If you want food, you're hungry; if you want drink, you're thirsty; if you want sex, you're horny. What are you if you want a cigarette?

Nicotiny?

What are you if you want a cigarette?

smokey?

*puts on medical cap*

addicted and going into withdrawal?

It's not an adjective, but I've known folks to say they were "jonesing" for a cigarette. From the phrase "have a jones for" something.

hurtin'

Perhaps addicted.

>What are you if you want a cigarette?

capnotic

stupid?

(I just know I'm gonna get it for this.)

stupid?

Hah - well done, Jazzo - I only just refrained from that earlier today!

2Ys U R,
2Ys U B,
I C U R
2Ys 4 C

[none-so-holy-as-quitters!]

Dear tsuwm: I couldn't find definition of "capnotic" The nearest I could come was "acapnia"/

Acapnia: Less than the normal level of carbon dioxide in the blood. The opposite of
hypercapnia.The origin of the word “acapnia” is curious. It comes from the Greek “a-“
meaning “without” + “kapnos” meaning “smoke” so acapnia literally means “smokeless”
referring to carbon dioxide which is a principal part of smoke.

For a guess, "capnotic" might mean short of breath from excessive smoking.

acapnotic => without smoke... smokeless... a non-smoker

by extension, capnotic =>with smoke... smokeful... a smoker

QED :-)

My college friends always said that they were "jonesing" for a cigarette, although this word comes from heavier drug-use originally. Addicts are jonesing for heroin or the like, but the term has come into common use for cigarettes too, at least in my circle of friends (they were chain-smokers!). Now that I live in Germany I don't know what they say here when someone wants a cigarette.

QED :-)

Is that the latest version?

acapnotic => without smoke

capnotic =>with smoke

Which would suggest to me that the answer to Y's question (dja remember the question?) would be acapnotic.

I agree with "jonesing." I have always heard that that word originates from drug culture slang, where it originally described the intense desire for heroin that an addict experiences. However, this doesn't exactly answer your question, since "hungry" and "horny" are adjectives, and jonesing is not. I don't know of an equivalent adjective for nicotine craving.

Of course many smokers will simply say "I'm dying for a cigarette," to which I reply "Yes, you certainly are."

Dear Maverick: "QED" is vintage Euclid.

well not quite Euclid-- unless he too, spoke latin instead of greek... of course it might be taken from a now unknown or less common greek expression..

its Quod erat (something... ) the first 2 are cross word puzzle words.. and the express mean proven

jf> QED :-)
mav> Is that the latest version?

::sigh:: this was a shot over my brow from mav, at my propensity for using both OED and QED...

to mav: from now on I will use OED2 and QED2* to differentiate.
to ot: quod erat demonstrandum (which was to be demonstrated)
{note to self: spaces *are important... QED2}

*not to be confused with QE2

Or is that ancapnotic?

Um, what ship was that you were sailing on?

What are you if you want a cigarette?
from 20 years' experience of living with a smoker, I 'd say: unbearable

I live with a smoker too - very true! My 8-year-old son came up with one - tempted!

...something with "crave"?

craving
craveful (?)


Marianna

Edit-in: And with this, my craving for AWAD membership has been satisfied! Yay!

Congratulations, Marianna!

I always loved the line in the play which recalls an episode of illicit passion during the blitz of London in WW2, when the doctor speaks of "seeing her face by the light of a post-coital Craven A".

"seeing her face by the light of a post-coital Craven A".

I could never understand how smoking in the dark could be enjoyable. The only reason I ever smoked was that the Army allowed a break every fifteen minutes for a cigarette, but non-smokers were supposed to keep on working.
But there was a certain fascination to watching the vagaries of the plumes of smoke. The mere nicotine effect of smoking in the dark never appealed to me.

The bombshelter bit reminds me of a joke in Time magazine during WWII.In the dark,a girl gets kissed by a stranger. When her boyfriend discovers this he blusters: "I'll teach him a thing or two if I catch him!" The girl replies dreamily: "Oh, Albert, you couldn't teach him a thing!"

non-smokers were supposed to keep on working

Yes, but even the hardest workers need a little slack time, Bill

and seeing as we already halfway to the gutter, I only half apologise for:

"Do you smoke after having sex?"
"I don't know, I've never looked!"

Rod

craving
craveful (?)
And with this, my craving for AWAD membership has been satisfied! Yay!
Congratulations Marianna.

and now I am cravulous, cravotic, cravenous, cravish (don't you eat them?), cravoid, cravelike, cravey (pour it over the cravish), cravial, cravaceous, cravewise , cravety, craviferous, cravesome, for addict describing words.

Rod

"seeing her face by the light of a post-coital Craven A".

Proust's madeleine is my Craven-A: when we were kids in the 50s, my sophisticated lady mother used to smoke Craven-As. I adored the elegant black cat which adorned each packet. Maybe mum smoked them for the flavour, but I like to think she was attracted by the feline grace of the logo. Dad was a no-nonsense Turf man. When I was 10 or so I sneaked one of mum's ciggies. Pre-pubescent though I was, the guilty sense of dissipated sinfulness which followed pretty much approximated what I now suppose (from books I have read of course) post-coital tristesse to be.

(And am I correct in recalling that P-CT was evocatively evoked in Mary McCarthy's 'The Group'?)

>"seeing her face by the light of a post-coital Craven A".

To which I said "Huh?"

Rusty finally clued me in >...my sophisticated lady mother used to smoke Craven-As...

*Thank* you! I initially read this as some Scarlet Letter allusion, which made only marginal sense - but now I get it. A brand name hadn't even crossed my mind...

"seeing her face by the light of a post-coital Craven A".

To which I said "Huh?"

As well you might. Why any half-way rational user of the so-called "English" language would want to call a product on which they are trying to convince people to spend their money Craven anything is totally beyond me. Have they no concept of the meaning of words?

>Have they no concept of the meaning of words?

oh, it was probably just a misreading of Shakespeare.

quoth the craven

And American cigarette had risible names also, e.g. Camels, the only brand with a picture of the factory on the package, and I don't mean the Pyramids.

Mention of the Pyramids reminds me of an interesting little book I read a couple years ago. It was written by a French chemist who specialized in inorganic compounds (geopolymers) of which Portland cement is only one. He became convinced that the Pyramids were built not of stone blocks laboriously shaped and hauled into place, but cast in place with a mixture of minerals, using the same casting forms over and over. This makes sense to me. He gave a lot of reasons that I accept. But since he is not a card carrying archaeologist, nobody will pay any attention to him.
His name was Davidovitz, and I used to be able to find his site on the Internet using a combination of Pyramids and his name. It may not be there any longer. I have noticed that Yahoo dumps some things over ten years old.
http://www.mm2000.nu/sphinxh.html

hmm... combining this theory with the 6000-year old universe and Edgar Cayce....

Dear tsuwm: You seem to be reacting like the closed clique of archaeologists who refuse to even read the book, which I found entirely convincing. No lost Continent of Mu or phoney Atlantis about it. Incidentally, there is another damned fine book convincingly attributing the Atlantis myth to the catastrophic destruction of an advanced early Greek civilization by a huge volcanic eruption on one of the Cyclades just a bit southwest of Turkey, the name of which I cannot recall at the moment.The archeologists are getting to dig this one, so they buy it.
Davidovitz has the misfortune of embarrassing too many of the old school.That is unforgiveable.

P.S. I could not find anything in Encarta Encyclopedia, but found a site that gave map of Cyclades, and found the Island of Santorini, which I believe in ancient times was called Thera. Apparently the volcanic eruption was so many centuries earlier than Plato, that no knowledge of it remained. Now I'll go back to internet to see if I can find anything except tourist spiels.

P.P.S. I hit the jack pot, a site with a lot of information about the Atlantis myth and modern discoveries.
http://search.yahoo.com/bin/search?p=Santorini+Thera+volcanic+eruption

Atlantis myth

My theory is that the disappearance of Atlantis is equivalent to the "Great Flood" and the story of Baucis and Philemon.

ABC had a special on about a week ago promoting their new movie Atlantis and they said that some oceanographers think they have found Atlantis. They say that Cuba once was a much larger island that was home to an advanced civilization. Some native American cultures have stories of a great snake in the sky that caused massive flooding. They say this was a comet's tail that looked like a snake and the flooding wiped out the southern 3/4 of Cuba. They had a quote from Plato making it sound like trips were regularly made from Greece to Atlantis.

Dear Jazzo: Hollywood can always find talented flacks to promote a movie.

When I was in High School, nearly fifteen years ago, I wrote a paper about Ancient Egypt. In doing research for it, I came across a magazine which featured the story of how some scholar had analysed the stone blocks of the pyramids, and come to the conclusion that they had been poured and not hewn. The evidence for this included some hair or fiber that had been found within one of the blocks when it was split open. I don't remember the name of the scientist or even the magazine, but perhaps it was this Davidovitz who has been working on this theory for quite a number of years now...

Marianna

>You seem to be reacting like the closed clique of archaeologists who refuse to even read the book, which I found entirely convincing.

not at all. my reaction was to reading the two links, which I found entirely unconvincing. ::shrug::

Dear tsuwm: I read the book very carefully. Naturally more of his arguments were presented there. I did not find a single argument I could refute. His style unfortunately was a bit reminiscent of some zealots and cranks. And to my satisfaction he anwered any reasonable objction to his theory. Marianna remembers reading a book about one of the blocks being broken open an unmistakeable signs of its having been cast being found. And it explains how the logistics of the casting theory make much more sense than the idea of hauling all those blocks from miles away, hoisting them hundreds of feet up from the river, and hauling them up a slope to final position. I do not see how any reasonable person who read Davidovitz' book could fail to accept his arguments.

well, I haven't read his book, but then it might not be worth my while, seeing as how I'm just an ol' nullifidian.

Dear tsuwm: Marianna sent me a very long PM about the Pyramid problem written by an authority in the field. I quote only the punch line:

I favour Morris' & Davidovits' theory simply because there is so much more
evidence supporting it.

the guilty sense of dissipated sinfulness which followed pretty much approximated what I now suppose (from books I have read of course) post-coital tristesse to be

That's what I love about this Board. I make a subtly suggestive and erudite inquiry about a linguistically beguiling subject, and the thread immediately unravels into an arid discussion on - wait for it - cement.

Atlantis, Mu

One of the best books I've read on Atlantis, Jazzo, was Charles's Berlitz's The Mystery of Atlantis, a comprehensive exploration of every theory ever proposed that still leaves the door open at the end. A fascinating read.

And, wwh, I found James Churchward's series of books on Mu, The Lost Continent of Mu, The Sacred Symbols of Mu, etc.to be intriguing and well-researched. Certainly not the scribblings of some money-hungry crackpot scientist at the turn of the 20th century, by any means! He was definitely on to something. I would recommend Churchward's books to anybody.

Personally, I believe the true knowledge of these ancient, mythical, and mysterious kingdoms (or, at least, the true clues as to how their legends arose) was destroyed with so much other irreplaceable wisom of the ancient world when the Library of Alexandria was torched, all for one day's act of war. How sad and infuriating. Who knows, perhaps the secrets to the roots of alchemy (even to The Philosopher's Stone) were lost that day! Once the written works were gone the High Priests would keep the knowledge to themselves, as was the custom then, and not pass it along to the common people, or even to the ruling class...they passed it only to other High Priests of the same sect, until, eventually, it went to the grave with them.

I find the theory of the manufacturing of the Pyramid blocks fascinating and extremely plausible...moreso than the vision of multitudes hauling this huge tonnage vast distances. I'll have to delve into it more!

extremely plausible...moreso than the vision of multitudes hauling this huge tonnage vast distances

Scuse me? Hate to break in on this fascinating discussion, but a small particle of elementary physics still applies in these crackpot alternate universes: mortar/concrete = solids + water + evaporation. Therefore any fabricated or cast blockwork mass will have entailed bringing a greater initial mass to the construction site, not a lesser!

mortar/concrete...bringing a greater initial mass to the worksite

Sure, mav...but they could have broken it up into smaller quantities to haul it in wagonloads, instead of having to maneuver those huge, awkward, heavy blocks of stone from vast, or even short, distances.

these crackpot alternate universes

So the pyramids are just an illusion?

However, there can be no doubt that the technology to conduct heavy haulage over long distances existed a very long time ago. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that the monliths of Stonehenge are made of concrete - indeed, the stone of which they are definitely made has been indentified as coming from mav's back yard, (relatively speaking, of course ) which is over a hundred miles away, I would guess.

Is there any other evidence of the knowledge of concrete technology in ancient times?

So the pyramids are just an illusion?

No. The only illusion I notice is the desperate search for improbable 'answers' to questions that don't really exist. All around the globe, from every age of mankind's history, there are vast monoliths raised by the power we exert as hive creatures with individual brains. That's what we do.

>I do not see how any reasonable person who read Davidovitz' book could fail to accept his arguments.
"I favour Morris' & Davidovits' theory simply because there is so much more evidence supporting it."

to me, that sounds like a very condescending attitude.
e.g., here's another reading:
http://www.catchpenny.org/theories.html

Thanks for that rational examination, tsuwm. It served to confirm my faith as a fully-paid up nullifidian

Dear tsuwm: I solemnly swear I do not regard myself sufficiently endowed with wisdom to be " condescending" to any Board member, much less to you whom I cheerfully regard as better qualified than I am. I simply meant that I read the book carefully, and was impressed with the completeness with which he covered all of the questions that might be reasonably asked. Too bad the book is not readily available, and that so many of the pertinent sites have been removed from Yahoo.

vast monoliths raised by the power we exert as hive creatures

Most noteably the Easter Island monoltihs... now there's a curious dilemma, since they hardly had the manpower on those small, sparsely populated islands to exert the power to raise them! Oh, well, then it must have been the space people, right mav?