How about this..

[Drich]

I promise to stop ....... general failures in basic understanding in logic and reason

How?

like in your specific case? per the first thread when you did not understand that the whole perpetual motion machine was a rouse designed to prove you guys do not look things up rather you argue what you think you know.. This rouse was in contrast to how I documented and cited several sources and could do so because everything I was explaining was based on current establish technology. Yet people such as yourself decided to argue with me anyway based on 'feelings'

So when I made my reveal that the earths heat would be considered a fuel source, and there fore revealing the fact this was not a perpetual motion machine at all, but just like machines that already exist that uses the methods I described to harness energy, it proved that All of you Do not put the time and effort in to speak knowledgeably and intelligently. Then you chimed in.. Seemingly you did not even understand on the most basic level what was going on.

Now with this new promise I pledge to take the time to help you with your failure to understand, rather than do what I did. (to try and make you look as foolish as possible) by highlighting your word use of fuel as a reward of your own ignorance of the topic. Yes you use the word fuel but you do not explain how a fuel in this context would diminish in any way my stated claim. then your very next post you abandoned the use of the word fuel all together and picked up the ever so popular second law of thermal dynamics like everyone else did. which again does not apply.. but when did my reveal you centered in on the word fuel and noted you actually typed the word negating the fact you made no effort in trying to explain why you used this word.. you only pretended that there could have been no other possible explanation for why you would use the word nuclear fuel (which again is not what is even being discussed) so you pretended you never even said nuclear.

Now if you are convinced I am wrong here then simply explain to me why the second law of thermodynamics does not apply to my perpetual motion machine as described.

Your answer if right will prove my intention to do as I claimed above. (so you can understand my intention) if your answer is wrong then it proves that you had no idea what was being discussed and everything you said in the first thread was 'untrue' at best and only further my initial point. That 1/2 the time you guys have no idea what you are arguing. you just take up ying yang position opposite to me and argue feelings.

Third option is you could remain silent and prove me wrong.