"Charles" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:14:42 +0000, 0tterbot wrote:

(i'd love to know though how the water could be full of oestrogen!!!)

Apparently it's there from the urine of all you women on the contraceptive
pill.

well you're clearly overestimating 1: the number of women who take the pill
at all, and 2: the amount of oestrogen which is in the pill anyway (both
progestogen and oestrogen in the modern pill are mere fractions of the
amounts which used to be in the older varieties - and yet no men were
claiming to be growing breasts from stuff in the water in the 1970s when the
pill was greatly more popular than it is now, were they?).

in short, if you're actually serious with that statement, you might need to
just talk yourself down, i think...

This one of the big dangers touted by a regular player on the "no"
side of recentish debate (and referendum) in Toowoomba here in Qld.

the naysayers in toowoomba didn't acheive anything beyond making everyone in
toowoomba look like a barking ninny, and they still haven't solved their
water problem. perhaps they are unrepresentative?

Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from drinking
recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus oestrogen, in
it.

yeah? what happens to us from drinking man-wee? do we grow beards and chest
hair?
kylie

I could be taking the wrong end of the stick here, but you do know that I
was being sarcastic in my original post don't you? I think the man in
question in Toowoomba was/is a fool. Perhaps I was too subtle for you?

On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:20:23 +0000, 0tterbot wrote:

"Charles" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 00:14:42 +0000, 0tterbot wrote:

(i'd love to know though how the water could be full of oestrogen!!!)

Apparently it's there from the urine of all you women on the contraceptive
pill.

well you're clearly overestimating 1: the number of women who take the pill
at all, and 2: the amount of oestrogen which is in the pill anyway (both
progestogen and oestrogen in the modern pill are mere fractions of the
amounts which used to be in the older varieties - and yet no men were
claiming to be growing breasts from stuff in the water in the 1970s when the
pill was greatly more popular than it is now, were they?).

I am not overestimating anything, I was relaying to you who asked the
original q re how did the oestrogen get in the water, the reason given by
those who make this claim.

in short, if you're actually serious with that statement, you might need to
just talk yourself down, i think...

Sorry, I thought it was obvious that I was *not* serious in that
statement, but was merely telling you the statement being made by some
who, unfortunately, are serious.

Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from
drinking recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus
oestrogen, in it.

Now y'see I figured that this was probably the big give away, the use of
"poor fellow" to me just screams sarcasm, but as I said above, I must be
too subtle, laconic and dry (no pun intended given the discussion re
water! :-) )for my own good.

I think Toowoomba residents missed a good opportunity, but one must not
discount the role both the local media (by refusal to use neutral and
noninflammatory terminology in its reporting) *and* the Federal Govt (by
demanding that a referendum had to be held and won in order to get Fed
funding for the project) had in the defeat of the referendum.

Charles
--
If some days are diamonds and some days are stone....
Then some days I live in a quarry!!

"Charles" wrote in message
news
I could be taking the wrong end of the stick here, but you do know that I
was being sarcastic in my original post don't you? I think the man in
question in Toowoomba was/is a fool. Perhaps I was too subtle for you?

perhaps g. sarcasm is not the best method of communication. however, you
can consider the statements still stand (if not directed to you) as some
people evidently believe these things!

I think Toowoomba residents missed a good opportunity, but one must not
discount the role both the local media (by refusal to use neutral and
noninflammatory terminology in its reporting) *and* the Federal Govt (by
demanding that a referendum had to be held and won in order to get Fed
funding for the project) had in the defeat of the referendum.

well of course. (anyone who wants to blame the govt for anything at all is
fine by me g)

what of the responsibility of individuals though, to not be total morons &
to take some responsibility towards saving themselves (e.g. the good
burghers of toowoomba)? it's all very well to blame the tabloids - why does
nobody question what kind of person reads them & believes that stuff,
because without their audience they clearly would have no influence..?!
(just a general question!!) same with govts in general - they've all got
form as fibbers - why would they be believable in one instance but not
another? (etc).
kylie

On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 01:01:36 +0000, 0tterbot wrote:

perhaps g. sarcasm is not the best method of communication. however, you
can consider the statements still stand (if not directed to you) as some
people evidently believe these things!

Perhaps so. I agree that your statements are sound, people *do* believe
that piffle I repeated, but then the general public usually does, by
necessity fall to the lowest common denominator. One only had to look at
the people on the SBS discussion program (Insight, I think) who were on
with Di Thorley (Toowoomba mayor), gingerly sniffing the bottled water
from Singapore that was offered for tasting, and being genuinely
incredulous that it *didn't* smell like faeces, to see how stupid "people"
are.

I think Toowoomba residents missed a good opportunity, but one must not
discount the role both the local media (by refusal to use neutral and
noninflammatory terminology in its reporting) *and* the Federal Govt (by
demanding that a referendum had to be held and won in order to get Fed
funding for the project) had in the defeat of the referendum.

well of course. (anyone who wants to blame the govt for anything at all is
fine by me g)

Ahh, well I am not a govt basher per se, even though I didn't vote for
them, I do believe that a society (as a whole) gets the govt it deserves. :-)

I blame the Govt (federal) because they forced the Toowoomba council to
hold a referendum on what is essentially an infrastructure issue. I can't
recall when any level of govt in Oz was forced to go to the electorate on
such an issue. (Forgetting the importance of this issue just for a moment)
Governments of all levels are elected to make decisions on what
infrastructure needs to be built at whatever level it operates, so that
the needs of its constituents (both present and future) are met as well as
possible.

what of the responsibility of individuals though, to not be total morons
& to take some responsibility towards saving themselves (e.g. the good
burghers of toowoomba)? it's all very well to blame the tabloids - why
does nobody question what kind of person reads them & believes that
stuff, because without their audience they clearly would have no
influence..?!

Too true! One only has to look at the issue of so called- reality TV,
*someone* must be watching these bores!

However on the issue of responsibility. Well given my feelings on the
general public, I would say that the average dude and dudette were really
behind the 8-ball. If they knew they were not in possession of the facts,
where were they to turn? To the media, of course...reporting on issues is
their job after all..in this case though, the media (all of it, including
ABC and SBS as well as the Toowoomba Chronicle) let down the uninformed
average citizen badly. So badly that as a single example, the very day
after the referendum, the same outlets that had been exclusively using
such terminology as "Recycled sewage" suddenly discovered that the term
"Recycled water" was a valid description.

sigh

Charles
--
If some days are diamonds and some days are stone....
Then some days I live in a quarry!!

"Charles" wrote in message
news
Ahh, well I am not a govt basher per se, even though I didn't vote for
them, I do believe that a society (as a whole) gets the govt it deserves.
:-)

ah, you are a _people_ basher ;-)

however, i must say i find your stance on that awfully unfair to people who
_didn't_ vote for govt of the day but get them anyway. (i feel sorry for
myself quite frankly).

I blame the Govt (federal) because they forced the Toowoomba council to
hold a referendum on what is essentially an infrastructure issue.

one of the things that irks me about them is they always find ways to get
their own way. let's not get started g.
kyile

On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 11:46:52 +0000, 0tterbot wrote:

"Charles" wrote in message
news
Ahh, well I am not a govt basher per se, even though I didn't vote for
them, I do believe that a society (as a whole) gets the govt it deserves.
:-)

ah, you are a _people_ basher ;-)

Yes, I guess I am :-) I see the great unwashed (myself included) as so
often less than they should be.

however, i must say i find your stance on that awfully unfair to people
who _didn't_ vote for govt of the day but get them anyway. (i feel sorry
for myself quite frankly).

As do I (for myself and for us all at times)

one of the things that irks me about them is they always find ways to
get their own way. let's not get started g.

No indeed, let's not get started :-) We've probably already gone too far
from the remit of this group ;-)

Charles
--
If some days are diamonds and some days are stone....
Then some days I live in a quarry!!

I think Toowoomba residents missed a good opportunity, but one must not
discount the role both the local media (by refusal to use neutral and
noninflammatory terminology in its reporting) *and* the Federal Govt (by
demanding that a referendum had to be held and won in order to get Fed
funding for the project) had in the defeat of the referendum.

Charles

Toowoomba, and indeed most southern downs media, seldom has content that is
not inflammatory, overemotional, biased etc. And neutrality was flushed down
the toilet, along with the water, a looong time ago. Don't expect reason
from that end of things. The idiot majority outnumbers the normals waaay too
much.
--
If some days are diamonds and some days are stone....
Then some days I live in a quarry!!

"0tterbot" writes:
Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from drinking
recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus oestrogen, in
it.

yeah? what happens to us from drinking man-wee? do we grow beards and chest
hair?

Nah, the effect is more subtle. Haven't you noticed that increasing numbers
of females are driving red sports cars ...... drinking beer ...... mowing
their lawns on Sunday ...... taking over the cooking at BBQs ...... given
to road rage ......
--
John Savage (my news address is not valid for email)

"John Savage" wrote in message
om...
"0tterbot" writes:
Poor fellow was apparently concerned about growing breasts from drinking
recycled water that might have had female urine, and thus oestrogen, in
it.

yeah? what happens to us from drinking man-wee? do we grow beards and
chest
hair?

Nah, the effect is more subtle. Haven't you noticed that increasing
numbers
of females are driving red sports cars ...... drinking beer

oops!

....... mowing
their lawns on Sunday ...... taking over the cooking at BBQs ...... given
to road rage ......

on the bright side, when we take over the cooking at bbqs, we don't have to
wear an apron with rubber breasts on it - we can just wear our own!
kylie