Ummmm, well...uh yeah, I, ummm, that is...I mean, I have a skull and I have a cap and I love both although I love my skull more than the cap because if I lost the cap I'd just be sad for a day or two but if I lost my skull I'd be really pissed. But of course the case can be made that the hat is important in that my skull is devoid of hair and without the hat I run a greater risk of sunburn than people who have hair; plus when it's cold the hat helps keep me warm. However, in the summer when it's really warm the hat that keeps my bald skull from getting burned traps heat and makes me sweat more so there is a trade off there. Further, however, I was born with a skull although it wasn't fully formed yet but I was also bald when I was born but later grew hair which eventually most all of it fell out returning my skull to the original state of baldness. My brother was also born bald but his hair eventually grew in and he still has his. He doesn't wear caps except when it's extremely cold outside which is different from me since I wear my cap all the time. Not everyone wears his or her cap (if they have one) all the time like I do, but some will. However, everyone I know has a skull of one type or another and some have lots of hair, while others are like me and have almost no hair, but then there are those that just have high foreheads. But even the ones who don't have hair do not have caps, therefore they may love their skulls but not their caps since they don't have any caps. And they don't worry about getting sunburned if they don't wear a cap because they use sunshades or really high SPF rated suntan loitions; in some cases they don't get sunburned on their bald heads because they refuse to come out in the daytime. It could be said they are using their skulls for something other than a place to wear their cap since they are smart enough not to come out into the sun in the first place...
Carl LaVon --- In [email protected], "kgassert" <kgass...@...> wrote: > > Yes, but do you love the skull cap???? > > Kevin1 > > --- In [email protected], "carl_lavon" <profedihmc@> wrote: > > > > PIZZA ON THIS TOPIC!! DAMN! THIS IS LIKE SOME PhD TO MD ARGUMENTS I HAVE > > BEEN A PART OF! FRICKIN' ENOUGH ALREADY! > > > > BTW, did I mention that even though I had to sell my Ercoupe I still love > > this Forum?! > > > > Carl LaVon > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Bill BIGGS <webacraft@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > To get technical, AC120-77 does not pertain to Ercoupes unless they are > > > for hire, and it specifically states it is advisory in nature and not a > > > regulation. > > > > > > > > > > > > http://rgl.faa.gov/REGULATORY_AND_GUIDANCE_LIBRARY/RGADVISORYCIRCULAR.NSF/0/199e798c7ee4347786256c4d004ae5dc/$FILE/AC%20120-77.pdf > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > From: ercoguru@ > > > Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 12:38:15 -0500 > > > Subject: Fwd: [ercoupe-tech] Re: Skull cap spinner > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry all, > > > > > > To get attachments, go to: > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ercoupe-tech/files/ > > > > > > Look up: > > > > > > AC120-77.pdf > > > > > > FAA-Definition of Type Certificate > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > WRB > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > > > > > > From: William R. Bayne <ercoguru@> > > > Date: September 3, 2009 11:20:21 CDT > > > To: Ercoupe Tech List <[email protected]> > > > Subject: Re: [ercoupe-tech] Re: Skull cap spinner [2 Attachments] > > > > > > > > > Kevin, > > > > > > Please. > > > > > > Read the following attachments. > > > > > > William R. Bayne > > > .____|-(o)-|____. > > > (Copyright 2009) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > On Sep 3, 2009, at 08:17, kgassert wrote: > > > > > > > > > "And my "point" has been that applicable federal regulations determine > > > the totality that comprise "the current TCDS". There is more to it > > > than just what can be downloaded from the FAA whether you are aware of > > > the remainder or have access to it or not. How likely would a police > > > officer yield to a driver's argument that the law he violated was not > > > taught him, he did not know of it, and he did not know how to ask for a > > > copy? "Ignorance is no excuse" will say the judge." > > > > > > No, this is where you are wrong. Where did you get the idea that a bunch > > > of drawings were part of the TC? What is downloaded from the FAA site is > > > the TC and that is what an A&P and IA has to go to and make sure the > > > aircraft conforms to. If something is in some drawing and the > > > manufacturer wants it to be required he puts it in the TC. If he doesn't > > > then too bad, maybe he should have but he didn't so if he wants it he > > > better amend the the TC. And believe me he will and it is done all the > > > time. > > > > > > Kevin1 > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Windows Live: Make it easier for your friends to see what you're up to on > > > Facebook. > > > http://windowslive.com/Campaign/SocialNetworking?ocid=PID23285::T:WLMTAGL:ON:WL:en-US:SI_SB_facebook:082009 > > > > > >
