I was watching one of those History Channel specials the other night, just about 10-15 minutes really, about the "puff the magic dragon" gun ships from the Vietnam days.  They showed a bit of the electronic warfare officer's station in an old clip, and lo and behold the guy raised his left hand as he worked and revealed a Zodiac Sea Wolf 20 ATM, seemingly identical to the one Butch sold me:

(https://www.vintagezodiacs.com/zforums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv235%2FZaphod04%2FSea%2520Wolf%252020%2520ATM%2FZodiacSeaWolf_7-4-09_03.jpg&hash=5ad9d197d17fafc9407fa83eef83df2b282c45e4)

(https://www.vintagezodiacs.com/zforums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv235%2FZaphod04%2FSea%2520Wolf%252020%2520ATM%2FP5160684.jpg&hash=43f8840c93db0b314ed2e3e60045de3176a09bf2)

(https://www.vintagezodiacs.com/zforums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv235%2FZaphod04%2FSea%2520Wolf%252020%2520ATM%2FP5160685.jpg&hash=2579cd51bcf7b6add7185e9d3a73258a3c00a68a)

So here's a question:  if it's spotted in a film from the 1960s, and so current for the time it was captured on film, is it still a vintage Zodiac???

Kind of cool to spot one in use, in any event.

A bit of a paradox, really, or so it seems at first...

Einstein's not around to help us out, so I'll do the best I can:

As the Pythagorean Theorem of Vintage Relativity Divided by Zero Cubed states, multiplied by Filmed Zodiac Sea Wolf (_FZ_SW) when solving for not Vintage Zodiac (Z_V):


(((A²+B²=C²)*(E=MC²))÷0³)*_FZ_SW ≠ Z_V = I_T


Since a Vintage Zodiac (Z_V) is a tangible item (I_T), it cannot equal zero, hence the Filmed Zodiac Sea Wolf (_FZ_SW) in question cannot be a Vintage Zodiac (Z_V).

Or more simply put, since the watch appeared in 1960's footage, it's the footage that's vintage, not the watch.

However, in the event that the particular watch filmed (_FZ_SW) is currently ticking all in one piece (possibly even in one of our own collections), it would now be considered a _VZ_SW.  If not, lets just hope all it's vintage parts (P_V) are living on keeping our _VZ_SW's running!


Unless of course, the footage was in Technicolor (F_T).  That changes everything... ;)

Rey de la Playa,
          One of the best responses I have ever seen. Bien hecho caballero!

Quote from: reydelaplaya on November 03, 2009, 01:58:27 AM
A bit of a paradox, really, or so it seems at first...

Einstein's not around to help us out, so I'll do the best I can:

As the Pythagorean Theorem of Vintage Relativity Divided by Zero Cubed states, multiplied by Filmed Zodiac Sea Wolf (_FZ_SW) when solving for not Vintage Zodiac (Z_V):


(((A²+B²=C²)*(E=MC²))÷0³)*_FZ_SW ≠ Z_V = I_T


Since a Vintage Zodiac (Z_V) is a tangible item (I_T), it cannot equal zero, hence the Filmed Zodiac Sea Wolf (_FZ_SW) in question cannot be a Vintage Zodiac (Z_V).

Or more simply put, since the watch appeared in 1960's footage, it's the footage that's vintage, not the watch.

However, in the event that the particular watch filmed (_FZ_SW) is currently ticking all in one piece (possibly even in one of our own collections), it would now be considered a _VZ_SW.  If not, lets just hope all it's vintage parts (P_V) are living on keeping our _VZ_SW's running!


Unless of course, the footage was in Technicolor (F_T).  That changes everything... ;)

ROTFLMFAO!!  Dude, you just ain't right!  :P :P   Badfish is dead on, that is one of the absolute best responses I've ever seen too!