pros use tubular tires, not clinchers.

[[email protected]]

Tom Sherman writes:

>> If you made a clincher tire that you _KNOW_ is faster and better
>> than a sewup you would never tolerate a rider's insistence on
>> riding another brand...

We have all that except that they are not lighter than tubulars so you
lose.

> Making a faster clincher is easy - just use radial instead of
> bias-ply construction. However, the handling feel of radial bicycle
> tires is reported to turn off most riders.

Where was this done, by whom and who tested the tires? I'm not aware
of any radial ply bicycle tires although I can imagine that they would
be expensive to make.

Consider that the automotive radial tire is mainly justified by its
dimensions with a cross section whose major diameter is between three
and four times its cross sectional diameter. In contrast bicycle
tires have about 28:1 ratio which makes them look more like
compressing a straight hose than deforming a donut. The benefit of
radial ply has practically nothing to offer there and I doubt that
anyone would manufacture such tires.

Jobst Brandt

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

jtaylor wrote:
> "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > jtaylor wrote:
> > > "jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > >
> > >>we have bike "engineering" experts on this forum that [incredibly] know
> > >>nothing of fatigue, fracture, deformation, thread rolling, [etc.]
> > >
> > >
> > > You're not bringing up again that nonsense about cut threads being a
> danger
> > > in brake bolts, are you?
> > >
> > >
> > try not to get so personally wrapped up in demonstrating the failure of
> > your schooling there kiddo. if an anonymous jerk on the net can push
> > your buttons so bad that you lose all rationality, you need to start
> > worrying about that tenuous grip you have on the rest of your life.
>
> Previously you told us you "used to be a metallurgist".
>
> Now you describe yourself as "...an anonymous jerk on the net..."
>
> Tell us, was this lifestyle change of your own choosing?


beam inadvertently downed some truth serum last night whilst having a
few "belts". He'll sleep it off, and wake up as a "metallurgist".

 

[[email protected]]

David L. Johnson writes:

>> You can leave off the "over irregularities" the thickness of the
>> casing, tread and tube are what cause rolling tire losses and
>> casings can only be made thin if strong fibers are used... like
>> silk. Somehow nylon never made a big hit in racing tires although
>> it replaced silk for parachutes.

> I do recall a nylon tubular tire that came out in the early '70s (my
> racing days). From Japan, I think. Not bad, but it was a royal pain
> to stretch so you could get it on the rim.

There is another sign of not understanding the way tires work. Making
undersized tubulars to help keep them on rims was an old axiom with no
basis in reality. That tightness was gone after riding a while. What
holds the tire on the rim is constriction form the bias ply of the
casing. That is composed of:

(Pressure x Cross sectional area) -
(Pressure x Cross sectional area x 2 x Tan^2(45deg))

from "the Bicycle Wheel"

That is a significant and reliable force that some tire manufacturers
seem to not recognize. That they make undersized tires that fit with
difficulty indicates to me that they do not understand these forces.

> I believe some modern tubulars are also made of nylon, polyester,
> and blends of all sorts of fibers. Strange to see, though, cotton
> casings as often as you do, since cotton was always considered
> vastly inferior to silk. No one raced on cotton tires in the early
> '70s. Now people pay big bucks for them. I wonder what the
> uber-elite teams have to pay for silk tires.

I don't think it is a significant cost in the realm of fielding a
team, and for that reason, probably receives little attention.

Jobst Brandt

 

[[email protected]]

John Forrest Tomlinson writes:

>> Few riders run latex rubber tubes in their clincher tires. Few
>> riders run butyl rubber tubes in their tubular tires.

> ??? I've used a lot of common road racing tires -- Continental
> Sprinters, Michelins, Vitorria CX. Plus way back when I used to
> train on tubulars used Clement Futuras. I thought these all have
> butyl tubes. Do they actually have latex tubes?

I can't imagine riding tubulars on a regular basis and never patching
one. How come you never opened on of these tires? I can't see
throwing a way a tire just because it got a flat. So how often do
these tires require inflation? That should give you a clue.

Jobst Brandt

 

[bill]

[email protected] wrote:
> John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
>
> >> Few riders run latex rubber tubes in their clincher tires. Few
> >> riders run butyl rubber tubes in their tubular tires.
>
> > ??? I've used a lot of common road racing tires -- Continental
> > Sprinters, Michelins, Vitorria CX. Plus way back when I used to
> > train on tubulars used Clement Futuras. I thought these all have
> > butyl tubes. Do they actually have latex tubes?
>
> I can't imagine riding tubulars on a regular basis and never patching
> one. How come you never opened on of these tires?

> I can't see
> throwing a way a tire just because it got a flat.

I do. It is not worth my time any more. When I was a pauper student,
it wasn't wroth my tiem either, but I hadn't figured that out yet.

> So how often do
> these tires require inflation? That should give you a clue.

 

[bill]

[email protected] wrote:
> Tom Sherman writes:
>
> >> If you made a clincher tire that you _KNOW_ is faster and better
> >> than a sewup you would never tolerate a rider's insistence on
> >> riding another brand...
>
> We have all that except that they are not lighter than tubulars so you
> lose.
>
> > Making a faster clincher is easy - just use radial instead of
> > bias-ply construction. However, the handling feel of radial bicycle
> > tires is reported to turn off most riders.
>
> Where was this done, by whom and who tested the tires? I'm not aware
> of any radial ply bicycle tires although I can imagine that they would
> be expensive to make.
>
> Consider that the automotive radial tire is mainly justified by its
> dimensions with a cross section whose major diameter is between three
> and four times its cross sectional diameter. In contrast bicycle
> tires have about 28:1 ratio which makes them look more like
> compressing a straight hose than deforming a donut. The benefit of
> radial ply has practically nothing to offer there and I doubt that
> anyone would manufacture such tires.
>
Now this is a post showing some good thinking. I was wondering where
that radial tyre **** came from, too, until I noticed that Tom links to
Sheldon Brown for everything and there is a short discussion of radial
tyres there (unattested). I guess you'd have to ask Sheldon where he
heard of this.

 

[Ozark Bicycle]

[email protected] wrote:
> John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
>
> >> Few riders run latex rubber tubes in their clincher tires. Few
> >> riders run butyl rubber tubes in their tubular tires.
>
> > ??? I've used a lot of common road racing tires -- Continental
> > Sprinters, Michelins, Vitorria CX. Plus way back when I used to
> > train on tubulars used Clement Futuras. I thought these all have
> > butyl tubes. Do they actually have latex tubes?
>
> I can't imagine riding tubulars on a regular basis and never patching
> one. How come you never opened on of these tires?

Simple: he's a p-o-s-e-u-r



> I can't see
> throwing a way a tire just because it got a flat. So how often do
> these tires require inflation? That should give you a clue.
>

Disposable (tubular) tires, disposable brifters. Poseurs don't
care....they just wannabe.

 

[G.T.]

"jim beam" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> i stood at the weigh-in of the amgen tour of california prolog today
>
> http://www.amgentourofcalifornia.com/
>
> and watched the first hour's worth of various sundry bikes having their
> conformity tests. [i was at the barrier and could literally touch them,
> so visibility was not a problem.] the ratio was about 20:1 in favor of
> tubs. "but, but, but" i found myself thinking, "the r.b.t. 'experts'
> all swear that pros use clinchers for lower rolling resistance".
>

You left out another conclusion:

3. Pros don't have brains.

Greg

 

[Chalo]

Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
> clichers are for nancys.

Then how come only clinchers come in manly sizes?

Chalo

 

[Jay Beattie]

[email protected] wrote:
> > You can ride a tubular a long way with no air.
>
> 1995 World Road Race Champion Abraham Olano would agree with that.

That happened under a Km away. Bill was two miles out. He would have
been caught before the finish, flapping along on his flat sew-up as the
crazed maniacs at the back of he pack cut in and out in front of him,
sprinting for thirty-seventh place. Some oxygen deprived idiot on a
Softride would have crashed into him, causing Bill great bodily injury.
So, using a sew-up that day may have resulted in terrible disability
and disfigurement. He should be happy he was riding a clincher and
just dropped out. -- Jay Beattie.

 

[Sheldon Brown]

An anonymous poster wrote:

>... I was wondering where
> that radial tyre **** came from, too, until I noticed that Tom links to
> Sheldon Brown for everything and there is a short discussion of radial
> tyres there (unattested). I guess you'd have to ask Sheldon where he
> heard of this.

It's not something I "heard" of, it's something I experienced. I own a
pair of Panracer 26 x 1.5 radial tires that I bought quite a few years
ago.

Their rolling resistance doesn't seem notably different from other good
quality tires.

Accelerating in low gears, I seemed to feel that they transitted torque
sligthtly better than bias tires.

However I just couldn't stand the feel of them. I was constantly having
to get off the bike and pinch them, because even when properly inflated
they always felt as if they were going flat.

The radial construction makes them more flexible sideways. As you ride
a bike you're constantly leaning at least a little bit to one side or
the other. The problem with the radials was noticeable when riding
straight, as every transition from leaning everso slightly to the left
to eversoslightly to the right caused a flopping sideways motion of the
tire. It was VERY unpleasant. Might not be so notciceable with
narrower tires.

Sheldon "Sometimes Bias Is Good" Brown
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| This message has been sent to you using recycled electrons |
| exclusively. Please do not discard them after use, |
| send them along and help conserve these irreplaceable |
| sub-atomic resources for future generations. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
Harris Cyclery, West Newton, Massachusetts
Phone 617-244-9772 FAX 617-244-1041
http://harriscyclery.com
Hard-to-find parts shipped Worldwide
http://captainbike.com http://sheldonbrown.com

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 22 Feb 2006 12:22:49 -0800, "Ozark Bicycle"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>[email protected] wrote:
>> John Forrest Tomlinson writes:
>>
>> >> Few riders run latex rubber tubes in their clincher tires. Few
>> >> riders run butyl rubber tubes in their tubular tires.
>>
>> > ??? I've used a lot of common road racing tires -- Continental
>> > Sprinters, Michelins, Vitorria CX. Plus way back when I used to
>> > train on tubulars used Clement Futuras. I thought these all have
>> > butyl tubes. Do they actually have latex tubes?
>>
>> I can't imagine riding tubulars on a regular basis and never patching
>> one. How come you never opened on of these tires?
>
>Simple: he's a p-o-s-e-u-r
>

For Brandt:
When I occasionally trained on tubulars (mid-1980s) I wasn't very
aware of the difference between latex and butyl. I repaired only a
handful of tires -- it didn't seem worth the time.

In the last 15 years I've not used tubulars for training or general
riding at all -- clinchers work so well there is no point. The only
times I use tubulars are for some races, and for events like that I
don't ride material I don't trust. So I usually toss a tire that's
flatted. I've also given some to a friend who doesn't mind reparing
tires and riding repaired tires.

But no, I never noticed the training tires I used in the past losing
air quickly, so I assume those were butyl tubes. These were Clement
Futuras and Wolber Invulnerables I think. In racing tires, I don't
recall them losing air quickly either, or at least not the tires I've
used in the last ten years. For racing tires, I re-inflate them
before every use. But I do the same thing with clinchers before races
too...

Now on the poser comment for Ozark.

I've never claimed to be a hotshot racer. I'm just a hobby racer --
category 2 on the road and a competent masters racer. I've ridden big
pro-1-2 races as pack filler, and held leadership positions in two of
our contry's oldest racing clubs. Plus done some successful coaching.
I love bike racing, despite rarely doing well.

If all that makes me a poser, then I'm a poser. If to you, anyone who
races bikes and isn't a pro or a winner is a poser, then I guess I'm a
poser.

It sounds like you're a scrub. But at least you probably know you're a
scrub...

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

bill got all huffy and wrote:
> Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > bill ? wrote:
> > > Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> > > > bill ? wrote:
> > > > > I don't think it means much if you lump eveyone together in "what do
> > > > > the pros use". Obviously, some people will use tubulars, others
> > > > > clinchers. There is no "standard."
> > > > >
> > > > > The immutable facts are clear. Tubulars ride nicer and the wheels are
> > > > > tougher.
> > > >
> > > > Define "nicer" in this context.
> > > >
> > > > Define "tougher" in this context. Provide citations of experimental
> > > > evidence or a mathematical model using established methods to prove
> > > > your contention.
>
> What are you, my professor? You *********** know that tubular wheels
> are strogner for a gven weight and quality of material due to the
> sectional geometry of the rim. If you are so smart and experienced in
> bike engineering, I should not have to tell you this. One more proof
> that you are a stuffed shirt.

Toughness in material's engineering generally refers to fatigue
resistance properties - are tubular wheels more fatigue resistant?

> > > >
> > > > > Clinchers allow a more compact emergency kit, and a fully
> > > > > functional tyre after an on the road flat repair (tubulars cannot take
> > > > > a hard corner after an on the road fix).
> > > > >
> > > > > Clincher riders who carry only a tube will eventually suffer a carcass
> > > > > failure or sidewall blowout and have to walk home,...
> > > >
> > > > Citation or other proof? How is a carcass or sidewall failure
> > > > inevitable with a clincher tire? Millions of clincher tires have been
> > > > retired from tread wear without exhibiting the aforementioned failure
> > > > modes.
>
> I didn't say inevitable with a clicher. I said eventually. Can you
> read? Go read it again!

In this case "inevitable" and "eventually" are by logic the same thing.

> > > >
> > > > > while the guys with
> > > > > tubulars will have a complete spare tyre, as will the guys that carry a
> > > > > foldable. (I know this from painful experience).
> > > >
> > > > And when the tubular ride with one (1) spare suffers two (2) flats?
>
> Shut up already. You are not reading this properly. I can say the same
> about carrying only one spare fldable clincher carcass.

Flats from punctures are much more common than carcass failures (maybe
in bill-world [TM] things are different?).

> Your replies are moronic flame retorts, not well reasoned or thoughtful
> replies.

A little touchy, aren't we?

> > > >
> > > > > Clinchers allow you to ride through trashy streets, get flats,
> > > > > patch/replace the tubes over and over, and still get 2000 miles out of
> > > > > the tyre. Tubulars, except for TUFO, do not allow this behavior. (TUFOS
> > > > > can be made self-sealing and so will literally seal the hole the moment
> > > > > you ride over a piece of glass).
> > > > >
> > > > > If you are racing the criterium in Hunting Park you aught to ride
> > > > > clinchers or TUFOS rather than your $70 silks. Just in case.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you are in the habit of riding over whatever the road throws in
> > > > > front of you, and/or believe Jobst when he says that "wiping tyres
> > > > > makes no difference" then you probably aught to copy all the fred and
> > > > > nancies and ride a set of deep-dish cosmic pizza wheels with michelin
> > > > > marshmellow tyres and a couple spare tubes and foldies and those stupid
> > > > > compressed air thingies instead of a real pump 8-0
> > > > >
> > > > > But if you are a cool dude, you will ride a real wheel with real tyres
> > > > > and you might even look where you are going
> > > >
> > > > Now we get to the real truth of the post. Tubular riders are "superior"
> > > > because they are part of the in clique that knows how to conform with
> > > > the "proper" equipment, clothing, jargon and dismissive attitude
> > > > towards others.
>
> You are sduch a moron, Tom. If you had *read* my post, you would have
> noticed that I did not in fact disparage clinchers. I stated clearly
> that a person riding a clincher has practical options equivalent to the
> tubular. I recognize that each system has its advantages. The fact that
> you cannot take a friendly smile shows a lack of, well, *human*
> intelligence and wit on your part.

Whoosh!

> > > >
> > > No, the truth of the matter is that I know how to glue a tubular on
> > > without getting all sticky, and you don't ;-)
> > >
> > > Seriously, you did not read my post. You reacted against it.
> >
> > How do you know what I read? Are you omniscient?
>
> Dude, you are lost. Your response showed a lack of comprehension. You
> may have looked, but you certainly didn't *read*.

Your thinking I have a lack of comprehension indicates your lack or
comprehension.

Again, Whoosh!

> >
> > > If you understand structural engineering, then I do not need to explain
> > > to you the issue of unbalanced sections.
> >
> > Explain further how this applies to bicycle tires.
>
> Once again, you have not been paying attention! The use of tubular
> tyres necessitates the use of tubular *rims* too. Clincher rims are
> more fragile in nature due to their geometry.

Which has what to do with unbalanced sections?

> >
> > > Ride nicer.
> >
> > "Ride nicer" is an ungrammatical fragment.
> >
>
> So there we have it, you are a language fascist. Not surprising,
> considering your socialsit rants in the past.

Yes, I believe people should sit together socially.

> If the world would only
> wake up and do things the Tom Sherman way, we'd all be so much happier!

Well, DUH! (Except for those who lust for power over others.)

> Go ahead, attack this fragment, too. It's easier than acutally paying
> attention to the meaning of things.
>
> > "Nicer" is a subjective criteria and a matter of preference, not
> > "fact".
>
> OK dude, that would be *criterion* not criteria, you moronic language
> snob. You can go eat crow now.
>
> Well, when it comes to riding, subjective criteria are just as
> important as objective criteria.
> >
> > > Well, if you do not agree, then it is clear that you have
> > > not spent any time on tubulars.
> >
> > Opinion presented as fact. Next!
>
> Well, yes, true, except that it really is hard to believe that you have
> much experience with them. Your attitude belies a lack of experience.

Why would I bother with obsolete technology? Quality clincher tires
have been available since I was in elementary school.

If you can point out a source, I would be willing to try a
sew-up/tubular tire on my wheelbarrow, so I could experience the
"magic" feel of these tires.

> > > Sidewall punctures from outside sources happen eqqully to either type
> > > of tyre, but pinch flats, anecdotally, never happen on tubulars. What I
> > > said was that if you carry *only* a tube, then you are bound to be
> > > caught out. As has happened to me. RTF post before responding.
> >
> > I read what was written; "Clincher riders who carry only a tube will
> > eventually suffer a carcass failure or sidewall blowout and have to
> > walk home..." This is utter nonsense, as it is POSSIBLE to ride a
> > lifetime only carrying spare tubes and never having a sidewall or
> > carcass on a clincher tire fail. The occurrence of sidewall and/or
> > carcass failures prior to the tread wearing out on clincher tires is
> > less than 100%, if you had not noticed.
> >
> > Think about what you are actually saying before posting, and especially
> > flaming others.
>
> Think about what I actually said in the 1st place, and reply
> appropriately, and you know what, then there won't be any "flaming" as
> you call it.

You are entertaining when you get upset.

> You are just not reading this very closely. If you had bothered to
> read my post that started this ridiculous interaction, you would see
> that in fact I was *neutral* regarding clincher/tubular with respect to
> spares, merely pointing out that if one does not carry a spare carcass
> (tubular or clincher), one is exposed to the sidewall hazard. I am
> happy that you have never experienced a sidewall failure. In my
> experience, you have been very lucky.

No, I watch where I ride. In addition, I do not use unduly narrow tires
(the narrowest tire I have mounted on a bike right now is 35-mm), so I
do not suffer the same type of flats that others that use minimally
sized tires do.

--
Tom Sherman

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

Chalo Colina wrote:
> Qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> >
> > clichers are for nancys.
>
> Then how come only clinchers come in manly sizes?

I think the tire designers at Schwalbe were thinking about Chalo when
they came up with the 60-622 Big Apple:
<http://www.schwalbetires.com/on_tour.php?Nickname=BIG%20APPLE&Image=TireImages/big_apple.gif>.

--
Tom Sherman

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

[email protected] aka Jobst Brandt wrote:
> Tom Sherman writes:
> ...
> > Making a faster clincher is easy - just use radial instead of
> > bias-ply construction. However, the handling feel of radial bicycle
> > tires is reported to turn off most riders.
>
> Where was this done, by whom and who tested the tires? I'm not aware
> of any radial ply bicycle tires although I can imagine that they would
> be expensive to make.
>
> Consider that the automotive radial tire is mainly justified by its
> dimensions with a cross section whose major diameter is between three
> and four times its cross sectional diameter. In contrast bicycle
> tires have about 28:1 ratio which makes them look more like
> compressing a straight hose than deforming a donut. The benefit of
> radial ply has practically nothing to offer there and I doubt that
> anyone would manufacture such tires.

>From "The Recumbent Bicycle," by Gunnar Fehlau (1st Edition, English
translation):

"[Rinkowski] secured his research with a GDR economic patent in 1954.
Rinkowski's radial tire for bicycles was determined to be superior to
the diagonal tire. He developed the radial tire long before it entered
the automobile industry. Tests showed that two-tube tires of ordinary
construction and size had a rolling resistance of 6 Newtons. To
overcome the resistance of Rinkowski's tires only required 3 Newtons.
He himself stated the following figures: 'The patented recumbent
bicycle tires under burden have a resistance of about 240 grams, while
a pair of tube tires has a resistance of at least 420 grams. I know
this so accurately because I have developed a rolling-resistance
measuring device that is now the property of the DHFK-Academic Sports
Club in Leipzig.' "Rinkowski's design resulted in 1.5 miles more per
hour in practice compared with a racing upright, if the bikes were
powered with 60 watts (which equals riding 12-14 mph on an upright).
This includes the general advantage of the improved aerodynamics of the
recumbent position."

--
Tom Sherman

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

mr. bill platt wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > Tom Sherman writes:
> >
> > >> If you made a clincher tire that you _KNOW_ is faster and better
> > >> than a sewup you would never tolerate a rider's insistence on
> > >> riding another brand...
> >
> > We have all that except that they are not lighter than tubulars so you
> > lose.
> >
> > > Making a faster clincher is easy - just use radial instead of
> > > bias-ply construction. However, the handling feel of radial bicycle
> > > tires is reported to turn off most riders.
> >
> > Where was this done, by whom and who tested the tires? I'm not aware
> > of any radial ply bicycle tires although I can imagine that they would
> > be expensive to make.
> >
> > Consider that the automotive radial tire is mainly justified by its
> > dimensions with a cross section whose major diameter is between three
> > and four times its cross sectional diameter. In contrast bicycle
> > tires have about 28:1 ratio which makes them look more like
> > compressing a straight hose than deforming a donut. The benefit of
> > radial ply has practically nothing to offer there and I doubt that
> > anyone would manufacture such tires.
> >
> Now this is a post showing some good thinking. I was wondering where
> that radial tyre **** came from, too, until I noticed that Tom links to
> Sheldon Brown for everything and there is a short discussion of radial
> tyres there (unattested). I guess you'd have to ask Sheldon where he
> heard of this.

So the well informed Bill Platt has never heard of the work done by
Paul Rinkowski?

In addition, Sheldon Brown is an extremely reliable source.

--
Tom Sherman

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

"jim beam" wrote:
> ...if an anonymous jerk on the net can push
> your buttons so bad that you lose all rationality, you need to start
> worrying about that tenuous grip you have on the rest of your life.

'jim beam" knows this from personal experience, as is demonstrated by
his reactions to the writings of Jobst Brandt.

--
Tom Sherman

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

Ozark Bicycle wrote:
> ...
> Disposable (tubular) tires, disposable brifters. Poseurs don't
> care....they just wannabe.

If I get an upright road bike (for stealth purposes), it will have a
steel frame, conventional 36-spoke wheels, down-tube or bar-end
shifters, lights, fenders and clincher tires at least 28-mm wide.

--
Tom Sherman

 

[Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman]

ill Platt wrote:
> > Few riders run latex rubber tubes in their clincher tires.
> > Few riders run butyl rubber tubes in their tubular tires.
>
>
> You are full of it ....

Who is "you" (attribution)?

> Of course, flatting does not happen all that frequently, but when it
> does, it really stinks....

The origin of the term flatulence? (At least that is what the leader of
a Wednesday evening ride I used to participate in called it when
someone flatted.)

--
Tom Sherman

 

[jim beam]

Johnny Sunset aka Tom Sherman wrote:
> "jim beam" wrote:
>
>>...if an anonymous jerk on the net can push
>>your buttons so bad that you lose all rationality, you need to start
>>worrying about that tenuous grip you have on the rest of your life.
>
>
> 'jim beam" knows this from personal experience, as is demonstrated by
> his reactions to the writings of Jobst Brandt.
>
with one eensy teensy wittle differwence - brandt is an outrageous bull
artist on some subjects, and they happen to be subjects on which i know
a thing or two. if it's being irrational to point that out, well, i
guess i /am/ the one with the problem. otoh, if you /don't know/ when
you're having smoke blown up your kilt, then you'll just accept b.s. as
fact and look somewhat foolish each time you show you've been suckered
in by it. choosing to /remain/ unedumacated? now /that's/ not foolish,
that's stupid.