New Book of Rules
in [Design]
|
From: Michael A. Terrell on 7 Aug 2006 00:22 Eeyore wrote: > > "Michael A. Terrell" wrote: > > > Eeyore wrote: > > > > > > Phat Bytestard wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 15:29:14 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell" > > > > <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> Gave us: > > > > > > > > > Yes, it does. If you're in the paper products or produce business. > > > > >It would be damn hard to make money selling apples and other fruit > > > > >without growing them on trees. It would also be very hard to build > > > > >decent homes without lumber, which grows on trees, as well. > > > > > > > > Yep... even the media that the "money" got printed on came from > > > > trees. > > > > > > Rag has been traditionally used actually ! You can't get much right can you ? > > > > > > Graham > > > > YOU don't know much about paper. > > > > As far as paper for money, some of it has synthetic fibers added to > > make them last longer, and to be harder to tear. > > And what was used before synthetic fibres ? > > Are you suggesting the paper made from rag *isn't* in use even now ? > > Graham You are not comprehending. PAPER MONEY DOES HAVE SOME FIBER FROM TREES IN IT. END OF STORY. As far as "Rag", when does your period end? You've been on it for months already. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: Michael A. Terrell on 7 Aug 2006 00:33 joseph2k wrote: > > Phat Bytestard wrote: > > > On Sun, 06 Aug 2006 15:29:14 GMT, "Michael A. Terrell" > > <mike.terrell(a)earthlink.net> Gave us: > > > >> > >> Yes, it does. If you're in the paper products or produce business. > >>It would be damn hard to make money selling apples and other fruit > >>without growing them on trees. It would also be very hard to build > >>decent homes without lumber, which grows on trees, as well. > > > > Yep... even the media that the "money" got printed on came from > > trees. > Can't speak of any other Country but US notes are on 100% cotton bond. > No trees involved. From the US Treasury website: What can you tell me about the paper that is used to make our currency notes? I'm also interested in the size and weight of the notes. The paper that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) uses to produce our currency is "distinctive." A paper manufacturer produces it according to BEP specifications. It is composed of 75 percent cotton and 25 percent linen. The paper also contains red and blue fibers of various lengths that are evenly distributed throughout the paper. All denominations of paper currency notes printed since 1929 are the same size, measuring approximately 2.61 inches (6.63 centimeters) by 6.14 inches (15.60 centimeters). Each note is 0.0043 inches thick, and a stack of currency notes one mile high would contain over 14.5 million notes. If all of the currency notes printed were laid end to end, they would stretch around the earth's equator approximately 24 times. Each currency note, regardless of its denomination, weighs about one gram. There are 454 grams in one U.S. pound, so there should be 454 notes in a pound. The custom paper production I mentioned earlier included paper for foreign currency, some which contained a small amount of wood fibers as a marker. I could get all the free paper I wanted, except when a secure order was being processed. It wasn't uncommon to see foreign security people in town when the materials were prepped, the run was made, and they left with it, as guards, to its final destination. Any other time I could get any size, color or weight of paper I needed, except tractor feed computer paper by making a phone call, and it would be dropped off at the shop for free. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: Michael A. Terrell on 7 Aug 2006 00:36 Eeyore wrote: > > Jim Yanik wrote: > > > John Woodgate <jmw(a)jmwa.demon.co.uk> wrote in > > news:UIZDeWgKGj1EFww$@jmwa.demon.co.uk: > > > > > In message <92acd2ti8n9opnthr1fd7d3imis3ah08vt(a)4ax.com>, dated Sun, 6 > > > Aug 2006, Phat Bytestard <phatbytestard(a)getinmahharddrive.org> writes > > > > > >>Iran is trying to make nukes. Not for protection of their nation, but > > >>so they can USE them. > > > > Nuclear WEAPONS,not power plants;they really don't need nuclear power > > generating plants. > > I find it curious how 'Washington' feels it's its business to dictate what power > sources another country should use. > > By the same token, the USA should shut down all its own reactors. > > Graham You should stop wasting oxygen, so stop breathing. -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: Michael A. Terrell on 7 Aug 2006 00:37 Eeyore wrote: > > krw wrote: > > > In article <44D69456.9E0E8524(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com>, > > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com says... > > > > > Is nuclear power a good idea or not ? > > > > Certainly it is, but why in hell does Iran need "nuclear power"? > > Why in hell does the USA ? > > Graham Its not really any of your business is it? -- Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to prove it. Member of DAV #85. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida
From: joseph2k on 7 Aug 2006 00:49
Phat Bytestard wrote: > On Sat, 05 Aug 2006 21:56:51 +0100, Eeyore > <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)REMOVETHIS.hotmail.com> Gave us: > >>" ONE of our delivery devices is the Trident II, and it is far more >>advanced than its ancestor. " Clearly implying you thought we had the >>previous version. > > Not at all. You are the idiot that said trident, not trident II. Maybe the poster was trying to compare Trident to Polaris, ignoring the in between Posiedon generation. Not to mention Trident III's are already obsolete and being phased out. -- JosephKK Gegen dummheit kampfen die Gotter Selbst, vergebens. --Schiller |