http://www.twinkiesproject.com/

....and of course this last article is highly coded out by ill cult programmers...I suppose that the main theme is this...when you talk about what they do...they are simply RAPISTS and TORTURERS of CHILDREN and so when I call what they did (and probably still do) 'programming' - that is to give it a false 'academic/scientific' note:

http://www.twinkiesproject.com/rebuttals.html

Attempted Rebuttals
Okay, well, it would seem that, flying in the face of our extreme laziness, this T.W.I.N.K.I.E.S. thing is not simply static. Oh nooooo! You all have to e-mail us about whatever it is you do, and sometimes, gosh darnit, that response deserves a response, and so on, recursively, until we all get lives, or die, or whatever.

The point being, or if there wasn't a point, then something we would really like to point out is that we won't sit idly by and let you say some of these things. Or rather, we will quite happily sit idly by for extended periods of time, at times stopping to think, "Hey, we disagree!" But then sometimes we think, "Let's do something about that," and then we think, "No, let's just write another web page!"

That, in general, is what this page is all about.

(Note: The normal protocol of formal debates, in which the term 'rebuttal' actually means something, will, hopefully, be largely ignored on this page. So sue us. We were both in band in high school, and still probably think (albeit less vocally) that debate is for weenies).





You said: "Your title suggests that Twinkies are inorganic. Yet most of the major ingredients (oils, sugars, and wheat) are organic. What gives?"

We said: Well, er, uh...sure, they say "wheat", but we think in reality they used "Wheet(tm)", the chemically synthesized substitute. Yeah. Plus, I mean, if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, it's a duck, right? And Twinkies don't look or sound like ducks, right? And ducks are clearly organic, right? Ipso facto, Twinkies are inorganic. (Please don't rebutt about sets and subsets...thank you) Finally, to conclude, Twinkies just don't act organic...sure, organic things may go into Twinkies, but does that mean that they come out? Based on our findings, I'd have to say a resounding "No!" with really cool echo effects and stuff like that.





You continued: "To further test the solubility properties, why not use a series of organic solvents of a wide range of polarities? I would suggest carbon tetrachloride, toluene, chloroform, dichloromethane, diethyl ether, acetone, and methanol."

To which we pondered: Shoot...wouldn't you know it, we're fresh out of all of those except acetone, and I think the cat urinated in that recently, so it's not really usable anymore. We used the rest last week when we ran out of ginger ale at our party and, well, you know, had to make more drinks. Oh well. All work and no play and all that, you know.





You said: "Speaking as a mechanical engineer, I think we could all benefit from a "structural integrity" test on said Twinkies. I would suggest experiments such as "ultimate compressive load" tests, "tensile strength" tests, "moment (bending)" tests, and so on."

To which one of us said: Unfortunately, while at Rice, I received a C+ in an introductory MechE class. Some may argue that this had as much to do with such arbitrary variables as "my class attendance", "percentage of time spent awake when uncharacteristically attending class" and "hours spent simultaneously studying and cursing self for neither attending class nor staying awake when I did" as with the subject itself, but if there's one thing I obviously haven't learned, it's how to deal with such large systems of variables, which, I am told, is what this whole mess is about. No offense to you and your ilk, but it just wasn't fun, so in honor of my having made it out of that class alive, we here at Twinkies HQ are banning all MechE tests indefinitely.

Sorry. I really wouldn't mind living the rest of my life without hearing the word "moment" used except in simple sentences like "just a moment" or some such.

You know.





You ranted: "the haikus were pretty stupid. have some more imagination. the last 2 were pretty cool though"

To which we pointed out, rather predictably:
you go to our page
a page of Twinkie "science"
and read our haiku

you expect to see
quality poetry from
Twinkie scientists?!

and now you mail us
just to complain about it
to show us you're cool?!

oh come on now, please
have some imagination
yourself...it's for fun!

lovingly sent by
the one that they call Stadler
Todd Stadler, that is






You, and half the people who mail us, asked, ever so cleverly: "Would Zingers [yellow frosted and red coconut-sprinkled] fare as well under the same rigorous testing inflicted at Rice on Twinkies? ... Do the Twinkie look-alikes demand equal time? ... What about testing Ding-Dongs? ... So will you advance to TastyKakes? ... How about Ding-Dongs? ... You might want to experiment with other Hostess products (like Ding Dongs or Sno-Balls) and compare results. ... Is it possible to get the same results with Chocodiles as with Twinkies? ... I'd be quite interested to see how a chocolate cupcake or a Suzy Q would stand up to the radiation test ... We were interested in conducting tests similar to your T.W.I.N.K.I.E. tests on Gummi Bear subjects ... Did you ever think about trying your experiments on Oreo cookies? ... Ever consider doing the same to a piece of Spam? ... Will there be tests on other foods/cakes? ... I was wondering if you had considered doing experiments on other Hostess products. One example could be Ho-Hos (they have creamy filling in common with Twinkies) ..." Ad nauseam et infinitum or whatever...this is just the letters we saved from a couple of weeks ...do you see a theme here?

To which we bitterly and with much restraint did reply: Sigh. Look, it's not funny. Really. It's called the T.W.I.N.K.I.E.S. project. If we did it on something different, why would that be funnier? Stop it. Leave us alone.

To which you, of course, followed up... "How about Ding Dongs, then?"

To which we, through clenched teeth, did say... Ahem. We're serious. Stop it. Leave us alone. Go e-mail Don Rickles with your witty repartee or something.





Nonetheless did you intrepidly continue... "I realize that MIT is not known for its English classes, but correct spelling helps make the sale!"

To which we said...sigh... Look, stop this. We're not selling anything, and we definitely are not from MIT, okay?! We went to Rice. Rice University. In Houston. And, no, in case you were wondering, we're not going to do any more experiments with Ding Dongs. Or Ho-Hos. Rice. Hooty-Hoot. Rice Owls. Sigh.





Then you got downright uppity, noting that... Hmmm...The T.W.I.N.K.I.E.S. page sure is looking a mite corporate nowadays, boys.

To which we, with much outrage, did point out that... Yeah, look, so we've fixed it up after watching it rot for several years. I mean, it was probably time to remove the warning that people use Netscape 1.1N in order to experience the page in its full glory, don't you think? In all fairness, the page is still old-fashioned enough to work on said antiquated browser, or so we assume. No frames, no plug-ins, no streaming this-n-that. Just the same simple wholesome goodness you've come to expect from us here at the T.W.I.N.K.I.E.S. Project. Kind of reminds you of the wholesome goodness one finds in a refreshing pack of Twinkies from Hostess, who, coincidentally, hosts this site. Why not have a Twinkie today - you deserve a treat!





Unswayed by our tasty suggestion, you got belligerent... 'Debate is for weenies'!?!?!? Look Twinkie boys, I thought your site was really cool, but then I read that debate was for weenies. You didn't have to make it personal. Band Geek.

To which we more persuasively pointed out that... Well, at least you didn't belabor the point by arguing. I swear, if we hear "a fortiori" or "a priori" or "ipso facto" or "pro squid nono" or "dachsund qua dachsund" or any other such foreign mumblejumble one more time, we'll just...well, we may just spit! Meanwhile, we will channel these negative energies into a song we have just composed for marimba and clarinet entitled "We are so sad". Let's see debate do that for ya - where is it when you're down and blue? Are ya gonna argue yerself happy? Huh?

Actually, all this arguing is making us rather elated. Huh. Guess we were wrong. Go figure. We can still kick yer butt, if ya wanna fight. (Our gratuitous use of colloquial spellings alone should make you realize we're right brutes!) After all, three years of carrying drums (and, to a lesser degree, the clarinet) around in marching band has made us the ripped studs we are today. Stick that in your habeus corpus and smoke it!

(Note - we know next to nothing about debate. It's probably a fine thing to engage in, but that particular comment was left in as an inside jab against our friend Scott Ruthfield, former author of the Geek Site of the Day, and national debate champion several years running while we were in college. He alone is proof that debate is not for weenies, but when we say that, we weaken our own position and sound all maudlin, so instead we'll just skip straight to the puerile rhetoric - band is grand! We hate debate!)


Comments? Questions? Problems? Inuresis?
Mail us!


Please note: Due to the large volume of mail that we receive, we cannot individually answer all messages. We do read them all though, and answer everything we get around to. Don't try too hard, though, there's nothing more pitiful than that