How many Scouter Forum Members does it take to change a light bulb?

[ozemu]

Does ''two deep'' apply when the place is dark and no youth members are present?

[ccjj]

Disclamer...this is long

 

Dark-Sucker Theory

 

For years, it has been believed that electric bulbs emit light, but recent information has proven otherwise. Electric bulbs don''t emit light; they suck dark. Thus, we call these bulbs Dark-Suckers.

 

The Dark-Sucker Theory and the existence of dark-suckers prove that dark has mass and is heavier than light.

 

First the basis of the Dark-Sucker Theory is that electric bulbs suck dark. For example, take the dark-sucker in the room you are in. There ismuch less dark right next to it than there is elseshere. THe larger the dark-sucker, the greater its capacity to suck dark. Dark-Suckers in the parking lot have a much greater capacity to suck dark than the ones in this room.

 

As it is with all things, dark-suckers don''t last forever. Once they are full of dark, they can no longer suck. This is proven by the dark spot on a full dark-sucker.

 

A candle is a primitive dark-sucker. A new candle has a white wick. You can see that after the first use, the wick turns black, representing all the dark that has been sucked into it. If you put a pencil next to the wick of an operating candle, it will turn black. This is because it got in the way of the dark flowing into the candle. One of the disadvantages of these primitive dark-suckers is their limited range.

 

There are also portable dark-suckers. In these, the bulbs can''t handle all the dark by themselves and must be aided by a dark storage unit. When the dark storage unit is full, it must be either emptied or replaced before the portable dark-sucker can operate again.

 

Dark has mass. When dark goes into a dark-sucker, friction from the mass generates heat. Therefore, it is not wise to touch an operating dark-sucker. Candles present a special problem as the mass must travel into a solid wick instead of through clear glass, This generates a great amount of heat and therefore it''s not wise to touch an operating candle type dark-sucker.

 

Also, dark is heavier than light. If you were to swim, just below the surface of a lake, you would see a lot of light. If you were to slowly swim deeper and deeper, you would notice it getting darker and darker. When you get really deep, you would be in total darkness. This is because the heavier dark sinks to the bottom of the lake and the lighter light floats at the top. That is why it is called light.

 

Finally, we must prove that dark is faster than light. If you were to stand in a lit room, in front of a closed dark closet, and slowly opened the closet door, you would see the light slowly enter the closet. But since dark is so fast, you would not be able to see the dark leave the closet.

 

Next time you see what is called an electric bulb, remember that is really a dark-sucker.

 

[Vicki]

>Dark-Sucker Theory >

 

Wow. That''s good. Reveals unplumbed depths of darkness in the psyche of the author...who seems to be unknown, but here''s a link to a slightly different version.

 

http://jewel.morgan.edu/~salimian/humor/humor_037.html

 

Vicki

[OldGrayOwl]

Quote -->>When dark goes into a dark-sucker, friction from the mass generates heat. Therefore, it is not wise to touch an operating dark-sucker.

[Gunny2862]

Actualy the LED light is a misnomer, as we know due to the current scientific trend that they do not emit light. They should be referred to as Low Emission Dark-suckers. (LED''s) And the Low Emission refers to the fact that the heat is dissipated on the way to the Dark sucker in this product, rendering it cool to the touch.

While the alternate universe theory an enjoyable diversion there is some concern that if it were proven that we might find ourselves in a situation where increased Low Emission Dark sucker usage in an alternate universe may be what is actually causing our Global Warming trends.

[PeteM]

...and here I thought that the reason for the current Global warming is due to the fact of the large amounts of methane gas that our political leaders and leader wannabe''s are currently emitting.

[PeteM]

edited due to the dreaded double post problem(This message has been edited by PeteM)

[John-in-KC]

No, Pete,

 

NPR is reporting that methane gas in Asian rice fields is 20 times more potent than CO2 in contributing to global warming:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15100994

Synopsis:

Thai Scientists Look for a Greener Rice Crop

by Jon Hamilton

All Things Considered, October 8, 2007 Rice fields are a major source of methane one of the so-called greenhouse gases linked to global warming. But switching to other crops is unthinkable in Asia, where rice is the primary source of calories for many people. So scientists in Thailand are trying to find rice cultivation techniques that produce less methane.

 

Further, there is the dreaded Staff Cow at Scout Camp:

 

I am cow, hear me moo

I weigh twice as much as you

And I look good on the barbecue

Yogurt, curd, cream cheese and butters

Made from liquid from my udders

I am cow, I am cow, hear me moo (moo)

 

I am cow, eating grass

Methane gas comes out my MOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!

And out my muzzle when I belch

Oh, the ozone layer is thinner

From the outcome of my dinner

I am cow, I am cow, Ive got gas

[OldGrayOwl]

John,

That "might" be true, butt nothing can compare to the amout of Far...., er, methane gas from our fine, upstanding elected officials and their wannabe''s.

 

OGO

NE-IV-183