• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

are you concerned about the future of your slabbed books?

Started by Monstro,

65 posts in this topic

mica

mica

Posted
Posted
the title of this thread is dumb, lol should have been, "are you concerned about the future of your slabbed books". something like that.
(thumbs u Now I'll quit razzing you. :baiting::foryou:
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nearmint

nearmint

Posted
Posted
I'm holding up fine. Thanks for asking.

 

Looking at many of my high school classmates on Facebook, I'm holding up very well... I look at least 5 years younger than many of them. My God... what ravages time has brought upon some. In all seriousness, some look closer to my parents than me.

 

That said, I have noticed that I need to hold books a little further away to focus sharply as of late. This can't be a good sign.

 

I woke up one morning last month and noticed a hair growing out of my ear. Figure it's all downhill from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jasmine-migration

Jasmine-migration

Posted
Posted
Edgar Churches' books,were'nt most of them naturally pressed by their own weight?

 

:signfunny:^^

 

:acclaim:

 

hm Hope you're not being sarcastic :blush:

 

Nope, that was one :censored: hilarious newbie post. ".. pressed by their own weight" :roflmao:

 

Wish I could take credit for trying to be humorous but I thought after reading the story that piles upon piles of the books were on top of each other, ergo would'nt that mean that the ones at the bottom were pressed? (shrug)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seanfingh

seanfingh

Posted
Posted
Edgar Churches' books,were'nt most of them naturally pressed by their own weight?

 

:signfunny:^^

 

:acclaim:

 

hm Hope you're not being sarcastic :blush:

 

Nope, that was one :censored: hilarious newbie post. ".. pressed by their own weight" :roflmao:

 

Wish I could take credit for trying to be humorous but I thought after reading the story that piles upon piles of the books were on top of each other, ergo would'nt that mean that the ones at the bottom were pressed? (shrug)

 

Yes, it does. But (to many) there is a difference between books that were stacked and pressed under their own weight, so to speak, and books that have been mechanically pressed. Many (including this writer) have tried to analogize the Church books to the mechanical press. The resulting fire and brimstone still smolders in these parts. Word of advice - Don't go there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
seanfingh

seanfingh

Posted
Posted
Many (including this writer) have tried to analogize the Church books to the mechanical press. The resulting fire and brimstone still smolders in these parts.

 

And rightfully so.... :devil:

 

Don't even get me started on Aman and the booger-flicking . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
Many (including this writer) have tried to analogize the Church books to the mechanical press. The resulting fire and brimstone still smolders in these parts.

 

And rightfully so.... :devil:

 

Don't even get me started on Aman and the booger-flicking . . .

 

Please don't... :foryou:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jasmine-migration

Jasmine-migration

Posted
Posted
Edgar Churches' books,were'nt most of them naturally pressed by their own weight?

 

:signfunny:^^

 

:acclaim:

 

hm Hope you're not being sarcastic :blush:

 

Nope, that was one :censored: hilarious newbie post. ".. pressed by their own weight" :roflmao:

 

Wish I could take credit for trying to be humorous but I thought after reading the story that piles upon piles of the books were on top of each other, ergo would'nt that mean that the ones at the bottom were pressed? (shrug)

 

Yes, it does. But (to many) there is a difference between books that were stacked and pressed under their own weight, so to speak, and books that have been mechanically pressed. Many (including this writer) have tried to analogize the Church books to the mechanical press. The resulting fire and brimstone still smolders in these parts. Word of advice - Don't go there.

 

Fair enough.

I was'nt trying to join the debate, merely to explain my previous post to the guy with the little green man.

I know nothing about these issues but was merely stating what I thought to be a logical fact. Whatever your standpoint the result is the same i.e.

Books on books=weight=pressure.

Woman's logic I guess ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
THE_BEYONDER

THE_BEYONDER

Posted
Posted
Edgar Churches' books,were'nt most of them naturally pressed by their own weight?

 

:signfunny:^^

 

:acclaim:

 

hm Hope you're not being sarcastic :blush:

 

Nope, that was one :censored: hilarious newbie post. ".. pressed by their own weight" :roflmao:

 

Wish I could take credit for trying to be humorous but I thought after reading the story that piles upon piles of the books were on top of each other, ergo would'nt that mean that the ones at the bottom were pressed? (shrug)

 

Yes, it does. But (to many) there is a difference between books that were stacked and pressed under their own weight, so to speak, and books that have been mechanically pressed. Many (including this writer) have tried to analogize the Church books to the mechanical press. The resulting fire and brimstone still smolders in these parts. Word of advice - Don't go there.

 

Fair enough.

I was'nt trying to join the debate, merely to explain my previous post to the guy with the little green man.

I know nothing about these issues but was merely stating what I thought to be a logical fact. Whatever your standpoint the result is the same i.e.

Books on books=weight=pressure.

Woman's logic I guess ;)

 

Your logic assumes the Church books had defects to begin with.... :gossip:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jasmine-migration

Jasmine-migration

Posted
Posted
Edgar Churches' books,were'nt most of them naturally pressed by their own weight?

 

:signfunny:^^

 

:acclaim:

 

hm Hope you're not being sarcastic :blush:

 

Nope, that was one :censored: hilarious newbie post. ".. pressed by their own weight" :roflmao:

 

Wish I could take credit for trying to be humorous but I thought after reading the story that piles upon piles of the books were on top of each other, ergo would'nt that mean that the ones at the bottom were pressed? (shrug)

 

Yes, it does. But (to many) there is a difference between books that were stacked and pressed under their own weight, so to speak, and books that have been mechanically pressed. Many (including this writer) have tried to analogize the Church books to the mechanical press. The resulting fire and brimstone still smolders in these parts. Word of advice - Don't go there.

 

Fair enough.

I was'nt trying to join the debate, merely to explain my previous post to the guy with the little green man.

I know nothing about these issues but was merely stating what I thought to be a logical fact. Whatever your standpoint the result is the same i.e.

Books on books=weight=pressure.

Woman's logic I guess ;)

 

Your logic assumes the Church books had defects to begin with.... :gossip:

 

I think you're missing my point.

Does'nt matter what condition any book is in,if there's a ton of weight on top of it, its subject to pressure. That is all I'm saying.

I'm not arguing one way or the other because I have not either the knowledge or the experience in these matters, but I do have an elementary knowledge of physics. :gossip:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing