Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Toilet Paper and other idiocy

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 7>
Author
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6546
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Toilet Paper and other idiocy
    Posted: 23 April 2007 at 9:44am
Now the eviorn-nuts want to limit toilet paper use, only one sheet per use...OK by poll how many believe that will accomplish the mission at "hand" and complete the required "paperwork".

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04 /21/AR2007042101385_pf.html

Crow (4/19, Springfield, Tenn.): I have spent the better part of this tour trying to come up with easy ways for us all to become a part of the solution to global warming. Although my ideas are in the earliest stages of development, they are, in my mind, worth investigating. One of my favorites is in the area of forest conservation which we heavily rely on for oxygen. I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. Now, I don't want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required.



Sawdust crappers, in your basement, that will work, jeeze.

And San Francisco, in the 70's ban paper bags demand plastic, because of the enviornmental damage of the use of trees for paper, now demand paper because of the enviornmental damage of plastic......make up your minds.

Gotta love Liberal Enviornmental Tree Huggers, can't quite figure out what is good for us, global cooling, new ice age in the 70's, now global warming, and the same scientists, what is the next "End of the world" scenario........everyone look up between @0600 and 2000, notice anything, that great heat tab in the sky, has a lot to do with the "heat" here on the surface. MArs also is losing its polar icecaps, co-incidense? or is the Mars rover that much of a killer SUV, or does Haliburton already have massive geo-mineral recovery assets already inplace?

Edited by oldsoldier - 23 April 2007 at 9:49am
Back to Top
Da Hui View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Guested, 9/13 Inappropiate post content

Joined: 06 August 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8442
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Da Hui Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 9:51am
I thought I had heard it all. Yet again I am proven wrong.
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 10:19am

Allow me to pose a more general question to OS:

TP, global warming, and any other specifics aside - do you believe that we (mankind) have an obligation to not destroy the environment?

Back to Top
evillepaintball View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not sexy - only dangerous to self

Joined: 08 March 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4927
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote evillepaintball Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 10:35am
Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Allow me to pose a more general question to OS:

TP, global warming, and any other specifics aside - do you believe that we (mankind) have an obligation to not destroy the environment?



at least until we find another planet to live on
Back to Top
c4cypher View Drop Down
Member
Member
Avatar

Joined: 17 March 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 312
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote c4cypher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 10:44am
Originally posted by evillepaintball evillepaintball wrote:

Originally posted by Clark Kent Clark Kent wrote:

Allow me to pose a more general question to OS:

TP, global warming, and any other specifics aside - do you believe that we (mankind) have an obligation to not destroy the environment?



at least until we find another planet to live on

Originally posted by Crow (4/19, Springfield, Tenn.) Crow (4/19, Springfield, Tenn.) wrote:

I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. Now, I don't want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required.

I don't know about OS, but while I feel that there there is some obligation, it doesn't extend into lunacy. Do you really feel that packaging toilet paper in indavidual squares would really help the enviornment?



Edited by c4cypher - 23 April 2007 at 10:45am
'Bring the rain!'
New to the game?
Back to Top
-ProDigY- View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
strike 1 4/20 faliure to follow sig rule

Joined: 20 December 2002
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 7268
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote -ProDigY- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 10:52am
Give me a break.
Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6546
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:00am
Yes Clark, Mankind has an obligation. Now once our scientists finally decide what exactly is the true error in our ways, maybe, until then I am sceptical. I do remmember the New Ice Age warnings of the 70's, then paper/plastic debates of the 70's and now today. Now the total opposite. Seen the eastern euro bloc after the fall of the Soviets, talk about a society that polluted.
And my primary concern at the present time is the utilization of science for socialist ideals. Limiting advanced societies, yet giving 2nd/3rd world full freedoms to do whatever does appear to be equalization, theft from one to benifit another. China with no polution restrictions, now there is a thought.
Al Gore, investing in a commodities firm that will sell polution/carbon footprint credits as a tradable commodity, and then making his gloom and doom movie, on polution and global warming does has a bit of hyprocracy in it. Are the social elites willing to live in our society as they preach we should, once they do maybe I will put some credance in thier claims.
The Gores, Edwards, etc have a "carbon footprint" larger than entire small communities here, and maybe even small developing countries, yet claim thier fellow americans must change thier life style to benifit the world. That my friend is the dilema.

The opposition view of global axis tilt, past higher and lower temperature changes based on archological/geological data, even the study of the sun, is never brought up. What caused ther Sahara to go from lush savanna to desert, what is causing the Martian polar cap melt, what caused the heat waves of the 16th century, even the dust bowl of the 30's.
The earth/solar system/universe is a diverse mesh of scientific unknowns, cause and effect. The Earth wobbles on its axis, scientific fact, changing solar aspect, any way that is causing the 1-2 degree shift in temp? I beleive Mt St Helen's put more greenhouse gasses and particular polutants in the atmosphere in four days than man has is 4 centuries. And the most by volumn greenhouse gas is Di-Hydro mono-oxide, lets also ban and regulate that.

Edited by oldsoldier - 23 April 2007 at 11:48am
Back to Top
Snake6 View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Outranked by guitarguy?

Joined: 11 September 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 11227
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Snake6 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:06am
Alrighty then.
Back to Top
-ProDigY- View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
strike 1 4/20 faliure to follow sig rule

Joined: 20 December 2002
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 7268
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote -ProDigY- Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:21am
Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

[crap]


You make me sick.
If you truly felt that mankind had an obligation to preserve the
environment than you would leave all the political <poopy> behind and
change your ways.

Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

The Gores, Edwards, etc have a "carbon footprint"
larger than entire small communities here, and maybe even small
developing countries, yet claim thier fellow americans must change thier
life style to benifit the world. That my friend is the dilema.


Shame on you.
Your complete inability to realize the importance of saving the planet
simply because it's considered a "leftist" agenda absolutely blows me
away. Honest to god, it makes me very sad.

It doesn't have anything to do with the hypocracy of the "social elites" or
China's policy on polution. Buck up and stop passing the blame
elsewhere you coward.


Edited by Rambino - 23 April 2007 at 2:48pm
Back to Top
evillepaintball View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Not sexy - only dangerous to self

Joined: 08 March 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4927
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote evillepaintball Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:25am
i always thought the most abundant GHG was H2O...

as for the mars ice caps melting, it happens every year.  the ice caps on mars arent frozen H2O like they are here on Earth.  mars has CO2 icecaps.  during the winter months, the atmosphere around the poles freezes and lays on the ground as dry ice.  during the spring and summer months, it warms because of the sun shining on it and it evaporates back into the air.
Back to Top
FlimFlam View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
I hate to do this in public

Joined: 09 December 2002
Location: Senegal
Status: Offline
Points: 3930
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FlimFlam Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:31am

There IS no scientific consensus on the subject of the CAUSE of Global Warming.  Yes, we know the average temperature on the face of this planet went up about 1F in the last century.  WHY this happened, is still being debated, though you'd never know it from the media coverage.

  1. Non-scientists generally don't want to bother with understanding the science. Any claims of consensus relieve them of any need to do so. These claims also serve to intimidate the public.
  2. There is a clear attempt to establish truth, not by scientific methods, but by perpetual repetition.

Personally, I think we're doing our part here.  Is there room for improvement?  I have no doubt.  Will we?  Most likely.  Reduce pollution.  Use compact fluorescent lights etc...  But to follow the gloom and doom sermons of the likes of Al Gore is pure folley... 

 


Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6546
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:34am
-ProDigY-
You are a classic. What is exactly is Global Warming, define it, how is it that we have reached "critical" yet someone can decide who can benifit and who must change.

If we are to "Save the Planet" come up with a method to the madness you claim that is feasable, equal, and benificial. Blanket statements based on one sided science is to me more tragic that any political agenda.

Do you actually believe that limiting CO2 a required gas for photosyntesis (keeping you breathing) is going to "Save the Planet" or benifit a certian group based on pysedo-science.

Read the Kyoto Accord, explain the rational of limited and excessive based on socio-economic standards, if we have reached "critical" how can we give others the right to pollute more while we must pollute less, yes that is socialist ideals.

If you are such an eco-warrior why are you on a computer, using energy and industrial products that contributed to the current "situation". Are you going to conform and use one sheet when mandated by eco-law? Yes we are dealing with a geo-political situation on an issue that does affect mankind, and unfortuanately politics and socio-economic beliefs does have a very distinct part in the process.

Edited by oldsoldier - 23 April 2007 at 11:43am
Back to Top
Reb Cpl View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar
2010 Worst Luck award winner

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 14004
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Reb Cpl Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:35am

This is right up there with the proposition that I heard not too long ago for the imposition of a tax on barbecuing since BBQ grills emit CO2. There would be an annual fee paid by those wishing to grill.

smooth huh?

Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6546
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:39am
Originally posted by evillepaintball evillepaintball wrote:

i always thought the most abundant GHG was H2O....


See...our education system and false fact repetion at work, proves point of the agenda here, confuse facts, and you can push anything.

Di-Hydro mono-oxide = 2 parts Hydrogen 1 part oxygen, commanly known as H2O

Edited by oldsoldier - 23 April 2007 at 11:49am
Back to Top
DeTrevni View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
b-YOU-ick. Was that so hard?

Joined: 19 September 2005
Location: Houston, Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 11763
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote DeTrevni Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:40am

Okay, no one mentioned this. How exactly do you propose the gov't "limit" our toilet paper use? Sell in individual packets? The packaging required would destroy the environment faster than TP ever would.

 

Idiots.

Evil Elvis: "Detrevni is definally like a hillbilly hippy from hell"

Back to Top
Benjichang View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
I pwned Leroy Jenkins!

Joined: 03 January 2004
Location: R'lyeh
Status: Offline
Points: 12518
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Benjichang Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:46am
I see you have an extensive knowledge of chemistry.
Back to Top
oldsoldier View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

Frequent target of infantile obsessives

Joined: 10 June 2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6546
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote oldsoldier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 11:50am
I are only a Hi Skool Gradyouate,

Edited by oldsoldier - 23 April 2007 at 11:52am
Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 12:01pm

Originally posted by oldsoldier oldsoldier wrote:

Yes Clark, Mankind has an obligation. Now once our scientists finally decide what exactly is the true error in our ways, maybe, until then I am sceptical. 

In other words:  "No"

Ok then.

Back to Top
Tae Kwon Do View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Best Forumer of the Year 2006

Joined: 30 July 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 6120
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Tae Kwon Do Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 12:01pm
I am sticking with the general theme of the thread and talking about cleaning yourself.


Has anybody in here used a bidet? Do they really work? Is it as refreshing as it looks?

Back to Top
Clark Kent View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar

Joined: 02 July 2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8716
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Clark Kent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 April 2007 at 12:05pm

Bidets work wonders, but you have to be careful or you get very wet.  And the first few times you will use more TP to dry yourself off than you would have just wiping.

But they definitely work as advertised, and do a much better job than mere TP.  In fact, folks in many parts of the world have very unflattering terms to describe the people (like us) who don't use bidets.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 7>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.