Nate Nagel wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>



snip


>>
>> what is smarter?
>>
>> 1. doing the same thing you did before, and expecting a different
>> result [retesting]? or
>>
>> 2. fixing the freakin' car, /then/ retesting???
>>
>> denial will only get you so far dude. it certainly won't save you
>> money or stop wasting electron on usenet!
>>
>
> I think he has reasonable concerns that the test was not done correctly
> and that there may not be a problem at all with the car.
>
> The *correct* answer, instead of shotgunning the car with parts when it
> may or may not actually need them, is to take the car to a shop with its
> own exhaust gas analyzer, NOT an emissions test station, and find out if
> there is actually a problem.
>
> nate


Pay no heed to beam as he resides in his "special" corner of the world
having little to do with the rest of us free thinkers.

I agree that the test may have been botched. Beam's assertion that the
"machine" is infallible is, well, ah... fallible.

BTW, how's JP doing these days?

JT