The regular website daily stuff (Annoyances, Recipes, Stuff, Thieves, NeighBads etc) will return on September 1st!
So send in your story or thingee or email or postcard! -- Odd Todd PO Box 187 NYC 10014

Friday, July 27, 2007

Sweaty on the Head

So I'm sweaty on the head when it's too hot. I don't like being sweaty on the head. I feel like people look at me like, "Look at the big sweaty head!" Big bald head with the sweaty? Nobody likes that! How am I supposed to talk normal when I'm sweaty on the head!?

Like, last night I was showing a couple cartoons on a stage and talking about them and boom! I was sweaty on the head. Gross! Makes me look nervous and sweaty on the head. And the other day I had a meeting and I rushed to get there and I was sweating on the head and I was like, 'Stop sweating! Nobody likes the sweaty head guy!' Big bald sweaty head walking into a room? An immediate C-!

I'm not sweaty on the head all the time. I feel like it's just a matter of degrees to make me sweaty on the head. Like if it's 86 I'm sweaty on the head but if it's 84 I'm not sweaty on the head. I can feel it.

I don't sweat under my arms at all or anywhere else. It's all sweaty on the head. Like a dog's tongue. But head instead. And I don't like it.

ok bye!

PS. Wait. Why did this fall down again?


Blogger catsnjags said...

Not "SURE" if this would work.. but how about trying underarm anti-perspirant? Of course the way you talk about your big forehead I would advise getting the wide-stick version.

July 27, 2007 11:34 AM  
Anonymous Sam said...

deodoroant on your head doesnt work i have tryed it

July 27, 2007 11:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Not this WTC 7 conspiracy crap again.

July 27, 2007 11:42 AM  
Anonymous G-Man said...

Every time you post some 9/11 conspiracy crap it makes you look stupid, ToDD. We are monitoring you.

July 27, 2007 11:43 AM  
Blogger Jaynut said...

Hi Todd,
My husband has the same problem - REALLY sweaty head. I mean, gross sweaty, all the time. He bought Certain-Dri wipes (not the roll on) applied them at night to his sweaty head, and PRESTO! No more super sweaty head, even after his morning shower. You can also use them on your hands... good luck!

July 27, 2007 11:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Better to have Schweddy brains than Schweddy balls, errrr I would guess :/

-jo :)

July 27, 2007 12:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

growing very weary of the wtc conspiracy. so tired of it.

July 27, 2007 12:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


July 27, 2007 12:57 PM  
Anonymous ALON said...

Get a hat! Not a baseball hat, you'll look like a trucker. Get a nice Panama hat or something! Look like a million bucks!

July 27, 2007 1:07 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i sweat when the weather changes... i can be perfectly fine when it's blazin hot out, but when it starts to cool down, THEN i sweat... how weird. i think i did too many drugs back i the day - idiot.

July 27, 2007 1:45 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the wtc conspiracy stuff is kind of naive...i think it's also pretty insensitive to victims' families and loved ones (i lost a couple of people i cared about on sept 11).

i mean, it's your site, so obviously you have the right to post whatever you want. just giving my 2 cents.

i mean, this site usually is amusing, funny, and upbeat. it's just weird and awkward when there's stuff like this on it, too.

July 27, 2007 1:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wow- I want my 5 minutes of time wasted on that garbage back. I cant believe you would fall for that crap todd. the government couldnt even get bottled water to the superdome after Katrina- you actually think they could pull off a 9/11 cover-up of that magnitude?? you give them WAY too much credit.

July 27, 2007 2:03 PM  
Blogger Shan said...

conspiracy stuff creeps me out

July 27, 2007 2:10 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"unidentified smoke"....... wtf

July 27, 2007 2:54 PM  
Blogger crazy wet americans said...

it's best to get all the sides. maybe it's giving the bush administration too much credit that they could have pulled off a massive conspiracy like that... but it's even more naive to think that they're saints who never lie and never do anything wrong. they just managed an executive order oulawing any "act or acts of violence against the Iraq War Policy"- without the media making any mention of it. we are too obsessed with li-lo. by the way- who do you think will decide what constitutes an "act or acts of violence?" and considering that "acts of violence" are already against the law... what do you think they're trying to outlaw here? i'm only saying you should use all the resources to get all the information and THINK about things. not just take the rhetoric spouted to you and believe it's holy gospel.
what about the video of the manager of building 7 saying "we decided to pull it". just because you're paranoid doesnt mean they're not out to get you. anyone who knows anything about physics is rightly concerned about the "official" version of 9/11.

July 27, 2007 3:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yikes, ToDd, I didn't realize you were one of these types of kooks. I've visited the site for years and missed most of the conspiracy talk. You don't think one of the what would have been hundreds of people who would have had to work a couple of months to set the explosives would have come forth for the right payday? A dying confession. A drunken admission? I'm a therapist, people spill EVERYTHING but hundreds could keep this a secret? I agree with what's already been said, love the site until this stuff. Make a political site if you want to spout nonsense...I come to your site for a different type of nonsense. Best of luck to you.

July 27, 2007 3:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

trust me, I'm the last person to believe anything the Bush admin says- but floating around idiotic conspiracy theories like this is nothing more than a complete waste of time, and it actually takes focus away from the things that people should REALLY be concerned about.

Two MASSIVE 110 STORY BUILDINGS FELL- along with several smaller trade center buildings- in the same vicinity as #7. Why is it so impossible for people lilke you to understand how #7 could have collapsed? Seems pretty cut and dry to us lamens, and you'd be hard pressed to find any engineer who is intimately familiar with the trade center and building #7 will tell you that these theories are nothing but GARBAGE.

Use your time on something more constructive, seriously!

July 27, 2007 4:22 PM  
Blogger crazy wet americans said...

want to talk about constructive. if you were building a 110 story building in the middle of new york city, you're seriously telling me you wouldnt even regard the possibility of something happening to the building and it toppling sideways onto half of manhattan? that you wouldnt put into place a plan to stop that happening? and for people to lump 7 in with 1 and 2, that's ludicrous. no plane hit number 7. no plane hit number 7. and all 3 buildings fell at freefall, into their own footprint, and werent controlled demolitions? riiight. there's your garbage- anyone trying to tell me these FREAKS OF ARCHITECURE all just "happened" to fall in a controlled way. even silence has a price.

July 27, 2007 4:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

two 110 story buildings fall down...i think that would shake the ground enough to collapse a couple more around it

July 27, 2007 6:07 PM  
Anonymous Eddie said...

It looks like you are the ones being naive. How unstable do you think these buildings are? Esspecially the building with the mayor's bunker in it? But WTC #3, #4, #5, and #6 all remain standing, even though they are damaged MORE and are CLOSER to the #1 and #2? Think it about it and don't take the media's word as law!


July 27, 2007 8:16 PM  
Anonymous potato said...

eddie, anything's possible in this world and lots of things go on that us little people will never get the true story on, but let me ask you this... Let's assume for a second that this really was in fact a big giant conspiracy. Two of the largest buildings in the country were completelty destroyed on 9/11. Ditto for buildings 3, 4, 5, and 6 that were next to them. What possible benefit would there be for these conspirators, after all that they had already accomplished, to go to that extra effort to take down a building that most people had never even heard of? It just doesn't make sense.

July 27, 2007 8:58 PM  
Anonymous TexasGirl said...

Okay. I am naive. I have never even heard this kind of WTC conspiracy stuff. Maybe I live in a vaccuum....

Second...Certain Dri works, Todd! I have super sweaty hand and feet and the Certain Dri wipes or roll on work! Put on the night before. Put only a little on, because too much will be itchy. It works wonders. Get at pharmacy/drug store. Really!

July 27, 2007 9:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the anon who tells us all to use our time constructively ... what, you mean like blathering away in commentary sections like this one? Is that using our time constructively?

I am very entertained by all movies, blogs, and animations CONSTRUCTIVELY CREATED by all the conspiracy theorists. They are the ones employing creative energy, while the rest of us just tediously yap away.

July 28, 2007 1:03 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And they need to stop questioning the Pat Tillman thing... It happened like they said it happened in the beginning. Why do people insist on asking ridiculous questions and second-guessing our government which has kept us safe for the last six years? Sheesh people!

July 28, 2007 8:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yea, because covering up a shooting in the middle of a desert and covering up the destruction of several buildings in NY and DC on live TV are pretty much the same thing. The 9/11 cover-up is so simple that even the stupidest administration ever to sit in the White House could pull it off. People that believe this crap should be allowed to do so but they should be encouraged to wear badges announcing it as a warning for the rest of us. Kind of like the way blind people use a white cane. It let's everyone know they are impaired in some way. At least now we know who is gullible enough to buy all that crap on late night infomercials.

July 28, 2007 12:02 PM  
Anonymous Silverstein said...

July 28, 2007 12:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As much as I hate conspiracy theory crap I have to admit I do not understand why building 7 fell straight down.

July 28, 2007 12:23 PM  
Anonymous FEMAs Report said...

* At 9:59 AM (after the South Tower collapse), electrical power to the substations in WTC 7 was shut off.
* Due to a design flaw, generators in WTC 7 started up by themselves.
* Debris from the collapsing North Tower breached a fuel oil pipe in a room in the north side of the building. (This means the debris had to travel across WTC 6 and Vesey Street -- a distance of at least 355 feet -- penetrate the outer wall of WTC 6, and smash through about 50 feet of the building, including a concrete masonry wall.)
* This, and other debris (that also made the journey across Building 6 and Vesey Street), managed to start numerous fires in the building. (Unfortunately, this event did not prompt anyone to turn off the generators.)
* The backup mechanism (that should have shut off the fuel oil pumps when a breach occurred) failed to work, and the fuel oil (diesel) was pumped from the tanks on the ground floor to the fifth floor where it ignited. The pumps emptied the tanks of all 12,000 gallons of fuel.
* The extant fires raised the temperature of the spilled fuel oil to the 140 degrees F required for it to ignite.
* The sprinkler system malfunctioned and failed to extinguish the fire.
* The burning diesel fuel heated trusses to the point where they lost most of their strength, precipitating a total collapse of Building 7.

July 28, 2007 1:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

your diary does not go beyond week 2 pleae fix the link

July 28, 2007 1:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amazing: question statements that defy physics, and you're a conspiracy nut. I'm getting tired of morons telling me that I am.

1.) Questioning the possibility of this occurring as fed to us is NOT disrespectful to the those lost on 9/11. To tell me that it is is a fallacy called 'argumentum ad miseracordium' -- an appeal to pity. In fact, a large number of victims families want an independent investigation of the 9/11 events. But I guess they're kooks whose feelings don't matter, right?

2.) You will not be "hard pressed" to find physicists that tell you the story disseminated by the media is not feasible. You will not find it difficult to find pilots with decades of military and commercial experience who admit that there most professionals couldn't pull off the maneuvers allegedly executed by the flunky Cessna pilots. This is off course, if you're only watching FauxNews, CNN, ABC etc...

3. Steel structures do not collapse from fire alone! Steel is a fantastic conductor of heat, which is why it is used in heatsinks. Effectively, these buildings have a built-in heat sink at the core! Such collapse has purportedly only happened 3 times in history: WTC1, WTC2, WTC7. Kinda of merits an investigation as to how, doesn't it?

4. Building 7 was a newer construct than the 1960's-built towers. I've read erroneous reports claiming that the towers were on the verge of collapsing soon anyway. Even if you take that as fact, it doesn't account for the collapse of the more modern WTC7.

5. I challenge someone to find a credible source to back up the official story. Stop using Popular Mechanics--it is not an unbiased consortium of Mechanical Engineers, as its title might lead you to believe!

The issue here is that so many people aren't ready to accept the implications of conclusions based on science and logic might entail.

And if you believe that George Bush is a well-meaning cowboy from Texas who believes in gun rights, look a little deeper. That family got it's up and comings through laundering money and financing the Nazi party. Our government has been hijacked because of the negligence of its people. Freedom isn't free -- it requires people to know that tyranny is the default. It requires people to study how tyranny acquires control of people. Can anyone even tell me about the Reichstag building, or is that going to far back into history?

July 28, 2007 1:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Amen Brother

July 28, 2007 1:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"3. Steel structures do not collapse from fire alone!"

I am so tired of this ridiculous statement. Tell that to anyone here in the Charleston area that steel doesn't collapse due to fire. Or you could just drive by the steel structure that collapsed and killed 9 firefighters. I guess the Bush administration created that fire to cover its tracks on 9/11!

July 28, 2007 3:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey anonymous, learn to spell before you spout. "lamens" what is that? I believe it's laymen's. Let's get back to the fun stuff tOdd please

July 28, 2007 4:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If it makes you feel any better, Todd, I think most people get sweaty head. But for those who are not follicly challenged like you and me, it gets soaked into the hair a bit and covers it up.

Living in Arizona, I deal with sweaty bald head all the time. I don't worry too much about keeps me cool.

July 28, 2007 6:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I actually admire Todd for continually posting these reminders. It's easy just to shrug shoulders at this and write it off and something this odd should't qualify for that action.

July 28, 2007 8:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is the wackos that keep going on and on about how the WTC collapse defies physics yet none of them seem to know the first thing about physics themselves. Here is something to ask yourself - How do they form metal into all those fancy shapes like steel beams, nuts, and bolts. Oh that is right. They heat it up. And what happens to metal that is heated to extreme temperatures? It gets weaker. So what happens when a metal support structure is heated up from a jet fuel fire? It weakens to the point that is can't hold the weight of the dozens of floors above it and collapses. Then we have this little thing with gravity, inertia, and kinetic energy causing all that weight to crash down and over-stress the lower sections causing them to fail. It is actually very plausible physically. The real conspiracy here is how so many of you people were able to graduate high school and maybe even college.

July 28, 2007 9:41 PM  
Anonymous vagina said...

This is not about the towers this is about Building 7 and your theory does not apply.

July 28, 2007 9:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It isn't a theory. It's laws of physics.

So you are having confusion about the fact that when several thousand tons of debris drops from several hundred feet it tends to spread a bit and damages other buildings? How about the fact that when that much matter drops that fast, a shock wave of wind and debris is created?

July 29, 2007 2:23 AM  
Anonymous vagina said...

There is no mention of debris or shock wave of wind as being a factor in any report explaining the collapse of 7 but if it makes you sleep better you can continue believing your imaginary physics.

July 29, 2007 3:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll go on with my "imaginary" physics which are proven out countless times every single day all around the world and you keep on with the ridiculous idea that some of the stupidest people on the planet (excluding you of course) pulled off the most elaborate conspiracies ever. I am sure they are also responsible for the Tsunami, the latest earthquake in Japan, and the Hellas Basin dust storm on Mars.

July 29, 2007 1:05 PM  
Anonymous vagina said...

I don't understand why you would blame the collapse of 7 on debris and "a shock wave of wind" when nobody with any real facts or information has ever said anything like that.

When you can find information that plausibly explains that building falling straight down please post it here.

I will stick to these facts in the meantime:

The official explanations of WTC 7's collapse are problematic for several reasons:

* Fire has never caused any steel-framed high-rise building to collapse in any manner, let alone with the vertical precision of Building 7's destruction.

* WTC 7 fell straight down, which necessitated that all of the load-bearing columns be broken at the same moment. Inflicting such damage with the precision required to prevent a building from toppling and damaging adjacent buildings is what the science of controlled demolition is all about. No random events, such as the debris damage and fires envisioned by the official reports, or explosions from fuel tanks proposed by some, could be expected to result in such a tidy and complete collapse.

* WTC 7 fell precipitously, at a rate closely approaching the speed of gravitational free-fall. That necessitated the sudden removal of structure near ground level that would have impeded its descent.

* The collapse of WTC 7 exhibited all of the features of a standard controlled demolition. To suppose that a cause other than controlled demolition could produce an event with all of the features uniquely characteristic of controlled demolition defies logic.

July 29, 2007 4:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey tOdd, How about a collio hat to help hide the issue? Nothin too flashy, but maybe nicer than a baseball hat.

Good luck with your head.

July 29, 2007 4:21 PM  
Anonymous mr. frodo said...

i don't believe in conspiracies but i do think it's funny that people who are so adamant about denying the possibility of a conspiracy ignore other lies the government has told us.

the air is safe.

there are wmds.

nobody could predict the attacks of 9/11.

saddam is linked to 9/11.

saddam tried to buy yellow cake.

pat tillman was shot in a fire fight.

come on.

believe whatever you want but don't be a jackass and trust what the government says.

those are the only STUPID people out there.

July 29, 2007 4:43 PM  
Blogger Ann said...

tOdd, thanks for posting the video about Tower 7.

What I find unsettling is how quickly "people" write these "you're crazy to believe in conspiracies" posts on, like, every single site on the web the second stuff like this appears. And they always sound exactly the same: derisive, eye-rolling and with just the same touch of "authoritative" or "insider" knowledge.

Practically nobody I know takes the events of 9/11 at face value. I certainly don't. These

August 3, 2007 3:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ugh, are you part of the WTC tinfoil hat crowd?

I repeat. Ugh.

August 22, 2007 12:54 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home