Photos From History Thread

  • Thread starter Liquid
  • 1,140 comments
  • 127,422 views
Pete05
The real Coca Cola, not Pepsi, Dr Pepper or any other imitation, is the only mixer I'll use.

Drinkers of neat, unspoiled spirits will say, Coke is as bad as any, but IMO there's only one mixer.
To use the others is like taking your tongue & palate on a cheap, double date McDonalds.

As a drink by itself, yeah, I can have bad days where I might do 600 - 1200ml, especially in summer. Call it a moment of weakness. It's also a matter of what the shop has to offer. If that's all they have in the fizzy section, them I'm kind of backed into a corner.

I did try and make a change for the better a few years ago by greatly reducing the amount of sugar in my fizzy drink choices. Anything has got to be better than 16 teaspoons in a 375ml can, right? Mineral Water with added fruit juice such as a Schweppes with 50% less sugar, has got to be better than doing bugger all.

Did Coke still have 'Mexican marching powder' added to it in the 50s?
When did they stop that?
Click to expand...
I think the ‘special ingredient’ was omitted before the 50’s, but don’t quote me.

When I toured China I always had a Pepsi or Sprite bungeed to my luggage, and I’d grab a Red Bull if it was a particularly rough day.

The last few years I switched to Schweppes because they do a great lime soda and it comes in sugar free, too. But without the sugar it’s just lacking that spark, so I gave up on pop for the most part.

I genuinely think of pop as sugary poison now, and would much rather have a beer for my carbonated needs. ;)
 
Last edited:
W3H5
I think the ‘special ingredient’ was omitted before the 50’s, but don’t quote me.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure they still use the coca plant, but remove all of the 'special' properties somehow. You can still get straight coca leaf in parts of South America though.
 
W3H5
I think the ‘special ingredient’ was omitted before the 50’s, but don’t quote me.

When I toured China I always had a Pepsi or Sprite bungeed to my luggage, and I’d grab a Red Bull if it was a particularly rough day.

The last few years I switched to Schweppes because they do a great lime soda and it comes in sugar free, too. But without the sugar it’s just lacking that spark, so I gave up on pop for the most part.

I genuinely think of pop as sugary poison now, and would much rather have a beer for my carbonated needs. ;)
Click to expand...
I forgot to add earlier how people pop an eyeball of the 16 teaspoons of sugar in a 375ml can.
Well, Pepsi beats that by adding another just for hood measure.

Your right Shem, Schweppes do great mixer drinks but having tried the sugar-free variety myself, it's way too bland.

Lastly, I will always go for a frothy bottle of suds over 'pop' anyday. Can't do if I'm working though.
We have to have .00 BAC.
They tend to frown if you do that while driving so, that's where I get caught on the non-beer express to sugartown.
 
Pete05
I forgot to add earlier how people pop an eyeball of the 16 teaspoons of sugar in a 375ml can.
Well, Pepsi beats that by adding another just for hood measure.

Your right Shem, Schweppes do great mixer drinks but having tried the sugar-free variety myself, it's way too bland.

Lastly, I will always go for a frothy bottle of suds over 'pop' anyday. Can't do if I'm working though.
We have to have .00 BAC.
They tend to frown if you do that while driving so, that's where I get caught on the non-beer express to sugartown.
Click to expand...
Tough ride. I imagine the regulations there are similar to the UK.

Here there’s zero tolerance on DUI, but with nobody to enforce it, half the traffic is drunk. :(
 
W3H5
Tough ride. I imagine the regulations there are similar to the UK.

Here there’s zero tolerance on DUI, but with nobody to enforce it, half the traffic is drunk. :(
Click to expand...
This wide brown land is made up of 7 States and Territories with different rules for each of them for the most part.
What is uniform from coast to coast, top to bottom is the .00 BAC rule for heavy vehicles.
I think that's brilliant, but they don't do enough testing.
The current number one problem within the industry, is ice/meth heads running the gauntlet and putting everyone else at risk.

I want to see two things quick smart.
A. Uniform rules across the country
B. The inability to start a vehicle without providing a sample, proving you're drug free. They've managed to make that compulsory for drink drivers in my State. If they can do that, the tech must be available to do it for drug offenders.
 
Pete05
B. The inability to start a vehicle without providing a sample, proving you're drug free.
Click to expand...
I don't understand this. How does it work in practice? To what/whom are you providing a sample of what on what basis?
 
I was going to go into detail about it, but then I realised I k know **** all about hauling and decided ignorance is bliss.
 
HU1NT63.jpg

8rUyt9J.jpg


Old-timey wrestling posters, no date given but at least 1949 to early 50's.
 
Last edited:
TexRex
I don't understand this. How does it work in practice? To what/whom are you providing a sample of what on what basis?
Click to expand...
If convicted of a drink driving offence in my State, an alcohol lock device must be fitted to the offender's car at their expense, and maintained at their expense. Currently over AUS$1,000 per service.
This device requires a sample of the driver's breathe blown into a tube before it will allow the car to be started.

They haven't quite worked out how to stop the offender getting a mate/Family providing the sample yet, but with DNA developments advancing all the time, that can't be far away.

How that tech would work for drugs, is along the same lines as the 'lollipop' they currently use to do roadside tests.
Because false readings roadside are still possible, backed up by lab test results as the final judgement, a higher sample level would have to be set.

Just like the drinkers, it wouldn't be fitted unless there was a conviction recorded.
 
Pete05
If convicted of a drink driving offence in my State, an alcohol lock device must be fitted to the offender's car at their expense, and maintained at their expense. Currently over AUS$1,000 per service.
This device requires a sample of the driver's breathe blown into a tube before it will allow the car to be started.

They haven't quite worked out how to stop the offender getting a mate/Family providing the sample yet, but with DNA developments advancing all the time, that can't be far away.

How that tech would work for drugs, is along the same lines as the 'lollipop' they currently use to do roadside tests.
Because false readings roadside are still possible, backed up by lab test results as the final judgement, a higher sample level would have to be set.

Just like the drinkers, it wouldn't be fitted unless there was a conviction recorded.
Click to expand...
Gotcha. I wasn't aware you were referring specifically to those drivers with a prior offense. My initial read of that was, "Wow, that's incredibly invasive."
 
TexRex
Gotcha. I wasn't aware you were referring specifically to those drivers with a prior offense. My initial read of that was, "Wow, that's incredibly invasive."
Click to expand...
100% with you on that.

When people learn of the costs involved in having a device fitted to their car, it should be enough to deter those with a basic understanding of maths.
Some just don't get it though.
This may seem draconian and was reserved for the repeat offenders, but when the innocent get maimed or wiped out by them, something has to be done.
 
Pete05
100% with you on that.

When people learn of the costs involved in having a device fitted to their car, it should be enough to deter those with a basic understanding of maths.
Some just don't get it though.
This may seem draconian and was reserved for the repeat offenders, but when the innocent get maimed or wiped out by them, something has to be done.
Click to expand...
When you violate the rights of others, you may be deprived of your rights by force of law. The only legitimate function of law is the preservation of rights. When the law fails to preserve rights, law is illegitimate and only violates rights.
 
Last edited:
Sadly, the only real explanation on both sides of that are that addictions are addictions.

And if someone refuses to get out of an addiction, they can do and be rather stupid.... :(
 
Pete05
They haven't quite worked out how to stop the offender getting a mate/Family providing the sample yet, but with DNA developments advancing all the time, that can't be far away.
Click to expand...
That’s not actually true. In South Australia, you need to provide a sample to start the vehicle, and at random intervals while driving. It might be once in an hour, or two times in 5 minutes.

An interstate B Double truck driver I worked with (who lost his license for drink driving in a car) had an interlock fitted to his work truck. He said it would go off constantly, and if a sample wasn’t provided, it would give a countdown and had the ability to disable the engine. (Which would be unbelievably dangerous)

The mechanic who serviced his interlock was certain he’d set some kind of record for most samples provided over a 12 month period. From memory it was deep in the thousands.
 
Hayden
That’s not actually true. In South Australia, you need to provide a sample to start the vehicle, and at random intervals while driving. It might be once in an hour, or two times in 5 minutes.

An interstate B Double truck driver I worked with (who lost his license for drink driving in a car) had an interlock fitted to his work truck. He said it would go off constantly, and if a sample wasn’t provided, it would give a countdown and had the ability to disable the engine. (Which would be unbelievably dangerous)

The mechanic who serviced his interlock was certain he’d set some kind of record for most samples provided over a 12 month period. From memory it was deep in the thousands.
Click to expand...
You are 100% correct @Hayden and thank you for posting the details I forgot to include.

The Truckie is absolutely on the money too with how dangerous it is to even think about cutting the engine in a heavy vehicle. You would simply lose ALL CONTROL and become a passenger.

That's dangerous enough in a car and I would like to put the Judge/Magistrate through that exact experience to see the terror on their face & make them see the error of their decision.

Again, it points out just how much of an inconvenience the whole process is.
 
My dad was in the Air Force, and went out and picked up a bit of radiactive glass formed by the explosion. He showed it to me once. I don't know where it is at the moment.
 
TRLWNC7396
My dad was in the Air Force, and went out and picked up a bit of radiactive glass formed by the explosion. He showed it to me once. I don't know where it is at the moment.
Click to expand...
Lead box, hopefully.

Do you remember if it glows in the dark?
 
It was a small piece, less than an inch in any dimension (and was barely 4 or 5 mm (1/8") thick).

But I have no idea where the box is that he kept it in. Maybe mom threw it away after he passed.
 
Kitchen Debate

Leader of the Soviet Union Nikita Khrushchev and US Vice President Richard Nixon verbally spar through interpreters around a model of a US kitchen at the 1959 American National Exhibition in Moscow.

Future Soviet leader Leonid Brezhnev is to the right of Nixon in the first photo.

1959_Khrushchev%2C_Nixon%2C_Brezhnev.jpg


Khrushchev and Nixon debated four times during the exhibition.

Kitchen_debate.jpg
 
1976: Incumbent candidate Gerald Ford in San Antonio, Texas eating a tamale without first removing the corn husk in which it was cooked. Ford would later lose Texas in the general election and not secure a second term as president.

27foodpolgraphix-ford-superJumbo.jpg
 

Latest Posts

Back