₦airaland Forum

VolvoS60:
^^^
Vehicle owners got fed up and removed the devices - one of them is a vehicle we talked about on another thread. Of course tracking company claims they are experts who know what they are doing and as such have ruled out faulty installation, wrong connection etc.

Owner just wants to see if batteries will die again soon before deciding what to do next. What do I tell him to convince him to give you a shot at installation?

VolvoS60:
OP,

Someone installed tracking devices in his vehicles but he has been having problems with battery life. The batteries of both cars have been replaced twice! in the last 9 months and the likely suspects are the trackers. Both cars do not have any DTCs or fault codes except for a faulty tyre pressure monitoring system - and this has nothing to do with battery life as far as I know. In frustration he has removed the trackers to see if the latest batteries will go the way of the old ones. Any ideas?

makavele:
So let me break it down for the guy that asked about fuel economy.

Like I said before; it boils down to the state of your vehicle. Mine is in prime condition; right now, there is just 1 light on the dashboard asking me

top up the windshield washer. Engine and trans and all sensors are in perfect condition. My short term fuel trim is 0.0 and long term is 2.4

which means over time, the vehicle is only burning and extra 2.4% of fuel as against the default stoichiometry. So it's more or less perfect.

Shout out to Gazzuzz for educating me on fuel trims.

Which means for every 10 litres of fuel normally, i burn extra 10.24 litres. which is negligble.

The 2006 fx35 has a fuel tank capacity of 23.8 gallons. 1 US gallon of fluid is approximately 4L (3.8 actually).

So by default, a full tank of fuel is about 90 to 95 litres of fuel depending on approximation (using 3.8 or 4L). So let's use 3.8

A full tank of fuel will be 90 litres. The combined MPG is 17 for the 2006 FX35 3.5 V6 engine with AWD.

17 miles per gallon converted from imperial to metric means 1 gallon which is 3.8 L of fuel will take you 17miles with every other thing being equal, moderate cargo, top

condition of engine and trans, spark plugs, timing, correct wheel size, tire pressure, moderate driving, etc.

If a full tank is 90 L or so, a quarter tank is about 23 litres approximately. Therefore, ceteris paribus, 23 litres should take me as far as

23 litres divided by 3.8 = 6.05 ; lets say 6. Then 17 miles per gallon x 6 = 102 miles.

102 miles is equal to 164km. The distance between lekki and iyana ipaja is 55km approximately; or 110 km round trip.

So you are still left with 50kM to waste on traffic, bad roads, engine age etc.

Now this is how you win an argument; not by shouting. Education is key.

Proof attached below: p.s I got 162 with pen on paper and 164 here due to rounding off figures, approximation et al.

makavele:
By the way, I use premium fuel. Go figure.

radautoworks:
E-HAIL UBER/TAXIFY ANNUAL MAINTENANCE PACKAGE N120k

6 oil changes including labor,oil and filters
1 set of Front brakes
1 set of Rear brakes
Fluid top-offs
1 set of wiper blades

If you want to get this package, email support@radautoworks.com with name, phone,year,make,model, vin, mileage. You will receive an invoice and when paid,account will be opened for your car. When maintenance is due,just schedule appointment and bring it in! Annual maintenance at an equivalent of 10k a month is a steal.

cmoney22222:
How do you mean sir... Please explain what you trying to sir boss.. Thanks

cmoney22222:
Good morning my oga, I just notice that when I turn my steering I hear whining noise from my wheel. Car is Camry 2009. Fluid is in max. What can be possible solution sirs? Thanks

GAZZUZZ
radautoworks

naifizzy:
I understand. If I have 2000 drivers a month you do the math.

The way this initiative is designed is to protect the interests of the Drivers.

Once Drivers see that they stand a chance to gain more from us, it will open doors for more Drivers. That's the key.. The selling point.

I had join Taxify and Uber to feel their pain.

I dont need to rent a pent house office at Eko Atlantic. I dont need to hire 100 staff from all regions of the country.

naifizzy:
Yes I am a developer.

http://grandexpress.naifizzy.com/index.php/grandexpress-driver-partner-grand-partners/

Click on the phone icon on the above page to call me or click on the whatsapp icon on the same page to whatsapp me.

naifizzy:
What sentiments?

You need to ask yourself. What are the duties of the e-hailing platforms?

Everything is run by programming. The major work is done when making updates to improve the platform.

I am an IT professional and a google partner. I know a whole lot more about networking than you I suppose.

You need to remove the hurdles from your mindset and begin to see things more objectively.

When you search a word in google no one lifts a pen in Google office.

With social media and less nay-sayers publicity and adverts wont be a problem.

I dont need to run an ad on TV or Radio which will cost millions....

I have about 46 Drivers and I haven't spent a dime yet.

You need to start believing.

MoonlightDrive:
Good one MMA queen, but have you thought of taking it further by giving reasonable credit facilities to uber & taxify drivers, for car repairs, I think you should be able to work out something with uber/taxify. For instance your company could grant N100K credit line for each uber/taxify driver, which must be settled within 5 months. Uber/taxify would for interested partners/drivers reflect 20k negative balance every start of the month in the drivers app, and remit the money owed to your company over a period of 5 months or less. Everybody wins partners are sure that genuine parts are installed given the car better mileage on the road & thus avoiding downtime, uber/taxify are happy as more cars are on the road, riders are happy as the issue of cars breaking down on trips becomes a thing of the past; partners are happy as cost of maintenance is spread out and more manageable with the added bonus of top notch warranty, drivers on hire purchase can meet their targets, your company radautoworks/carquest would see reduced inventory holding cost, your staff's would have little idle time. In short everybody is a Winner!.

GAZZUZZ:
360km in town... seems fair if you factor age of the car and traffic conditions. you should scan it, seems the check engine light bulb is burnt

Hairyrapunzel:
Put your comments and my replies side by side if you don't have anything to hide. I am waiting for the attack

Hairyrapunzel:
How many times will I treat this issue? Why are you ashamed of telling us to read the whole leveticus chapter 17?

Now I have I'll character just because I returned your sucker punch showing you that the last verse you mentioned of leveticus 3 had preceding verses talking only about animals for sacrifice.

I no you didn't expect it. In my church we don't conclude or make doctrines from assumptions based on a phrase from an isolated verse in a chapter.

We always take into consideration all the verses in the whole chapter.

Hairyrapunzel:
So gb that says they are imperfect, uninspired and fallible and can err in doctrinal matters and organizational direction are saying they are Jesus and moses?

Explain gb worshipper. You teach that Catholics shouldn't be united under the leadership of the pope because that makes it a false religion whereas you are united under the leadership of 8 old imperfect, uninspired and fallible men who reside in new York and you describe it as the sign that you are the one true religion? You guys in your cult are really hilarious.

Hairyrapunzel:
I addressed all your points. How did I attack you? That I have contrary opinion to your non biblical doctrine is now attacking you?
List the attack points out I am waiting

Hairyrapunzel:
Blood is sacred to your God. Whether animal or human. Yet life of animal and humans are not sacred to your jehovah. Very funny. Your jehovah is very very funny. He can allow humans take the lives of animals for food while he also prefers humans taking their own lives because of blood transfusion ban since 1945 by watchtower organization.
He has made a symbol more important than what it represents.
Your jehovah no dey joke with blood of animal or humans yet he loves playing kalo kalo with human and animal life. Very interesting.





At least you have come here to open up to us that your religion has been assuming since 1945.




You guys love using this rubbish analogy.
Let's analyse.
Your physician will not allow you to use nicotine because it's of no health importance neither is it feasible putting nicotine in needle. Nicotine doesn't save life. On the other hand blood transfusion can be prescribed by physicians. It saves live its a medical procedure. Doctors don't joke with blood transfusion because it's real.

SO TEY YOUR LEADERS USE UNREAL SITUATIONS TO TRY TO JUSTIFY WHY REAL SITUATIONS ARE BAD. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF PROPAGANDA AND IT'S DECEITFUL.

JUST KNOW THAT NO PHYSICIAN WILL PRESCRIBE NICOTINE TO TREAT ANY AILMENT WHEREAS BLOOD TRANSFUSION IS CALLED A MEDICAL PROCEDURE.



Why then do we have to commit suicide obeying your leaders when Jesus has already paid the ransom sacrifice for man's salvation. If Jesus has done the work why do you feel you have to kill yourself or children because you are obeying jehovah?




Did Jesus give you internet to browse nairaland and jw.org?



But Jesus didn't say humans should refuse blood transfusion. Nathan knorr made the law in 1945 for his followers.



Jehovah or Jesus didn't ban blood transfusion after all in the Bible. Nathan knorr banned it in watchtower magazines in 1945.


Jesus didn't make any law on blood transfusion ban. Nathan knorr made the law in watchtower magazines in 1945. You are obeying Nathan knorr the illiterate.



Jesus or jehovah never banned blood transfusion so it's your man made non biblical law. You decided to obey your leaders law since 1945 because he made it compulsory.



At least we are not Jesus Christ. You said Jesus paid the ransom sacrifice for man yet you want to pay your own ransom for yourself. Jesus didn't refuse blood transfusion. Stop imagining what's not in the Bible and making it your law.



At least God didn't say we should abstain from the medical procedure called blood transfusion. It's Nathan knorr that made the law in 1945.


Since jehovah is the only source of life and has the right to determine how man should treat blood, why would an illiterate ban the medical procedure blood transfusion amongst his followers in 1945. It's obvious jehovah didn't decide on that a man called Nathan knorr did.


It's a kind of medical procedure. Whether it's holy grail or not isn't your concern



You want to lie about a situation to paint a bad picture of the procedure abi? Normal watchtower way. Always saying bad things about blood transfusion. It's not new.
Let me give you a shocker. I have transfused over 200 children and no one died. They are all doing fine till today.



Last last blood transfusion ban isn't in the Bible after all. You can take components of blood from blood donated by worldly people whereas you say blood transfusion is bad. Soon your gb will allow whole blood since they have allowed all the fractions. Lol

Hairyrapunzel:
At least in blood transfusion people don't get to eat the human being who donate blood. Bible was specific on what to eat and not eat.






At least this verse only talks about animals to be used as food. Not once does bible makes reference to the medical procedure called blood transfusion. So we all agree that its just an assumption that is also a speculation made by jws.



You even have to lie on early Christians not using WHOLE BLOOD even for medical reasons.
Read about history of blood transfusion you will see that early Christians did not even know jack about blood transfusion.
Why lie about blood transfusion done in the time of the early Christians and you don't even have a reference.

Is this how you guys cook up stories just to make your doctrines look like it was mentioned in the bible?
I know jws first banned all forms of blood in 1945. They even banned vaccination and organ transplant around the same time.

But you know what? They banned vaccination for 13yrs and organ transplant for 26years.

Do you know that currently your leaders don't ban all components of blood? That it is just whole blood they ban?
Bible says abstain from blood and your leaders translate blood to whole blood transfusion?
Bible didn't even talk of components or fractions of blood to be accepted. Yet your leaders made a list of fractions to be accepted. Who is deceiving who.

Do you know your leaders added white blood cells and platelets as fractions their members can accept 2 years ago?

Do you know that these fractions/components of blood are gotten from blood donated by wordly, wicked, evil,unrighteous people? people who you consider pagans and satan worshippers?

You guys The so called followers of jehovah can never donate blood to save yourselves or another person yet you accept components of blood from blood donated by Satan worshippers.

Your leaders are masters of cherry picking.

Just say it's what your leaders want and not what the bible says. Stop blaming non biblical doctrines/beliefs on the bible.





The US army last time I checked has not stopped doing blood transfusion. You are making a false impression about a situation. They adopted something doesn't mean they abandoned blood transfusion. Read things with sense.
Do you know when your so called bloodless surgery and medicine fails the last resort is blood transfusion?




Still johns Hopkins has never abandoned blood transfusion.
Do you know there are indications and contraindications to bloodless surgery?
Always read with sense.

Meanwhile FDA banned polyheme and hemopure (from cow blood) that jws were championing because of deaths it caused. Think of the number of jws used as lab rats that died before the ban.

Every drug or medical procedure has a propensity for producing adverse effects. Don't come here to lie about things that your leaders are illiterate about.

radautoworks:
Yes it does which is why I thought you'd be there one to appreciate it the most and maybe educate others.

Hairyrapunzel:
Now it's ad hominem. Lol

It's obvious you don't know jack about ad hominem.

You brought out an isolated verse in a chapter. Leveticus 3:17. You called it sucker punch and o called you out that the verse talked about animals only never once did it refer to humans.

Meaning You just assumed while the whole chapter talked including the verse you quoted talked about animals, lamb and goat.

It's like you hated my reply for bringing out this fact.
You that has being ARGuING FROM SILENCE NKO?
There is no fallacy in my thinking.
It's your thinking that contains all the fallacies.

You say you are a genius whereas all conclusions you reached are based on assumptions/speculation.


Next, you brought out leveticus 17: 11 and 14 which you wanted me to take in isolation again and I called you out.

One verse talked about the use of the blood as atonement on the altar and the other one talked about the what to do with animals or bird you hunt for food. I called you out on these and told you the verses never talked about humans and it was a figment of your own imagination.

I don't know what you were trying to drive at you quoted another verse in isolation Ezekiel 18:4 and I said it had no bearing with what was being discussed.

Maybe you feel I have to agree with your assumed conclusion which are never seen in the Bible. I don't know but I am not daft. The Bible is front of me and I have the right to read a whole chapter.

Your organization has never hurt me. I just can't bear to see people lying on the bible.
I have a contrary opinion and you are saying is ad hominem.

Or was it because I said Nathan knorr was an illiterate? He was of course. He made a law that has killed and is still killing jws in 1945 a time when medical practice was just beginning in USA. The war just ended and the USA just began to get major secrets from Germany.

He had no access to accurate research data as this was not done then (research in medicine was also beginning), no internet, no DVD etc. And you say this is ad hominem?

You really need to find what ad hominem really is. Nathan knorr will always be part of this argument as he was the originator of this belief system. You can't wriggle your way out of this by tagging my statement ad hominem.

You want to force me to believe your and agree with a misconception? No I can't.

Hairyrapunzel:
How am I biased? Lol
Has anything I said deviated from what the bible said?
See me see wahala.

You that is an intellectual has been forcing us to come to a conclusion based on what the bible didn't ever mention Nko?

I agree I may not be an intellectual but I am not a gullible person.
Because you see I am giving Bible verses you cry ad hominem. You must show me how i attacked you.

People will always hold contrary opinions. I don't believe what's not in the Bible. You don't imagine doctrines and think outsiders will not know that you are imagining things.

I know how painful it is to discover that the isolated phrases you believed to be talking about humans was never referring to them. It's devastating but with time you will get to understand that I was right about the Bible all along.

You are even ashamed to point to the phrases and verse that point to the animals. I have done that for you.

You will sit down and see that what was important to God was:
1. The life of humans: nobody should murder or slaughter or kill humans in this case you will not see their blood to pour on the floor or to use as sacrifice neither will you use their flesh for food or sacrifice. Don't even cause the death of another human being.

2. The blood of animals: it signified the lives of animals that are killed and slaughtered by humans for food and sacrifice. In this case you will see their blood to pour on the floor.

Leveticus 3 and 17 only talked about ritual done by Israelites on animals and birds being slaughtered for food and sacrifice

Hairyrapunzel:
I attacked you because I pointed out the fact that you drew your conclusion from isolated phrases in a verse two times?
No be only attacking the arguer.
Do you know peacefullove called said I wasn't an intellectual one time?
Let me tell you why. I caught him when he removed a word on purpose 2 or 3 times from a verse so as to justify his assumption. I called him out for it and called him a deceitful person.


You can't use agbari for me cos it won't work. You quoted phrases in isolation for me and expect me not to go to the Bible (the word of God) and not read the whole chapter?
It's only robots/zombies and daft people that will swallow something like this and agree with it.

Leveticus 3 and 17 only talked about blood of animals used as food and sacrifice. It talked about rituals that follow killing animals and birds during Moses time only.
The only humans involved where the ones who killed the animals, the priests who did the sacrifice and aarons sons who were priests. Nobody killed a human being and nobody ever used a human beings blood.

Sorry o I can't come to a conclusion based on what was never there in the first place.

Hairyrapunzel:
Now it's ad hominem. Lol

It's obvious you don't know jack about ad hominem.

You brought out an isolated verse in a chapter. Leveticus 3:17. You called it sucker punch and o called you out that the verse talked about animals only never once did it refer to humans.

Meaning You just assumed while the whole chapter talked including the verse you quoted talked about animals, lamb and goat.

It's like you hated my reply for bringing out this fact.
You that has being ARGuING FROM SILENCE NKO?
There is no fallacy in my thinking.
It's your thinking that contains all the fallacies.

You say you are a genius whereas all conclusions you reached are based on assumptions/speculation.


Next, you brought out leveticus 17: 11 and 14 which you wanted me to take in isolation again and I called you out.

One verse talked about the use of the blood as atonement on the altar and the other one talked about the what to do with animals or bird you hunt for food. I called you out on these and told you the verses never talked about humans and it was a figment of your own imagination.

I don't know what you were trying to drive at you quoted another verse in isolation Ezekiel 18:4 and I said it had no bearing with what was being discussed.

Maybe you feel I have to agree with your assumed conclusion which are never seen in the Bible. I don't know but I am not daft. The Bible is front of me and I have the right to read a whole chapter.

Your organization has never hurt me. I just can't bear to see people lying on the bible.
I have a contrary opinion and you are saying is ad hominem.

Or was it because I said Nathan knorr was an illiterate? He was of course. He made a law that has killed and is still killing jws in 1945 a time when medical practice was just beginning in USA. The war just ended and the USA just began to get major secrets from Germany.

He had no access to accurate research data as this was not done then (research in medicine was also beginning), no internet, no DVD etc. And you say this is ad hominem?

You really need to find what ad hominem really is. Nathan knorr will always be part of this argument as he was the originator of this belief system. You can't wriggle your way out of this by tagging my statement ad hominem.

You want to force me to believe your and agree with a misconception? No I can't.

achorladey:
Once you don't see him as an intellectual individual,then it means you can abandon the thread for him. God/Jesus are not looking for intellectuals to discuss spiritual or discern spiritual matters,he choosed babes, Unlettered individuals some may say.

Once you say he is not intellectual, are you too not using Ad hominem?

If he had attacked, you keep addressing the issue don't attack back.

achorladey:
Once you don't see him as an intellectual individual,then it means you can abandon the thread for him. God/Jesus are not looking for intellectuals to discuss spiritual or discern spiritual matters,he choosed babes, Unlettered individuals some may say.

Once you say he is not intellectual are you too not using Ad hominem. If he had attacked, you keep addressing the issue don't attack back.

Hairyrapunzel:
How many times will I treat this issue? Why are you ashamed of telling us to read the whole leveticus chapter 17?

Now I have I'll character just because I returned your sucker punch showing you that the last verse you mentioned of leveticus 3 had preceding verses talking only about animals for sacrifice.

I no you didn't expect it. In my church we don't conclude or make doctrines from assumptions based on a phrase from an isolated verse in a chapter.

We always take into consideration all the verses in the whole chapter.

radautoworks:
@AutoElectNG this will be of interest to you. Didn't know where else to post it.

https://www.bobistheoilguy.com


https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/forum_summary

Hairyrapunzel:
Which sucker punch?
Is it that you just take a phrase from a whole chapter and convert it to your sucker punch?

HERE IS MY OWN SUCKER PUNCH

HOW MANY TIMES DID THE CHAPTER MENTION ANIMALS, LAMBS AND GOAT AND WHAT DID THEY USE THEM FOR?

HOW MANY TIMES DID THE CHAPTER MENTION HUMAN BEINGS AND WHAT DID THEY USE THEM FOR/WHAT WAS THEIR ROLE?

SUCKER PUNCH INDEED

IT'S LIKE YOU GUYS THINK WE ARE DAFT O
Leveticus 3:1-17

3 “‘If your offering is a fellowship offering, and you offer an animal from the herd, whether male or female, you are to present before the Lord an animal without defect. 2 You [b]are to lay your hand on the head of your offering and slaughter it at the entrance to the tent of meeting. Then Aaron’s sons the priests shall splash the blood against the sides of the altar. 3 From the fellowship offering you are to bring a food offering to the Lord: the internal organs and all the fat that is connected to them, 4 both kidneys with the fat on them near the loins, and the long lobe of the liver, which you will remove with the kidneys. 5 Then Aaron’s sons are to burn it on the altar on top of the burnt offering that is lying on the burning wood; it is a food offering, an aroma pleasing to the Lord.

6 “‘If you offer an animal from the flock as a fellowship offering to the Lord, you are to offer a male or female without defect. 7 If you offer a lamb, you are to present it before the Lord, 8lay your hand on its head and slaughter it in front of the tent of meeting[/b]. Then Aaron’s sons shall splash its blood against the sides of the altar. 9 From the fellowship offering you are to bring a food offering to the Lord: its fat, the entire fat tail cut off close to the backbone, the internal organs and all the fat that is connected to them, 10 both kidneys with the fat on them near the loins, and the long lobe of the liver, which you will remove with the kidneys. 11 The priest shall burn them on the altar as a food offering presented to the Lord.

12 “‘If your offering is a goat, you are to present it before the Lord, 13 lay your hand on its head and slaughter it in front of the tent of meeting. Then Aaron’s sons shall splash its blood against the sides of the altar. 14 From what you offer you are to present this food offering to the Lord: the internal organs and all the fat that is connected to them, 15 both kidneys with the fat on them near the loins, and the long lobe of the liver, which you will remove with the kidneys. 16 The priest shall burn them on the altar as a food offering, a pleasing aroma. All the fat is the Lord’s.

17 “‘[b]This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live: You must not eat any fat or any blood.’”




YOU EVEN HAVE TO LIE TO PUT SOMETHING NEVER MENTIONED IN THE WHOLE CHAPTER. WOW

NOW FRUSTRATION HAS SET IN

YOUR BEHAVIOUR IS NOT SURPRISING. WHEN YOU SEE THAT ALL YOU BELIEVE IS ALL A LIE PROPAGATED BY A PSYCHOTIC HUMAN BEING WHO WAS AN ILLITERATE

Barristter07:

Anal sex and Vagina sex , which is not fornication ? Going by your flawed logic, a person has obeyed the instruction to abstain fornication as long as vagina is untouched, IF DONE THROUGH ANOTHER ROUTE

Either Man or Animal blood, do not consume " ANY BLOOD " at all - Lev 3:17

That prohibition came before the Law, confirmed by the Law and continue to exist after the Law