From: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org (fegmaniax-digest) To: fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Subject: fegmaniax-digest V13 #208 Reply-To: fegmaniax@smoe.org Sender: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-fegmaniax-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk fegmaniax-digest Friday, July 16 2004 Volume 13 : Number 208 Today's Subjects: ----------------- RE: Can't somebody DO something? (yes, it's *that* debate again...) ["] Think outside the atmospheric box ["Cadtharsis" ] I hate technology ["Natalie Jane" ] gnatmaniax: Sonic Youth at last ["Natalie Jane" ] Re: I hate technology [Tom Clark ] RE: I hate technology ["Bachman, Michael" ] Re: Can't somebody DO something? [Jason Brown ] Re: Coincidence? ["Eb" ] spooked! [fingerpuppets ] Re: Can't somebody DO something? [Barbara Soutar ] Re: spooked! [fingerpuppets ] RE: Can't somebody DO something? (yes, it's *that* debate again...) [] the solution to Americaaaaaaargh [Dolph Chaney ] Re: Think outside the atmospheric box ["Fortissimo" ] RE: Can't somebody DO something? (yes, it's *that* debate again...) ["Bachman, Michael" ] Re: the solution to Americaaaaaaargh ["Eb" ] RE: Coincidence? ["Bachman, Michael" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:36:35 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: Can't somebody DO something? (yes, it's *that* debate again...) Jeff wrote: >All of this is true, except...see, the election is only five months >away. And more education, community, and media coverage are unlikely all >to come into play by then. Hey Jeff, take a look at your calendar. It's more like 3 1/2 months away in a couple of days. Time is fleeting! >For "must," substitute "have no choice because the election's going to >happen whether you want it to or not, and either Kerry or Bush is going >to win," and for "fear-mongering" substitute "reality-acknowledgement." >Or more like: yeah, fear is there - but if it's real, it's not being >"mongered," only acknowledged. Am I fearful of a second Bush presidency? >Damned right. Am I fearful that a Kerry presidency would also be harmful >(though, IMO, not as much)? Damned right. Do I think that wishing we had >a real alternative will make a difference in November? No. Unless the House or the Senate flip over to the Democrats, Kerry won't be able to push much through is what I am guessing. He will be more hamstrung then Clinton was after the 1994 Contract on America Republicans got into office if the flip doesn't happen. Even so, a flip could occur in 2006 if it doesn't happen in 2004, then we will see what Kerry is made of. I am cautiously optimistic about Kerry and Edwards. Michael B. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:33:27 -0600 From: "Cadtharsis" Subject: Think outside the atmospheric box > Here's the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Which > sections do you think are bad science? > For starters, I don't see any mention of the Earth's fading magnetic fields which shield us from radiation from space and solar winds. The magnetic field has been in decline for hundreds of years and deflects most cosmic radiation to the Earth's poles. It is thought to be a natural cycle for the magnetic field to flip every quarter million years so. Increased cosmic radiation due to fading magnetic fields could easily explain higher incidents of cancer, increased global warming, greenhouse gases and reduction of the polar caps. They might just be monitoring the fever instead of diagnosing the disease. shaving with Achem's razor, - - Bill ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:49:21 -0700 From: "Natalie Jane" Subject: I hate technology Ugh... I have the horrible feeling that my previous post came out as complete nonsense. Fuck you, Tom Clark! n. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Discover the best of the best at MSN Luxury Living. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:48:08 -0700 From: "Natalie Jane" Subject: gnatmaniax: Sonic Youth at last - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee. Security. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 13:28:26 -0500 From: steve Subject: Re: I hate technology On Jul 16, 2004, at 10:49 AM, Natalie Jane wrote: > Ugh... I have the horrible feeling that my previous post came out as > complete nonsense. Fuck you, Tom Clark! n. Does blank count as nonsense? - - Steve __________ Maybe in the Scalia household they make you pee into a cup just for being alive. - Dahlia Lithwick ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 11:42:00 -0700 From: Tom Clark Subject: Re: I hate technology On Jul 16, 2004, at 8:49 AM, Natalie Jane wrote: > Ugh... I have the horrible feeling that my previous post came out as > complete nonsense. Fuck you, Tom Clark! n. > It actually came out blank. My evil plan is now in full effect! Bwahahahahahaha! Fuck me, - -tc ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:03:02 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: I hate technology - - On Jul 16, 2004, at 8:49 AM, Natalie Jane wrote: >> Ugh... I have the horrible feeling that my previous post came out as >> complete nonsense. Fuck you, Tom Clark! n. > Tom came back with: >It actually came out blank. >My evil plan is now in full effect! Bwahahahahahaha! As in: "Your too late. I've come to turn you on!"? Michael B. NP Kate Rusby - 10 ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:15:03 -0700 From: Vendren Subject: Fw: orange juice - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vendren" To: "James Dignan" Sent: Friday, July 16, 2004 12:14 PM Subject: Re: orange juice > > > >Now I remember who Orange Juice remind me of: Aztec Camera! > > > > One slight difference - Aztec Camera were at times quite good (and > > their song with Mick Jones, "Good morning Britain", is one of the > > best protest songs around). Orange Juice, however, I could never > > stand. > > > > James > > I don't know if one really reminds me of the other. I do, however, quite > like both bands. > > "Good Morning Britain" is a great track off an under-appreciated album - > "Stray." Roddy Frame did one album with Ryuchi Sakamoto, under the name > "Aztec Camera" called "Dreamtime." For a Sakamoto collaboration it's very > poppy. But it's also very good. It's one of the few discs in my collection > dominated by sappy love songs that manages to get quite a bit of play. When > people talk about Aztec Camera I find I need to plug that disc. > > I like all three Orange Juice discs. The third (self-titled) is often > considered to be much weaker than the other two, a sentiment I do not share > myself. For someone wanting to check them out I think any of their three > albums would do. > > Palle ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 11:48:46 -0700 From: Jason Brown Subject: Re: Can't somebody DO something? > > I agree that that generally isn't a good thing, but is there not a point > > where the other guy is so much worse that such a strategy will work. > > Work to do what, though? It'll work to keep the worse guy out of office, > but is that what you want to leave to your children? "Here you go son, it > could have sucked more!" At the very least yes! I'll trade idealism for pragmatism in a heartbeat. > It won't work to make the world a better place than it is now, only better > than it might have been if we'd been more negligent. I agree with you there. But when there are only two possible outcomes shitty or shittier. Give me shitty any day. > You're just saying that you'll vote for anybody given a sufficiently > horrifying alternative. > What happens when Bush decides he's a Democrat and runs against Rumsfeld? Actually in that case i'd vote for Rumsfeld over Bush. But that's just me. Anybody But Bush to the extreme. It's hard to imagine a viable candidate I wouldn't find preferable to Bush. Maybe Tom Delay? I'd vote for Nader or Badnarik over Bush if they were the binary choice. Should there only be two viable choices? No, definitely not. But that's the choice before use A or B there is no C. > If you'd read my first post in this thread carefully, you'd've found that > I've already discounted this November's election. No good can come of it. But maybe less bad could come of it? Maybe this nation will cease being a pariah in the world? Maybe we wont end up invading Syria? Maybe Islamic terror can be reduced instead of further inflamed? > We need to work harder to develop a nation in which a third party > candidate CAN get a majority of electoral votes because the two major > parties are seriously holding us back. But is electing Bush the best way to do that? I think the tact Jeff argued for of grassroots growth of third parties is far more compelling and likely to be effective. If you get third parties in the state legislatures then you can change the system. For instance, here in Washington the State House and Senate have been closely divided between Democrats and Republicans with usually one party only holding a 1 or 2 seat advantage. If say the Libertarians (who have official party status in the state) or the Greens (who do not have official party status) elected 3 or 4 members to each house they could hold the balance of power and begin to change the political climate and the way the public views third parties. That would be more likely to inspire a change than just voting ones conscience for president in November will. > > and in the outside chance that some one like Nader won Vermont or > > something and Bush or Kerry didn't have enough electoral votes to win > > outright. Then Congress would select either Kerry or Bush. I don't > > necessarily wish things were that way but that is the political reality. > > Does that mean we have to all participate in putting one of those assholes > in office? No, you are free to vote how ever you damn well please. But I will happily participate of one those assholes can do less harm to the country than the other. > What you're doing is telling people that they MUST perpetuate this system > or else things will get worse. That's fear-mongering. I didn't tell any one to do anything. I've just been defending my position and my reasons for voting the way I will. > > > When are we going to demand candidates that are just plain not evil? > > > > How is Kerry evil? Seriously, how? > > Seriously? Kerry supports the death penalty. Kerry supports war. Kerry > takes a "separate but equal" stance on civil rights for same-sex couples. > Kerry fails to denounce the "War on Terror" for what it is -- a perpetual > state of fear and confusion to diminish people's expectations of > government in the social arena while lining the pockets of defense > contractors. I don't completely agree with you characterization of the war on terror but I don't think any of those stances are evil. Wrong but not evil. And for the most part, one couldn't be elected president without those stances. If the left side of the American political spectrum really was completely anti-death penalty, completely anti-war, and completely pro-gay rights we'd be be talking about Bush and Kucinich. So to answer your way back original question "will we ever have a president that isn't evil?" given your definition of evil the answer is a big no, so long as the US is a democracy. > > > I'm going to do it right now. When you guys catch up, we'll be in a > > > better place. > > > > This is a perfect example of why people think you are big asshole: smug, > > holier-than-thou, uncompromising, and elitist. > > I think we should all be uncompromising in our expectation of liberty, > peace, and mutual aid. Good for you. > If that's "holier-than-thou", so be it. Great, just don't be all why-does-everyone-think-I'm-an-ass in the future. > I don't see what there is to be gained by compromising those values. > Essentially, you're telling us all that we must give up some of those > things so that we don't lose more than we willingly give up. Jeme, I'm not trying to convince you to vote for Kerry. I expect it's more likely that I'll run off to Boston to marry Rick Santorum before that happens. But please stop trying insinuate that because I think you are wrong that I want to scare you or others into voting the way i am going to. > Our ideal is in front of us and you're asking that we all take a step > backward because if we don't, we might get pushed back two steps. I don't think voting for Kerry is in any way a step backward. It maybe standing in place, but that is better than moving backward. > You're not providing us with any means for moving forward, Jason. Show me > where it ends. Describe to me the path from your position to a better > system. See my grassroots argument above. > What you describe can be infinitely perpetuated without ever doing > anything but giving up ground. Where is it to be gained and how if we > always concede to the lesser evil? I don't think we should always concede to a lesser evil and have never said so. I do think there are cases when the lesser evil is preferable. Just because i think people should do what ever they can stop the Bush from being re-elected doesn't mean i think that strategy is always necessary. Is that moral relativism? Fuck Yeah! BTW I think several of my response above may appear contradictory. Oh well. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:23:49 -0700 From: "Eb" Subject: Re: Coincidence? > On Thu, 15 Jul 2004, Rex Broome wrote: > > Hey, my car just blew up. That fuckin' blows. > > Make lemonade, man. Consider this an opportunity to be rid of the burden > and costs (personal, social, financial, environmental, and humanitarian). > > I can probably hook you up with local car-free groups and lots of > literature and instructions. And if those don't grab you, I'm sure Jeme could hook you up with a local branch of the Flat Earth Society. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:25:50 -0400 From: fingerpuppets Subject: spooked! posted on yeproc... Robyn Hitchcock SPOOKED manifesto. In this world of doubt, one thing is certain for me; that I will go on writing songs up to and - I hope, through heavenly means or diabolical - - beyond the day I die. Being a modern guy means I'm often in a hurry, and don't appreciate things until they're long in the past. Writing songs is a way for me to bottle sections of time and store them, for savouring in the future. Seeing a wet August afternoon will always transport me back to the day Elvis Presley died in 1977, and a cloudy September brings a whiff of 1969; like weather conditions my songs act for me as a time machine. Thus 'Insanely Jealous' hauls me back to the skinny, haunted fellow I was in 1979, and 'Glass Hotel' has me somewhere between the Isle of Wight and San Francisco a decade later. By reinhabiting the emotion of the songs, I'm drawn back into eras of my life that I was too preoccupied to notice at the time. The songs on SPOOKED are all recent, so right now they remind me simply of the intensity of recording them in Nashville with Gillian Welch and David Rawlings. My wife Michhle turned me onto Hell Among The Yearlings and Time (The Revelator), so we were thrilled to get tickets for their London show last September. It was a brilliant affair; Gillian and David walked on stage carrying their guitars and never once used pick-ups on them. They played music that seemed to come from no particular era, but was rooted back centuries ago. The deeper your roots, the longer your branches. One of the many highlights for me was a new song called "Miss Ohio." Afterwards I met David in the bar and he told me that I had signed his guitar at an in-store in Boston in 1989. It transpired that they both used to come and see the Egyptians and me, way back in the 1980s. In parting, we agreed it would be great to attempt playing together, and he gave me some of their phone numbers. A month later, someone sent a photo in to David Greenberger, who runs my web-site. It showed a beauty contest, where the new Miss Ohio was being crowned: her name was Robyn Hitchcock. Michle suggested I call Gillian and David to tell them this. I spoke to Gillian, who duly introduced "Miss Ohio" onstage in New York with this story. The idea of recording together resurfaced, as I had a fresh catch of songs thrashing in my notebook. I had a weekend free after doing some filming in New York in January ( a small part as a sinister operative in Jonathan Demme's re-make of The Manchurian Candidate, on general release July 30th), and flew out of the frozen city to Tennessee on the 10th. After Nashville sushi and a long debate on Bob Dylan, we went into Woodland Studios at 10 pm that night for a look around, and jammed for 5 hours solid. Somewhere there is a version of me singing .Miss Ohio. with them, and three takes of .Bang A Gong.. Within 6 days we had recorded most of SPOOKED, which was duly finished in April. My songs were birthed in a nest of Dylan songs, one of which survives on the finished record. We sat in a cluster by the studio window, singing and playing live, using neither headphones nor pick-ups. Nobody even counted the songs in; we always started playing together, and the tape always seemed to be rolling. It was like a child's drawing of a recording session. For me it was an extraordinarily good dream. To sit there with people I admired but had barely met, and to so quickly feel natural playing music with them was something rare indeed. It was as if I was inside one of their records, but with me singing too. What a beautiful feeling! SPOOKED is the edited highlights from this lake of sound. The world may be a sick place, but music is the doctor, and they don't come any more qualified than Gillian and David. - - Robyn Hitchcock, London, 2004 DATA . Produced by David Rawlings. . Recorded in Nashville 2004. . Robyn Hitchcock plays guitar, keyboard, harmonica, electric sitar and sings lead vocals. . Gillian Welch plays guitar, bass, drums and sings harmony. . David Rawlings plays lead guitar, dobro, wurlitzer and sings harmony. . Joey Spampinato from NRBQ plays bass on 2 tracks. ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 12:32:51 -0400 From: Barbara Soutar Subject: Re: Can't somebody DO something? Jeme said: "You don't get the nation talking about universal healthcare by mentioning it at the county council meeting." Wait a minute here. I heard that Hillary and Bill Clinton tried to get universal healthcare going in your country and it was deep-sixed by those who are making money off the system you have now. Huge amounts of money were spent on foiling the attempt. Commercials showing how terrible universal healthcare is, and how Canada's system is a failure were shown non-stop apparently. Meanwhile I have convinced many people online that the Canadian system is working beautifully, and when I tell them I had a free brain operation with a 2 month stay in hospital where money was never once mentioned they are amazed. Propaganda has worked wonders for your domineering capitalist system. I'm trying to spread the message for the other side, which has no money to waste on propaganda, being too busy actually saving lives and stuff. I've looked at Kerry and he is quite liberal in his views, though he talks a bit tough for me. (Canadians don't go for that stuff, but most Americans seem to like an aggressive leader.) Probably pandering to those who shake in fear thanks to Tom Ridge and the remains of 9/11 fear... he's no war monger though. He's been there and done that. Only chicken hawks love war. For the future, my vision is for a two party system for your country but without Republicans, let's say the Democrats and Greens. After this Project for a New American Century experiment has proved itself to be an abject failure, Republicans should be deemed unacceptable as a political party. Barbara Soutar Victoria, British Columbia ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:32:30 -0400 From: fingerpuppets Subject: Re: spooked! one other thing, there is a clip of "if you know time" from the album at . woj ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 14:44:59 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: RE: Can't somebody DO something? (yes, it's *that* debate again...) On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:36:35 -0400, "Bachman, Michael" said: > Jeff wrote: > > >All of this is true, except...see, the election is only five months > >away. And more education, community, and media coverage are unlikely all > >to come into play by then. > > Hey Jeff, take a look at your calendar. It's more like 3 1/2 months > away in a couple of days. Time is fleeting! So you mean "The Left-Wing Liberal Arts Anti-Mathematical Phalanx for Electoral Democracy" - whose flyer informed me that the election was in five months as of yesterday - is a right-wing front group trying to mislead folks like me? For shame! Next thing you'll be telling me Republicans are trying to get Nader on states' ballots, or that Bush is refusing to meet with NAACP leaders - because, as a great leader, he fears that they might boo him, and that would hurt his feelings... - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb :: --Batman ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 14:51:17 -0500 From: Dolph Chaney Subject: the solution to Americaaaaaaargh Let's all move to Molvania! - -- Dolph ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 14:56:16 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: Think outside the atmospheric box On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:33:27 -0600, "Cadtharsis" said: > > Here's the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Which > > sections do you think are bad science? > > > > For starters, I don't see any mention of the Earth's fading magnetic > fields > which shield us from radiation from space and solar winds. The magnetic > field has been in decline for hundreds of years and deflects most cosmic > radiation to the Earth's poles. It is thought to be a natural cycle for > the > magnetic field to flip every quarter million years so. > > Increased cosmic radiation due to fading magnetic fields could easily > explain higher incidents of cancer, increased global warming, greenhouse > gases and reduction of the polar caps. > > They might just be monitoring the fever instead of diagnosing the > disease. That doesn't indict the report as bad science - at most, it makes it incomplete science. Let's think about this: grant that the "fading magnetic fields" theory might be correct (although as far as I can tell, Stephin Merritt's been getting great press lately, so he's hardly in decline, at least critically). Grant your second paragraph: that FMF might account for the effects generally attributed to global warming. But we don't know which. What do we do? Well, as far as I know, there's absolutely nothing we can do about the magnetic fields (short of hooking up Merritt with a boyfriend who makes him stop smoking...okay, I'll stop). But there *are* things we can do about global warming. So things look like this (grossly oversimplified, of course, and assuming *either* A or B and not both): Cause A: fading magnetic fields Cause B: global warming Action A: do nothing Action B: act to alleviate global warming A+A = no effect A+B = no effect* B+A = ill effect B+B = positive effect So either way, we're better off with action B - especially considering that... * there are other positive effects that would flow from attempting to alleviate global warming, even if there ain't no such beast. I'd say the burden of proof is on those who claim there's no such thing as global warming, both to counter the science that says there is, and to argue against the other positive effects of acting as if there is. - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: crumple zones:: :: harmful or fatal if swallowed :: :: small-craft warning :: ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:04:46 -0500 From: "Fortissimo" Subject: Re: the solution to Americaaaaaaargh On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 14:51:17 -0500, "Dolph Chaney" said: > Let's all move to Molvania! > > To the contrary: this site is just full of reasons...why we don't live in Molvania... (I suppose that's exactly the kind of tortured wordplay that Eb complains about...) - ------------------------------- ...Jeff J e f f r e y N o r m a n The Architectural Dance Society http://spanghew.blogspot.com/ :: Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb :: --Batman ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 16:17:34 -0400 From: Ken Weingold Subject: Re: the solution to Americaaaaaaargh On Fri, Jul 16, 2004, Dolph Chaney wrote: > Let's all move to Molvania! > > That's my new favorite song! - -Ken ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 16:17:36 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: Can't somebody DO something? (yes, it's *that* debate again...) On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 10:36:35 -0400, "Bachman, Michael" said: > Jeff wrote: > >> >All of this is true, except...see, the election is only five months >> >away. And more education, community, and media coverage are unlikely all >> >to come into play by then. > > > Hey Jeff, take a look at your calendar. It's more like 3 1/2 months > >away in a couple of days. Time is fleeting! Jeff replied: >So you mean "The Left-Wing Liberal Arts Anti-Mathematical Phalanx for >Electoral Democracy" - whose flyer informed me that the election was in >five months as of yesterday - is a right-wing front group trying to >mislead folks like me? >For shame! Could Be! You never know these days. >Next thing you'll be telling me Republicans are trying to get Nader on >states' ballots, or that Bush is refusing to meet with NAACP leaders - >because, as a great leader, he fears that they might boo him, and that >would hurt his feelings... What is Dubya's official excuse for not meeting with the NAACP? That he believes they are now a Democrat group, and thus are not on his radar? I wonder if he has ever met with that gay Republican group, what are they called The Log Cabin something or other? I doubt it. He chooses to ignore those that don't fall within his moral or political beliefs. He rather be back on the ol' ranch in Crawford. Michael B. PS Has anyone seen BEFORE SUNSET yet? ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 15:18:55 -0500 From: Subject: Re: FW: Coincidence? [demime could not interpret encoding binary - treating as plain text] On Fri, 16 Jul 2004 09:16 , Bachman, Michael sent: > Some can go 100,000 without replacing timing belt. Some even longer. We had a 1979 Ford F100 with a 300ci straight six that finally gave out after 310,000 miles. The first timing chain lasted 170K, the second lasted another 140k and was only disgarded because the rebuilt long-block came with a new one. The was the finest production engine ever made for consumer use. Why do you think they stopped making it? Today I drive a Chevy C1500 with a 5.0 MPI engine and it is a piece of shit comparatively. Recently I spun the front main and had to have the engine rebuilt. That was at 186K. The timing chain was original, along with the starter, power steering pump, water pump and transmission etc... The only things I had to replace besides tires,fluids filters and such, before the main bearing problem, was the alternator and the master cylinder and a damn intake manifold plenum gasket, twice. That is a pain in the ass. Metal timing "chains" normally last much longer than rubber timing belts. But everything normally lasts much longer when you change the oil regularly and remember you ain't driving the LeMans. gSs - ---- Msg sent via WebMail ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 13:27:28 -0700 From: "Eb" Subject: Re: the solution to Americaaaaaaargh > > > > To the contrary: this site is just full of reasons...why we don't live > in Molvania... > > (I suppose that's exactly the kind of tortured wordplay that Eb > complains about...) Weird...this is the second time a mailing-post has pointed me at that "Zlad" video, but the first time, it was on a totally different site (presumably, a *real* site rather than this mockup). Actually, I believe the guy is Israeli, not "Molvanian." I have a headache. Eb ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 15:31:44 -0400 From: "Bachman, Michael" Subject: RE: Coincidence? Rex wrote: >Hey, my car just blew up. That fuckin' blows. Especially given that this was already, and I >mean it, no holds barred "The Worst Week of My Adult Life Ever". Did the engine actually blow up? Or did your timing belt brake? Because when that happens the valves can end up getting smashed by the pistons. Some of these newer multi-valve (3-4 valves per cylinder) engines have that problem. So the timing belt needs to be replaced every 60,000 or so miles depending of the engine. Some can go 100,000 without replacing timing belt. Michael B. ------------------------------ End of fegmaniax-digest V13 #208 ********************************