MMO, the real deal.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
That's ok, he still doesn't know what he is talking about.
I have yet to see him post anything technical on BITOG, yet observe that he understands anything technical. He's just a jealous baiter trying to see how far he can go.

The attacks never end.

Please suggest any professional or scientific accomplishment to your credit? Dr Shalvoy's record is quite public - readers can judge for themselves whether his credentials are valid and his results are reasonable. A 'former Boeing employee' and a 'former grad student' who did not complete the program hardly qualifies you to suggest they 'don't pass muster at the University level'.

Are anonymous BITOG articles the pinacle of your professional achievements?
 
When you're cluless, you go on autopilot.
banana2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: dave5358

Dr Shalvoy's record is quite public - readers can judge for themselves whether his credentials are valid and his results are reasonable.


He's a hack. A hired gun who will say whatever he's paid to say. Since you think he is so great, bring him to the forum. Then he can regale us with stories of how biocides can diffuse into metal.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
He wouldn't know an attack from a bug bite.


Oh dear me, someone disagreed with me on a topic I can't understand
so I am under attack.
grin2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: rdalek
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Actually with you not understanding what the settlement means is your fallacy to your proclamation. If you and the other dave can not understand this which is very simple compaired to understanding chemistry in relation to tribology is a lost cause. Which explains why neither of you can answer the product questions posed to you. Rather than admit this you use testimonials and marketing neither are factual.

Admitting your fallacy does not make you weak rather it is an testimony to your strength. Having too much pride to admit your lack of understanding only weakens your stance. I am sure a wiser person than myself has stated this before. I recommend following this advice once and it will strengthen your experience and actually research each product including MMO which at best provides a small benefit and at worst is detrimental. There are various SAE white papers and laboratory test that conclude that too much detergents such as mineral spirits found in MMO actually removes the lubrication layer from internal combustion engines. Analysis reveals Zmax is nothing but refined oil which by itself is a terrible lubricant for an internal combustion engine. If you really want to find proof of an additive having an small benefit find one that is actually marketed by manufacturers themselves or products that the SAE has studied and have written papers on the support advertised benefit. Using an individual that endorses the product is not an scientist because a scientist will work with his peers to support his findings. This is were the supporters against mola have failed. Mola has actually referred his findings with published papers with other professionals in his field not acted like an lone wolf.


So, once again, why not provide that info to the FTC? You "claim" to have so much information to back up what you say, go give it to the FTC. That same challenge goes for you, Trajan, MoleKule and anyone else that is willing to step up to the plate. If you are not willing to change the fact that Zmax can make those claims, you are not proving a thing, certainly not where it counts most.

As I said before, the fact that Zmax survived a lawsuit and still makes those claims with the full knowledge of the FTC says a lot. It certainly says a LOT more than some very few people on the internet who are not willing to step up to the plate and change it. So, either change the fact that Zmax is making those claims or you are not proving a thing. As I have said before, I don't think a single person that claims to be able to prove Zmax doesn't do what it claims is ever going to step up and do a single thing. Not one, not a thing.


Dale I have tried to educate you on the civil legal system and the role of the FTC before pro-Bono and I have wasted an hour of my life for free lessons. Further education will cost some coin I do not mind donating my time but a person has to have an open mind and have awareness. If a person is unable to have an open mind and awareness further lessons from me are going to cost a lot of money. If a person can not differentiate between civil court and science then I doubt the distinction of the viability of product can be made in their mind. Carneys would called the public that could be duped rubes. That is my last free lesson to you Dale.
 
Not to mention $240/hr for a University course in basic science.
Even Dave5358 could benefit from that one.

Add another $240/hr for a class in Logic and Language. BTW, That's a Philosophy of Science course in which they teach real logic.
cool.gif


Even rdalek could benefit from this one.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: rdalek
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Actually with you not understanding what the settlement means is your fallacy to your proclamation. If you and the other dave can not understand this which is very simple compaired to understanding chemistry in relation to tribology is a lost cause. Which explains why neither of you can answer the product questions posed to you. Rather than admit this you use testimonials and marketing neither are factual.

Admitting your fallacy does not make you weak rather it is an testimony to your strength. Having too much pride to admit your lack of understanding only weakens your stance. I am sure a wiser person than myself has stated this before. I recommend following this advice once and it will strengthen your experience and actually research each product including MMO which at best provides a small benefit and at worst is detrimental. There are various SAE white papers and laboratory test that conclude that too much detergents such as mineral spirits found in MMO actually removes the lubrication layer from internal combustion engines. Analysis reveals Zmax is nothing but refined oil which by itself is a terrible lubricant for an internal combustion engine. If you really want to find proof of an additive having an small benefit find one that is actually marketed by manufacturers themselves or products that the SAE has studied and have written papers on the support advertised benefit. Using an individual that endorses the product is not an scientist because a scientist will work with his peers to support his findings. This is were the supporters against mola have failed. Mola has actually referred his findings with published papers with other professionals in his field not acted like an lone wolf.


So, once again, why not provide that info to the FTC? You "claim" to have so much information to back up what you say, go give it to the FTC. That same challenge goes for you, Trajan, MoleKule and anyone else that is willing to step up to the plate. If you are not willing to change the fact that Zmax can make those claims, you are not proving a thing, certainly not where it counts most.

As I said before, the fact that Zmax survived a lawsuit and still makes those claims with the full knowledge of the FTC says a lot. It certainly says a LOT more than some very few people on the internet who are not willing to step up to the plate and change it. So, either change the fact that Zmax is making those claims or you are not proving a thing. As I have said before, I don't think a single person that claims to be able to prove Zmax doesn't do what it claims is ever going to step up and do a single thing. Not one, not a thing.


Dale I have tried to educate you on the civil legal system and the role of the FTC before pro-Bono and I have wasted an hour of my life for free lessons. Further education will cost some coin I do not mind donating my time but a person has to have an open mind and have awareness. If a person is unable to have an open mind and awareness further lessons from me are going to cost a lot of money. If a person can not differentiate between civil court and science then I doubt the distinction of the viability of product can be made in their mind. Carneys would called the public that could be duped rubes. That is my last free lesson to you Dale.


Until they get past this "making a claim = proving a claim" hogwash, you're wasting your time. You can't explain the legal system any more clearly.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dave1251
Originally Posted By: rdalek


So, once again, why not provide that info to the FTC? You "claim" to have so much information to back up what you say, go give it to the FTC. That same challenge goes for you, Trajan, MoleKule and anyone else that is willing to step up to the plate. If you are not willing to change the fact that Zmax can make those claims, you are not proving a thing, certainly not where it counts most.

As I said before, the fact that Zmax survived a lawsuit and still makes those claims with the full knowledge of the FTC says a lot. It certainly says a LOT more than some very few people on the internet who are not willing to step up to the plate and change it. So, either change the fact that Zmax is making those claims or you are not proving a thing. As I have said before, I don't think a single person that claims to be able to prove Zmax doesn't do what it claims is ever going to step up and do a single thing. Not one, not a thing.


Dale I have tried to educate you on the civil legal system and the role of the FTC before pro-Bono and I have wasted an hour of my life for free lessons. Further education will cost some coin I do not mind donating my time but a person has to have an open mind and have awareness. If a person is unable to have an open mind and awareness further lessons from me are going to cost a lot of money. If a person can not differentiate between civil court and science then I doubt the distinction of the viability of product can be made in their mind. Carneys would called the public that could be duped rubes. That is my last free lesson to you Dale.


The thing is, you have nothing to back up what you claim. Since you don't, you can't teach anything to me or anyone else either. Actually, your posts are worth nothing so I wouldn't pay you a single cent for any of them or what you claim to know. They do not change the facts one bit.

You have tried several ways to try and twist the debate but you have failed to change a thing. Zmax is still selling its product with claims you say it couldn't prove, even tho it clearly did so.

Originally Posted By: Trajan


Until they get past this "making a claim = proving a claim" hogwash, you're wasting your time. You can't explain the legal system any more clearly.


Do you need me to post those court doc pics again? In it, it lists the "substantiation" that was provided to the FTC and the court. That ended the lawsuit. That is also why Zmax can still put on the bottle what it does to this day and not one single thing you or anyone else has posted has changed that.

You can twist this any way you want but it doesn't change the facts a bit.
 
Dayum, it's a whuppin' fest! Da fellas iz gangin' up on youse. Guys, "ders a time to hold 'em and a time to fold 'em". Me thinks it's time to get ta steppin'. It's gettin' painful.
 
Originally Posted By: Trajan
MolaKule said:
Not to mention $240/hr for a University course in basic science.
Even Dave5358 could benefit from that one.

Add another $240/hr for a class in Logic and Language. BTW, That's a Philosophy of Science course in which they teach real logic.
cool.gif


Even rdalek could benefit from this one.



http://www.amazon.com/Logic-For-Dummies-Mark-Zegarelli/dp/0471799416

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/education-...ITLE&page=6


Yea, I forgot about that, that would be cheaper.
shocked2.gif
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: keesue
Dayum, it's a whuppin' fest! Da fellas iz gangin' up on youse. Guys, "ders a time to hold 'em and a time to fold 'em". Me thinks it's time to get ta steppin'. It's gettin' painful.



Whoopin' or Whuppin'?

'Pends on wher ure frum.

Now back in old Kentucky we could settle this over a jug of moonshine.
grin2.gif
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Originally Posted By: Trajan
MolaKule said:
Not to mention $240/hr for a University course in basic science.
Even Dave5358 could benefit from that one.

Add another $240/hr for a class in Logic and Language. BTW, That's a Philosophy of Science course in which they teach real logic.
cool.gif


Even rdalek could benefit from this one.



http://www.amazon.com/Logic-For-Dummies-Mark-Zegarelli/dp/0471799416

http://www.dummies.com/how-to/education-...ITLE&page=6


Yea, I forgot about that, that would be cheaper.
shocked2.gif



Under the assumption that...
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
Not to mention $240/hr for a University course in basic science.
Even Dave5358 could benefit from that one. Add another $240/hr for a class in Logic and Language. BTW, That's a Philosophy of Science course in which they teach real logic. Even rdalek could benefit from this one. Blah, blah

The attacks never cease. Dr. Shalvoy is now a hack? Let's see. He completed his doctoral degree at one of the nation's most prestigious universities. He has devoted his life to teaching and research, published at least two books and numerous articles, helped his nation through work for the Bureau of Standards and the Department of Defense, holds several patents. In each one of these areas, he is the exact opposite of you.

And, yes, he has been an expert witness and also worked as a consultant to large industries (Proctor and Gamble!). He worked as a consultant to the US Government (you really don't like the government, do you? It's a part of your anti- ...everything). How about your consulting work? Before your "internet" oil company collapsed, was even a single one of your oily "inventions" snapped up by a responsible vendor? Will there anything to remember it by? If Dr. Shalvoy is a hack, what does that make you?

Please suggest any professional or scientific accomplishment to your credit? Anything? Dr Shalvoy's record is quite public - readers can judge for themselves whether his credentials are valid and his results are reasonable. A 'former Boeing employee' and a 'former grad student who did not complete the program' and a 'former teaching assistant' hardly qualifies you to suggest that someone else's scientific research 'don't pass muster' or that they are a hack. Are you serious?

I guess anonymous BITOG articles will be the pinnacle of your professional achievements.
 
Originally Posted By: MolaKule
When you're cluless, you go on autopilot.
banana2.gif



Oh dear me, someone disagreed with me on a topic I can't understand
so I am under attack.
grin2.gif
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

1 SX
MMO “experiment” (1oz per gal of fuel)
2 3
Replies
49
Views
15K
ChrisD46
A
2 Valvoline Restore & Protect tests
14 15 16
Replies
305
Views
121K
irollo
T
  • Locked
Best Way To Desludge This New-To-Me Dodge Dakota w/4.7L V8?
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
36K
Astro14
V
Can a 2005 Volvo go 300K Miles easily?
3 4 5
Replies
81
Views
17K
Kira
D
  • Locked
BG 109 vs 120, any techs experienced w/ both?
Replies
10
Views
12K
Olas
Back
Top Bottom