Florescent light bulbs?

Jennie Kermode wrote:
On 2006-12-09, terry <tsanford@nf.sympatico.ca> wrote:
The most common misspelling is "Flourescent".
That's not a misspelling.
It's a forcing function inserted lower case "U". (YOO is Swahili)
for Physics Telsa Coil retards
who can't understand how you
spell "Uranium Hexa-Flouride".

Heh. According to the packet it came in, I'm currently using a
'flouride' toothbrush'.

Jennie

--
Jennie Kermode jennie@innocent.com
http://www.triffid.demon.co.uk/jennie
 
On 10 Dec 2006 13:30:51 -0800, "zzbunker@netscape.net"
<zzbunker@netscape.net> wrote:

Jennie Kermode wrote:
On 2006-12-09, terry <tsanford@nf.sympatico.ca> wrote:
The most common misspelling is "Flourescent".

That's not a misspelling.
It's a forcing function inserted lower case "U". (YOO is Swahili)
for Physics Telsa Coil retards
who can't understand how you
spell "Uranium Hexa-Flouride".


Heh. According to the packet it came in, I'm currently using a
'flouride' toothbrush'.

Jennie

--
Jennie Kermode jennie@innocent.com
http://www.triffid.demon.co.uk/jennie
---
No doubt made from wheat or maize?


--
JF
 
zzbunker@netscape.net wrote:
Jennie Kermode wrote:
On 2006-12-09, terry <tsanford@nf.sympatico.ca> wrote:
The most common misspelling is "Flourescent".

That's not a misspelling.
It's a forcing function inserted lower case "U". (YOO is Swahili)
for Physics Telsa Coil retards
who can't understand how you
spell "Uranium Hexa-Flouride".
retard:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/8c61d9b058845497/e8b063cea3217c65?#e8b063cea3217c65
 
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com writes:

My $500 terminal is now a dinosaur?! I can't keep up with this biz.

Way newer things than CRT's are already dinosaurs. Anybody still
remembers the Zip drive?
Anyone remember the Jazz drive ?

Graham
 
John Fields wrote:

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 14:00:54 +0000, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Americans ! They probably use cellphones while refuelling too.

---
Yup, and ya know what? I haven't heard of a single instance of a
filling station blowing up because of it, have you?
Mt comment is about ppls' propensity to do what they're asked not to do.

Graham
 
Autymn D. C. wrote:
zzbunker@netscape.net wrote:
Jennie Kermode wrote:
On 2006-12-09, terry <tsanford@nf.sympatico.ca> wrote:
The most common misspelling is "Flourescent".

That's not a misspelling.
It's a forcing function inserted lower case "U". (YOO is Swahili)
for Physics Telsa Coil retards
who can't understand how you
spell "Uranium Hexa-Flouride".

retard:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/8c61d9b058845497/e8b063cea3217c65?#e8b063cea3217c65
Nobody knows what the hell that
means other than that the NSA redacted it
from retards at Berrkley.

c
 
David Brown wrote:

And what is the problem with using cellphones while filling petrol? There
has (according to what I recently read somewhere) been absolutely no
evidence of mobil phones being a problem at petrol stations.
Mobil ? phones !

Graham
 
In article <457CC099.8B22396E@hotmail.com>,
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
John Fields wrote:

On Sun, 10 Dec 2006 14:00:54 +0000, Eeyore
rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Americans ! They probably use cellphones while refuelling too.

---
Yup, and ya know what? I haven't heard of a single instance of a
filling station blowing up because of it, have you?

Mt comment is about ppls' propensity to do what they're asked not to do.
This only shows tour willingness to be controlled, like the good
Eurosheep you are.

--
Keith
 
In article <1165772153.686237.293560@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>,
pomerado@hotmail.com says...
krw wrote:
In article <1165724615.957643.274360@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
pomerado@hotmail.com says...

krw wrote:
In article <elfjqr$qia$2@jasen.is-a-geek.org>, jasen@free.net.nz
says...
On 2006-12-08, ehsjr <ehsjr@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
CoreyWhite wrote:



20%, is what Al Gore said. He would know better than me. What do you
think the electric power needs of the florescents would be? And where
can I buy a Tesla Bulb?


Maybe from that paragon of honesty who claimed he
invented the internet...

Al gore never claimed to have invented the internet.



He did claim responsibility for it though, which was absurd enough.

If you read the actual words, he claimed to have financed it.

It existed before he was in congress. He lied (again), is the
point.

Did you see in the papers where Merriam-Webster's word of the year is
"truthiness"?
No, why is it interesting? ...and what does it have to do with
AlGore's serial lies?

--
Keith
 
krw wrote:

rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com says...
John Fields wrote:
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

Americans ! They probably use cellphones while refuelling too.

---
Yup, and ya know what? I haven't heard of a single instance of a
filling station blowing up because of it, have you?

Mt comment is about ppls' propensity to do what they're asked not to do.

This only shows tour willingness to be controlled, like the good
Eurosheep you are.
You're being ridiculous. I think a sea-change may be in progress btw.

Graham
 
"krw" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:MPG.1fe5f0c5e7d268a3989dcd@news.individual.net...
In article <1165724615.957643.274360@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
pomerado@hotmail.com says...

krw wrote:
In article <elfjqr$qia$2@jasen.is-a-geek.org>, jasen@free.net.nz
says...
On 2006-12-08, ehsjr <ehsjr@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
Maybe from that paragon of honesty who claimed he
invented the internet...

Al gore never claimed to have invented the internet.



He did claim responsibility for it though, which was absurd enough.

If you read the actual words, he claimed to have financed it.

It existed before he was in congress. He lied (again), is the
point.
Yes, ARPANET goes back to before Gore was in Congress. But the Internet as
we know it today is a lot more than a tool for letting research institutions
communicate with eachother. The High Performance Computing Act, which Gore
introduced, created a lot of the fiber optic infrastructure that made the
Internet ubiquitous. At the time, I think most people in the US who were on
any networks at all were on systems like Compuserve and Prodigy, which were
mostly using X.25 networks, not TCP/IP.

Gore did take the initiative, both as a Senator and as Vice-President, to
see policies put in place to bring the Internet into American homes. So,
when he said he "took the iniative to create the Internet", I don't think he
was lying. The statement was taken out of context.
 
In article <457c2267$0$97226$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>,
Troia <troia.legata@gmail.removethis.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
In article <457c1d21$0$97249$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>,
Troia <troia.legata@gmail.removethis.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
....
Having watched the current misusage of those things, I would
not be surprised if they use them during sex.

/BAH
er ... um ... while I never have done so, someone did mention the fact
that they vibrate nicely!

They vibrate, too? Oh, good grief. I guess that would make
the term "phone sex" take on a whole new meaning.

Apparently one can do quite a bit of erotic teasing with a mere phone
call and not saying a word.

What is the purpose of those devices vibrating while you're
talking?

/BAH

Um, no ... now remember, I've just *read* about this! But apparently it
is not exactly uncommon.

One does not *talk* on the phone. One puts it in a certain place with
relation to the body, the other partner makes a phone call, the phone
does not get answered.

Clearer?

Sort of like a remote-controlled vibrator.
I understand the function of a dildo. I was asking about why
a phone vibrates while one is talking.

/BAH
 
In article <MPG.1fe5f02e29ac817a989dcc@news.individual.net>,
krw <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote:
In article <elh71j$8qk_002@s1128.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
jmfbahciv@aol.com says...
In article <457c1d21$0$97249$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net>,
Troia <troia.legata@gmail.removethis.com> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:
In article <457C1316.2F1B97DA@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 14:03:25 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
"OG" <owen@gwynnefamily.org.uk> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
"Joel Kolstad" <JKolstad71HatesSpam@yahoo.com> wrote:

A more interesting comparison might be how efficiently you can
light
a
room with gas!
BOOM! Quite efficiently, but all the light shines at the same
time.
Light and heat and improved ventilation
grin> Yep.
Nah - if you learn to light one properly, the deflagration front is
contained within millimeters of the mantle. ;-)
I have watched people fill the auto gas tank. Despite all warnings
I've seen men and women hanging onto a cigarette while doing so.
Americans ! They probably use cellphones while refuelling too.

Having watched the current misusage of those things, I would
not be surprised if they use them during sex.

/BAH

er ... um ... while I never have done so, someone did mention the fact
that they vibrate nicely!

They vibrate, too? Oh, good grief. I guess that would make
the term "phone sex" take on a whole new meaning.


Apparently one can do quite a bit of erotic teasing with a mere phone
call and not saying a word.

What is the purpose of those devices vibrating while you're
talking?

Not while talking. They can be set to vibrate instead of (or
before) ringing.
I knew that.

The vibrate mode is more discrete than some
gawd-awful ringer tunes.
Reread the comment that got me wondering. The implication was
that the phone was used as a dildo. So...either the female
knows when the male is calling and never answers to use it
or ...??? IOW, how does the male know that the female is
using the vibration and keeps ringing long enough until
climax? hmmm...I suppose those cameras are getting used already..

/BAH
 
In article <m4eon2p4edthn7tpoqib730a0mr2n7up3p@4ax.com>,
Spehro Pefhany <speffSNIP@interlogDOTyou.knowwhat> wrote:
On Sun, 10 Dec 06 14:32:55 GMT, the renowned jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

In article <457C1316.2F1B97DA@hotmail.com>,
Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com> wrote:


jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:
On Sat, 09 Dec 2006 14:03:25 +0000, jmfbahciv wrote:
"OG" <owen@gwynnefamily.org.uk> wrote:
jmfbahciv@aol.com> wrote in message
"Joel Kolstad" <JKolstad71HatesSpam@yahoo.com> wrote:

A more interesting comparison might be how efficiently you can light
a
room with gas!

BOOM! Quite efficiently, but all the light shines at the same time.

Light and heat and improved ventilation

grin> Yep.

Nah - if you learn to light one properly, the deflagration front is
contained within millimeters of the mantle. ;-)

I have watched people fill the auto gas tank. Despite all warnings
I've seen men and women hanging onto a cigarette while doing so.

Americans ! They probably use cellphones while refuelling too.

Having watched the current misusage of those things, I would
not be surprised if they use them during sex.

/BAH

Y'know, back in the day (of analog cellphones) it was possible to
listen in on conversations easily if you had an appropriate receiver.
One could hear some "interesting" stuff.
Yup. Clinton administration finally figured that out after a month
of phone use and somebody's conversation ended up in the news.
I don't recall the subject but it was picked up while somebody
was flying overhead using his phone.

/BAH
 
"Troia" <troia.legata@gmail.removethis.com> wrote in message
news:457c1d21$0$97249$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...


Apparently one can do quite a bit of erotic teasing with a mere phone call
and not saying a word.
I thought heavy breathing down the phone was an offence,
well it was in my case, but a first offence, that was my story. ;-)
 
Satori wrote:
"krw" <krw@att.bizzzz> wrote in message
news:MPG.1fe5f0c5e7d268a3989dcd@news.individual.net...
In article <1165724615.957643.274360@j72g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
pomerado@hotmail.com says...

krw wrote:
In article <elfjqr$qia$2@jasen.is-a-geek.org>, jasen@free.net.nz
says...
On 2006-12-08, ehsjr <ehsjr@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
Maybe from that paragon of honesty who claimed he
invented the internet...

Al gore never claimed to have invented the internet.



He did claim responsibility for it though, which was absurd enough.

If you read the actual words, he claimed to have financed it.

It existed before he was in congress. He lied (again), is the
point.

Yes, ARPANET goes back to before Gore was in Congress. But the Internet as
we know it today is a lot more than a tool for letting research institutions
communicate with eachother. The High Performance Computing Act, which Gore
introduced, created a lot of the fiber optic infrastructure that made the
Internet ubiquitous. At the time, I think most people in the US who were on
any networks at all were on systems like Compuserve and Prodigy, which were
mostly using X.25 networks, not TCP/IP.

Gore did take the initiative, both as a Senator and as Vice-President, to
see policies put in place to bring the Internet into American homes. So,
when he said he "took the iniative to create the Internet", I don't think he
was lying. The statement was taken out of context.
Disk Armey deliberately lied about Gore's statement. The rushsheep are
still bleating in agreement.
 
On Mon, 11 Dec 06 12:31:35 GMT, jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Reread the comment that got me wondering. The implication was
that the phone was used as a dildo. So...either the female
knows when the male is calling and never answers to use it
or ...??? IOW, how does the male know that the female is
using the vibration and keeps ringing long enough until
climax? hmmm...I suppose those cameras are getting used already..

Sweetie, vibrators vibrate and dildos penetrate. Sometimes a toy does
do both, but then it is usually just called a vibrator.

I suppose if you tucked the phone in up far enough and at the proper
angle to contact the G-spot the trick would work. So long as the
subject didn't move afterwards.
Realisticly though you would probably place it to maintain clitoral
contact. Much easier to get right the first time, and to keep in place
while still allowing movement.

Remote control vibrators are available, but they do not have the range
you get with a cell phone. Besides, with a cellphone the lass could
just trot off to the bathroom and give her caller a callback to let
them know that the trick did or did not work. No doubt while hoping
it was not her mother callng unexpectedly.

OK, now I am contemplating condoms for cellphones, and I don't even
own a cellphone.

NightMist
--
Come to the dark side.
We have cookies.
 
In article <jX4eh.3190$QD3.2643@trndny01>, ehsjr wrote:
CoreyWhite wrote:



20%, is what Al Gore said. He would know better than me. What do you
think the electric power needs of the florescents would be? And where
can I buy a Tesla Bulb?


Maybe from that paragon of honesty who claimed he
invented the internet...
What Gore actually said was that he "took the initiative in creating the
internet".

I say not as bad as an exaggeration as that of his opponents, since he
was the main force in the Senate for expanding it from the Aarpanet back
in the days when it was often called the "Information Superhighway".

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In <mq2u44-kne.ln1@sirius.tg00suus7038.net>, The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
In sci.math, John Fields <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote
on 10 Dec 2006 12:40:54 -0600 <r0lon21lu22ptg7ne0tfdhkk94fqh0dbd9@4ax.com>:
On 10 Dec 2006 14:01:57 Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations@hotmail.com>:

jmfbahciv@aol.com wrote:

Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

Electronic ballasts don't make a flickery light.
---
They don't make any light at all, dumb donkey!

Well, maybe once, sometimes...

It makes little difference; unless there's a rectifier/capacitor
somewhere in the circuit, those fluorescents are going to flicker as
they are driven by either a 50 Hz (in Europe) or 60 Hz (America) power
source.
Electronic ballasts normally have a rectifier and smoothing capacitor.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In article <1165452585.592905.307650@j44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
CoreyWhite wrote:
Al Gore came on Opera yesterday and said we could save 20% of the
energy our light bulbs use if we switched to more expensive florescent
bulbs. These bulbs last longer you know. But are you aware that the
light bulb companies are conspiring to keep florescent bulbs off the
market? They charge you more for them already, but Tesla invented a
florescent bulb that is still burning in the Tesla Museum 50 years
later.
How brightly? Does it light up a room? With what sort of energy
efficiency? Has there been any significant phosphor degradation?

There are "induction" fluorescents such as "Icetron" and "QL", where
life is limited by phosphor degradation. The degradation can be slowed by
making the lamps larger (which would be more expensive).

If we all used his bulbs we would never have to worry about
screwing in light bulbs. So the answer to the most important question
of the day: How many scientists does it take to screw in a light bulb?
Really should be none. Because we don't have to ever change our light
bulbs in an ideal world.

But can anyone tell me how I can get a hold of one of these Tesla bulbs?
I do suspect that they aren't that hard to duplicate - just send an
engineer familiar with fluorescent lamp manufacturing to the Tesla museum
to have a look at that thing!

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top