Recent content by uzziel49

Yep, got the doughnut washer & fixing kit yesterday (figured that if the bolts were rusted up then the fixing bracket probably would be too, so makes sense to replace them all). Thanks for your help John, done plenty of other plumbing stuff in my time but always steered clear of work on toilets...

Just a thought - would a smear of petroleum jelly be an idea for the bolts and wing nuts, keep them from rusting?

Thanks John, I've cut part way through the bolts with a junior hacksaw, access is awkward as you say. So, hopefully, if I can cut through the bolts then I'll be able to re-attach using new bolts and wing nuts. That would certainly be cheaper than a new loo, but you're right that it'll probably...

I've got a bit of a problem with a toilet cistern. Decided to change the syphon as the flush wasn't great (needed several pulls on the lever). Of course, the bolts that tie the cistern to the pan were rusted and needed WD40 to loosen them - fair enough. I got the wing nuts part way loosened, and...

Yep, my bad - I'm a bit tired, been a long day already, typo-itis strikes again :lol: I agree that it's become boring, but I don't like accusations without substantiation. Still don't think I've seen that, and still don't accept that I've put words in your mouth, but let's move on.

Are we going for some kind of record? :lol: I'm not so sure it is still on track, looking back to the OP. But I guess it's closer to it than many threads I've seen elsewhere.

No, I'm not confused. Why is it that when why we disagree, then I'm the one that's confused and not you? :roll: I intended to make a hyptohetical point, you decided it was "far from hyptothetical", I've tried to re-establish the hyptothetical nature of my point but you seem unable to accept...

Sooey, you said :- "I'd already stated there wasn't any, so you stating that there may be is far from hypothetical, to me anyway, and I have the perfect right to ask you to show me some, though I know you can't." That's your assertion that I was saying that there was evidence, and not...

Yep, you repeatedly asked me for an example after I'd suggested that "there may be evidence" (which you seemed to have taken as an assertion by me that there was evidence). We then went on to agree that because none had yet been produced it didn't mean it didn't exist. Not sure where I'm...

Yep, I think you must have. The "hypothetical point for discussion" comment was made when you kept asking me to provide the proof I supposedly said existed - which, of course I didn't say, as already explained.

Sooey, you've probably gathered that I think the same to some of your posts :roll: But you know what? The sun still rose this morning.... :wink: If you wanted to know, you could have just asked :)

But you say that as if only science can provide truth - but to my mind that's a narrow view to have. Only a practitioner of science can tell me the truth? I don't think so, and I've never met a scientist of any discipline who would say so either. Perhaps I misunderstood? BTW sooey, I hope...

:lol:

Only obvious in the light of subsequent experience. At the time the trials were not flawed and were rigorous enough. You have said you'll only take evidence proven by science. Science changes its tune without impunity, the interpretation of fact it provided yesterday will have changed tomorrow...

Soory, how can you defer to science with such a closed mind :?: