.

California, the nation's most populous state, led the pack with a 
1996 law to spur competition among generators and reduce electric 
rates, then 50 percent above the national average.

The new law worked well at first, prompting big independent producers 
like Duke Energy (NYSE:DUK - news) and others to buy and upgrade 
plants from PG&E Corp.'s (NYSE:PCG - news) Pacific Gas & Electric 
unit and Edison International's (NYSE:EIX - news) Southern California 
Edison (news - web sites).

But the law was badly written, requiring in-state utilities to buy 
whatever extra power they needed in the volatile wholesale market 
while capping how much they could charge customers. Wholesale prices 
started to soar last spring amid strong demand and tight supplies, 
eventually pushing Pacific Gas and Electric into a Chapter 11 
bankruptcy filing while SoCal Edison struck a tentative $2.76 billion 
bailout deal with Gov. Gray Davis (news - web sites).

Meanwhile, California's deregulation bid and similar moves by other 
states slowed power plant construction to a crawl as industry 
executives pondered the new marketplace and looked for new investment 
opportunities.

By spring last year, California -- which has not seen any big new 
power plants in 10 years -- was unable to bridge a widening supply-
demand gap that state energy officials predict will produce up to 35 
days of blackouts this summer.

EYE ON BIG EXPANSION

Calpine Corp. (NYSE:CPN - news), of San Jose, California, is one of 
the big independent power producers adding badly needed generators in 
the Golden State and scouring other states to serve growing demand.

The company, which now has 6,000 megawatts on line, ``wants 70,000 
megawatts in operation in the United States by the end of 2005,'' 
said Calpine spokesman Bill Highlander -- more than 8 percent of 
current total U.S. demand of about 800,000 megawatts.

``We expect national demand to be 1 million megawatts by the end of 
2005 with population growth and more robust economic gains. What you 
find in the U.S. is what you find in California -- lots of 
inefficient plants 30 to 40 years old. So we're building to meet new 
demand and replace the older plants,'' Highlander said.

Other big players challenging Calpine in the national power stakes 
include Mirant (NYSE:MIR - news), privately held Panda Energy, PG&E's 
National Energy Group, Reliant Energy (NYSE:REI - news), NRG Energy 
(NYSE:NRG - news), PSEG (NYSE:PEG - news), FPL Group (NYSE:FPL - 
news), and Cogentrix.

The generating capacity among the top 10 developers totals 136,580 
megawatts, or about 45 percent of all new capacity expected to be 
operational by 2007, according to EPRI.

The hot markets for new fuel-efficient ``combined cycle'' plants 
powered by natural gas are Texas, the mid-Atlantic states of 
Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland, California, New England, and 
Florida.

``THREE OUT OF NINE''

``The market rule of thumb is that for every nine projects announced, 
only three will get built,'' said Abbott of Moody's. ''I have a lot 
of respect for the developers, but everyone has to put a little bit 
of cautious realism in their plans.''

EPRI warned ``developers could well overshoot the conventional 
requirements of several market regions, likely creating a dip in 
prices, profitability and utilization rates for many of the new 
plants.

``Of course, this is only one possible path for industry evolution. 
It is also plausible that strong environmental restrictions on coal 
burning will create a need for a great deal of the announced plants, 
without overcapacity,'' said EPRI.

Calpine nevertheless remains bullish.

``It's a big market out there,'' said Highlander. 

-- Anonymous, May 13, 2001

I looked into this claim and found that this gentleman (freddie the free loader) might not be that bogus.

Exhibit A: http://www.eureka.findlay.co.uk/archive_features/Arch_Automotive/magne ts/Magnets.htm

Exhibit B: U.S. Patent 3,830,621 - Process and Apparatus for Effecting Efficient Combustion. U.S. Patent 4,188,296 - Fuel Combustion and Magnetizing Apparatus used therefor. U.S. Patent 4,461,262 - Fuel Treating Device. U.S. Patent 4,572,145 - Magnetic Fuel Line Device. U.S. Patent 5,124,045 - Permanent Magnetic Power Cell System for Treating Fuel Lines for More Efficient Combustion and Less Pollution. U.S. Patent 5,331,807 - Air Fuel Magnetizer. U.S. Patent 5,664,546 - Fuel Saving Device. U.S. Patent 5,671,719 - Fuel Activation Apparatus using Magnetic Body. U.S. Patent 5,829,420 - Electromagnetic Device for the Magnetic Treatment of Fuel.

The actual vehicle efficiency is about 9%. This mean that your car consume more energy that it convert in movement. In other words you pay more energy that you obtain. In this text I will describe you a method and apparatus for improving the combustion fluid fuel in combustion devices, such as, general burners, incinerators, fuel oil boilers from appliance boilers to heat power boilers (home or industrial heating), various combustion furnaces, and internal combustion engines in automobiles (two-cycle and four-cycle, diesel and gasoline), trucks, ships and jets, where the fuel employed is liquid or gaseous hydrofuels, such as oil, gas, natural gas, propane, kerosene, gasoline, fuel oil, butane, etc...

Applying a magnetic field to ionizing fuel to be fed to combustion devices we can ensure more complete combustion, obtaining a maximization of the fuel economy, improving the fuel efficiency and reducing polluting emissions.

The air and fuel are subject to the lines of forces from permanent magnets mounted on the air and fuel inlet lines. The magnet for producing the magnetic field is oriented so that its South pole (red) is located adjacent the fuel line and its North pole (blue) is located spaced apart from the fuel line.

The magnetic field strength must be at a higher Gauss level (500 Gauss) since it may be demagnetized to some extent before reaching the combustion chamber.

How it works.

Most fuels for internal combustion engines are liquid. But liquid fuels don't combust till they are vaporized and mixed with air.

Currently regulated gas emissions from motor vehicles are unburned hydrocarbon (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), and oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Unburned HC and NOx react in the atmosphere to form photo-chemical smog. Smog is highly oxidizing in the environment and is the prime cause of eye and throat irritation, bad odor, plant damage, and decreased visibility. Oxides of Nitrogen are also toxic. CO impair blood capability to carry oxygen to the brain, resulting in slower reaction times and impaired judgement.

Fuel mainly consists of hydrocarbons. Groupings of hydrocarbons, when flowing through a magnetic field, change their orientations of magnetization in a direction opposite to that of the magnetic field. The molecules of hydrocarbon change their configuration. At the same time intermolecular force is considerably reduced or depressed. These mechanisms are believed to help to disperse oil particles and to become finely divided. In addition, hydrogen ions in fuel and oxygen ions in air or steam are magnetized to form magnetic domains which are believed to assist in atomizing fuel into finer particles.

Generally a liquid or gas fuel used for an internal combustion engine is composed of a set of molecules. Each molecule includes a number of atoms, which is composed of a nucleus and electrons orbiting around their nucleus. The molecules have magnetic moments in themselves, and the rotating electrons cause magnetic phenomena. Thus, positive (+) and negative (-) electric charges exists in the fuel's molecules. For this reason, the fuel particles of the negative and positive electric charges are not split into more minute particles. Accordingly, the fuels are not actively interlocked with oxygen during combustion, thereby causing incomplete combustion. To improve the above, the fuels have been required to be decomposed and ionized. The ionization of the fuel particles is accomplished by the supply of magnetic force from a magnet.

The resultant conditioned fuel/air mixture magnetized in opposite polarities burns more completely, producing higher engine output, better fuel economy, more power and most importantly reduces the amount of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust. Another benefits if these devices is that magnetically charged fuel and air molecules with opposite polarities dissolve carbon build-up in carburetor jets, fuel injectors, and combustion chambers help to clean up the engine and maintain the clean condition.

Installation.

The magnetic flux density to be imparted to fuel widely varies depending upon fuel, air or steam, and combustion equipment and conditions. In general, the preferred range of magnetic flux density is from 1000 to 3500 Gauss, and the most preferred range is from 1400 to 1800 Gauss when fuel oil is used in combination with conventional heat power boilers. The optimum range will be determined through experimental runs. The field strength is a function of the engine size based on fuel consumption.

The Ferrite magnets are the most cost effective for treating fuel. When high energy Neodymium Iron Boron Magnets are applied, we can obtain a decrease in the fuel mileage and unburned hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide.

In the usual automobile gasoline engine demagnetization usually does not occur even when the oxygen is treated in the air filter section of the engine. However, if the oxygen is put in a South pole magnetic state in the air filter of a Diesel engine, it has been found that the oxygen will be demagnetized to some extent in the blower section and thus the magnetic field strength should be about 13000 Gauss in air filter section in order to have the oxygen at the proper level when it reaches the combustion chamber.

In achieving a system which operates effectively, it has been found that magnets need be placed on booth the hydrocarbon fuel inlet and the oxygen inlet. Magnetizing only oxygen or fuel fails to achieve the best combustion efficiency. Also, it has been found that the magnets need be particularly oriented to achieve the optimal efficiency.

The magnetizing apparatus is located on the pipe between pumping means and the burner, carburetor or fuel injectors, because it is unnecessary for any other parts to be magnetized. A portion of the fuel feeding system extending from a point downstream of the magnetizing apparatus to the burner must be made of non-magnetic material. In this case, magnetized fuel is directly fed to burners or atomizing nozzles with a minimum reduction of magnetism.

The oxygen is in the South pole magnetic estate as contrasted with a North pole magnetic state since the advantage of the present invention are attained only when the oxygen is caused to be in the South pole magnetic state. Whether the oxygen in the air is in a North pole or is in a South pole magnetic state after having passed through a magnetic field can easily be determined by holding an ordinary compass near the conduit through which such oxygen is flowing. If in the desired South pole magnetic state, the needle of the compass which normally points to the North pole of the Earth will be detected toward and point to the conduit containing the oxygen.

The magnets are embedded in a body of non-magnetic material, such as plastic, copper or aluminum, to secure they to the fuel line. No cutting of the fuel line and no hose and clamps are necessary to install this device, outside a fuel line without disconnection or modification of the fuel or ignition system for producing magnetic flux in the flow path of combustible fuel within the pipe. These units have been installed without other fuel line or ignition adjustments to treat vehicles failing required emission tests as an inexpensive retrofit accessory to give substantially immediate improvements of up to the order of 80 % reduction in hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions.

In a preferred embodiment, one or more magnets are strapped to the fuel line as close as possible to the carburetor or fuel injectors with only one pole of the magnet or magnets adjacent to or in contact with the fuel line. One or more magnets are strapped to the air intake in such a way as to magnetically expose the oxygen to the magnetic field emanating from the pole opposite that of the pole used to expose the fuel.

It is believed that the fuel (South, Red) and oxygen (North, Blue) are oppositely polarized or ionized, with the result that the fuel and oxygen exhibit a stronger attraction to each other with the consequence that there is more efficient and complete bonding to each other during the combustion process.

The magnets should have a Curie temperature sufficiently high that they retain their magnetic characteristics at the operating temperatures to which they are exposed. For example, in an automobile engine, the fuel line magnets will lie above the engine block where relative heating will greatly increase their temperature. Some magnets lose much of their magnetic field strength as their temperature rise. The Curie temperature on Alnico magnet are 760ºC to 890ºC, on Ceramic magnets (ferrite magnets) 450ºC, on Neodymium 310ºC to 360ºC and on Samarium 720ºC a 825ºC.

In order to protect magnets from the effects of heat generated by the engine, it will be seen that magnet is provided with insulation which would include a layer of aluminum to block radiant energy and a layer of thermal insulation (neoprene) to prevent heating by conduction and radiation. I think that the aluminum cover isn't needed, a Ferrite or Ceramic magnet can work with temperatures of - 40ºC to 260 ºC.

Examples of results.

Dust in exhaust gas from a boiler was measured by both weight and concentrate methods. It was found that at the same weight of dust contained in exhaust gas, the exhaust gas generated after the magnetizing treatment according to these devices exhibited in higher value in concentration than that generated without magnetization. This fact that dust particles after magnetization are finer than those usually found, which in turn, means that oil particles are made finer by the magnetizing treatment of these devices. In boilers the combustion conditions are improved by applying magnetism to fuel according to these devices. - The flame becomes brighter and turns from red to white orange. A high temperature bright flame is observed. - The flame is reduced in vertical length and extended laterally. The rates of combustion becomes higher. - Spark in the flame is reduced or eliminated. - Vibrating combustion is prevented. - Pollution material content in exhaust gas is reduced.

Results in automobile comsume tests:

- 1980 Ford with a 3.3 liter engine from 18 MPG to 24 / 27 MPG => 33 / 50 % increase mileage, this mean: 5.5 G/100M to 4.16 / 3.7 G/100M => 25 / 32 % consume reduction.

- 1970 Toyota in country from 35.8 MPG to 40.8 MPG => +14 % increase mileage, this mean: 2.7 G/100M to 2.45 G/100M => 8 % consume reduction.

- 1970 Toyota in city from 21.4 MPG to 28.9 MPG => + 35 % increase mileage, this mean: 4.6 G/100M to 3.4 G/100M => 26 % consume reduction.

- Dodge from 12 MPG to 19 MPG => + 59 % increase mileage, this mean: 8.4 G/100M to 5.24 G/100M => 37 % consume reduction.

- Citroën BX 19 Diesel with ceramic magnets obtained from electric motors, I have convert a consume of 6 liters/100Km to 4.8 liters/100 km => 20 % consume reduction.

- Yamaha TZR 50 from 3.13 liters/100 km to 2 liters/100 km => 36 % consume reduction.

For more test resuts of a simular devive visit The Magnetizer Group Inc.

Conclusions.

With a magnetic field we can increase the internal energy of the fuel, to cause specific changes at a molecular level. Increasing the internal energy to obtain more easier combustion. The molecules fly apart easier, join with oxygen easier and ignite easier. 'Ionization' implies that the fuel acquires a 'charge' and molecules of like charge repel each other, this makes fuel dispersal more efficient. Then if you charge the air to the opposite polarity, then the fuel and oxygen combine far quicker than 'normal'. We can obtain about: 80% -90% Reduction in Hydrocarbon emissions. 60% -80% Reduction in Carbon Monoxide emissions. 20% Reduction in Nitrogen Oxides. 10% - 40% in Consume Reduction. 8% - 60% in Increase Mileage.

The resultant conditioned fuel/air mixture magnetized in opposite polarities burns more completely, producing higher engine output, better fuel economy, more power and most importantly reduces the amount of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust. Another benefits if these devices is that magnetically charged fuel and air molecules with opposite polarities dissolve carbon build-up in carburetor jets, fuel injectors, and combustion chambers help to clean up the engine and maintain the clean condition.

The air and fuel are subject to the lines of forces from permanent magnets mounted on the air and fuel inlet lines.

One magnet is oriented so that its South pole is located adjacent the fuel line and its North pole is located spaced apart from the fuel line, another magnet is oriented so that its North pole es located adjacent the air inlet and its South pole is located spaced apart from the air inlet.

I recomend the use of one Ferrite magnet in fuel inlet and I think that the use of the magnet in air inlet have less effect.

Source:http://www.fut.es/~sje/mag_fuel.htm

-- Anonymous, June 28, 2001

I forgot to mention that the EPA does not believe in magnets. WHich is most important.

-- Anonymous, June 28, 2001

Ephraim:

If your address is real, it is a shame. I remember when folks at Williams were required to learn the language. The science that you present is unadultrated bullshit. Them folks at Williams ust to teech batter science than that.

At least you gave me a laugh.

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, June 28, 2001

By-the-by:

Unleaded regular is 1.24 9/10 today. The price has been dropping like a rock. Sounds a lot like CPR's predictions.

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, June 28, 2001

Z,

It's still hoverin' around 1.40 here, but it's also still dropping.

To the guy who keeps posting this magnet stuff: oxygen cannot be "magnetized" at energy levels less than those normally found in the core of a star.

(I put "magnetized" in quotes for a reason. I'll let you figure out why.)

Show me some peer-reviewed scientific articles with replicable results demonstrating that you can magnetize ordinary gasses, and you'll be directly in line for a Nobel Prize, because about half of what we understand of subatomic structure will fly out the window.

Until you do, I shall consider it hogwash.

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2001

I luved the part about aluminium being used to "block" heat!

Heh heh. Lets just forget the part about Alum being 14 times more conductive of thermal energy than glass....yeah. Maybe I should get those new vinyl windows re-replaced with "heat blocking" aluminium ones!

Some people.

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2001

I wonder if we've progressed or regressed in this kind of stuff. The herbal supplement people are making egregious, outlandish claims for Booger Weed and Swamp Grass nowdays, and they can get away with it.

I mean, didn't we pass laws to get rid of Doc Smith's Snake Oil, "guaranteed to cure whatever ails ye?" What gives?

As I've said before, I don't automatically reject this stuff; echinacea and zinc seem to help when I get a cold, for example. But when they start claiming that the laws of physics no longer apply in their case, well, I get noivuss.

By the way, I once installed a platinum gas saver (erm, I think that should be "Platinum Gas Saver[tm]") on a Ford LTD Smoke-a-lot that I had a few years back. (Sandy and I called it the "BP Mobile" because we were putting so much oil in it.)

The claims for that thing were just as outlandish; by injecting a minute amount of colloidal platinum solution in the fuel mix, my mileage would go up by 5-30%, etc., yadda yoda. Why, the worse the vehicle, the MORE it would help!!!

I think I gained maybe 1 mpg (and that's entirely subjective).

-- Anonymous, June 29, 2001

Poole:

On Sunday morning it was 1.19 and nine. Guess, I can take the pick-up in and fill both tanks.

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, July 01, 2001

I wasn't smart enough to realize this was a hoax. Of course I also wasn't smart enough to consider the operation. The fuel line and carburetor...does one open the hood to find those, or crawl under the car? Do most people have electrical tape lying around the house, or would that need to be purchased? What is an 8" cable tie? Is that also something that most people have lying around the house, or would that up the price?

These are all rhetorical questions, BTW.

-- Anonymous, July 02, 2001

well you all laughed at the probe dude....but infact a friend of mine back in the eighties...tried some magents on the fuel line of his dually he used to haul his world of outlaws sprint car....he was very skeptical....so was I...well he gained 5mpg using cuise control too....he made a round trip before and after the magnets where put on.....yep 5mpg...he took em back off.....lost 5 mpg...hmm....I went to home depot saturday....bought the magnets the probe guy suggested...put only two of them on...instead of four....85 crown vic 351 HO....best on the same day 29.7 mpg...at 55 mph 100 mile round trip.....installed magnets....same round trip....36.2 mpg.....took em back off....again 29.8....Go figure LMAO

-- Anonymous, July 03, 2001

Poole:

Now 1.15. Got to give CPR credit. This keeps up it will be at 1.06 [where it was on 2 Jan 00] in a week.

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, July 03, 2001

Howdy Anita:

I wasn't smart enough to realize this was a hoax. Of course I also wasn't smart enough to consider the operation. The fuel line and carburetor...does one open the hood to find those, or crawl under the car? Do most people have electrical tape lying around the house, or would that need to be purchased? What is an 8" cable tie? Is that also something that most people have lying around the house, or would that up the price?

I have three vehicles and none has a carburetor. Haven't had a car with one of those since the 70's. Yes it would be under the hood. You can find the fuel line under the hood and under the car [except on the 911 that I had with front fuel tanks]. I have both the tape and the cable ties in my workshop. Yes, I know that your post was, somewhat, light hearted, as was my response. *<)))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, July 03, 2001

Just curious, since we have at hand such an enlightened group of experts:

WHY wouldn't the magnets work as well on a fuel injected vehicle?

DO the work on a diesel???

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2001

Can't you read? This magnet thing is BS.

..........

Diesel? Just keeping the fuel lines clean (especially the fuel filters) and busting up the paraffins would increase and improve the burn. The better the burn the higher the fuel efficiency.

-- Anonymous, July 08, 2001

This thing with the magnets won't work these days, seing as how we now use unLEADED gas and all....

-- Anonymous, July 11, 2001

Hi all repliers,

There are a lot of people which think they know everything, especially things they did not lern and will not learn never.

Somehow a long list of this kind of idiots have replied to Freddie's message, which tried to share us with his experience.

Cant't you, idiots, keep your mouth sut ??? At least, be kind to a nice person !!!

-- Anonymous, August 07, 2001

Anon:

Hi all repliers,

There are a lot of people which think they know everything, especially things they did not lern

Things that they did not lern. That line sure convinced me. :)

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, August 07, 2001

when a cat is dropped, it always lands on its feet, and when toast is dropped, it always lands buttered side down? And therefore, if a slice of buttered toast is strapped to a cat’s back, buttered side up, and the animal is then dropped, the two opposing forces will cause it to hover, spinning inches above the ground. Maybe we can apply this to gas line theory. ( Just joking )

Thanks for the info, I'll try it. Lou

-- Anonymous, November 01, 2001

The "Cat landing on its feet" phenomena has been investigated scientifically with results published in Scientific America and other journals well over 15 years ago.

To summarize for the lay people, high speed stop motion photos and some not too sophisticated graphics show that the cat's motions can be addressed as a "center of mass problem" coupled with the cat's natural intinct to try to remain in an upright position.
Add to that studies involving spinning tops and ice skater's rate of spin speed with arms extended and held close, and how the cat can rectify its position is easily explained.

This does not mean that cats dropped from 10 story buildings will survive only that they will be upright when impacting.

As for the "Toast", I have seen no studies about buttered toast but the priciples involved would be a collection of the above coupled with the FACT that MOST HUMANS WOULD HOLD TOAST WITH THE BUTTERED SIDE UP.... BEFORE THEY WERE CLUMSY and FUMBLE FINGERED.

How the toast would land if its "Initial Position" were butter side down is left as an exercise to the reader.

HINT: here you would need to add Bernoulli's Laws into the considerations. But don't make the classic Scientifically ILLITERATE guess that because the buttered side "weighs more", it will force the slice to make a revolution while falling. An old cat with cannonballs on the Tower of Pisa took care of that centuries ago.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2001

To summarize for the lay people, high speed stop motion photos and some not too sophisticated graphics show that the cat's motions can be addressed as a "center of mass problem" coupled with the cat's natural intinct to try to remain in an upright position.

Add to that studies involving spinning tops and ice skater's rate of spin speed with arms extended and held close, and how the cat can rectify its position is easily explained.

In other words, the cat retracts it's limbs and spins it's tail, which turns it's body in the direction opposite of the spinning tail, when it's body is again upright the cat extends it's feet. I think Newton had some ideas about the principles involved.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2001

You all need to get something that gets better gas mileage than a ford problem, you're all assholes and idiots. EVERY ONE OF YA.

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2001

CPR:

You are confused because you don't understand the science being taught at Williams. Here is how it goes.

Phlogiston theory , hypothesis regarding combustion. The theory, advanced by J. J. Becher late in the 17th cent. and extended and popularized by G. E. Stahl, postulates that in all flammable materials there is present phlogiston, a substance without color, odor, taste, or weight that is given off in burning.

Ok as far as it goes. It also turns out that phlogiston prevents interaction between matter and antimatter [recent research at Williams, apparently the only school working in this area].In addition, gasoline, unlike everything else on earth, is 50% antimatter. Since, phlogiston is attracted to magnets, it is removed from the stream and the energy released from the combination of matter and antimatter is recovered. Be careful, if you use a magnet that is too strong, you will destroy your car.

How's that? ;o)))

Best Wishes,,,,,

Z

-- Anonymous, November 02, 2001

Well ya know kiddies, it doesn't hurt to try now does it?

-- Anonymous, December 26, 2001