Welcome to KleenKuip.com's Professional Carpet Cleaners Discussion Forum!

  
Carpet Cleaning Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Carpet Cleaners Discussion > Tile and Grout and Hard Surface Floor Cleaning Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - How to clean an old shower floor?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Commercial Floor Cleaning Machines

How to clean an old shower floor?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
lilypotter View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 26/June/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 5
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lilypotter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: How to clean an old shower floor?
    Posted: 24/July/2009 at 6:43am
We have a shower floor that's 10 years old, made of fiberglass. It's got a textured bottom with a kind of starburst design in it, and some of the grooves have darkened. What's even more unattractive is that the floor itself is no longer really white, and none of the usual cleaning supplies have been effective. Can anyone suggest something? Thank you!
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Mark McMaster View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 22/October/2007
Location: Trenton,Ontario
Status: Offline
Points: 170
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mark McMaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24/July/2009 at 6:53am
Try a Mr Clean magic eraser
Don't take your organs to heaven.....
Heaven knows we need them here

www.mcmastertile.com
Back to Top
nightrider View Drop Down
Marketing Master
Marketing Master


Joined: 12/March/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 4656
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nightrider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24/July/2009 at 1:45pm
If you scrub or scour the finish you might get it somewhat clean but will dirty in a short while after some usage, because you would have taken the protective coating off. If the colour is a yellow or dark beige/yellow that is mostly soap scum and foot oil. Try a butyl based degreaser , let sit for 5 minutes, gently scrub with non abbrasive mops, better have a good ventilation or hold your breath for  as long as possible, rince with cold water then hot when most of the butyl is gone. You might have to repeat 2 or 3 times
 
I had this problem at one of my contracts, and just gave up and recommended a new shower install, the cost of labour and chemicals just isn't worth it. I got the contract to build a new larger shower, and all worked out well. Ceramic all around, including floor.
 
                                                      Nightrider
Back to Top
lilypotter View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 26/June/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 5
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote lilypotter Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/July/2009 at 4:03am
Thank you for the quick response and ideas you people have provided me with. I agree to the point that the dirt on my floor is soap scum. Surely will give a try. Saturday i started Google research for the best cleaning supplies and studied conventional cleaning supplies contain toxic chemicals that negatively affect every system in our body. Here is the article that tells about effects and alternatives to conventional cleaning supplies : http://www.sustainlane.com/reviews/ten-products-you-should-ban-from-your-home-forever/YSDLWL22O1U2SBV7D13YUD3KXWOR. It helped me a lot.
Back to Top
nightrider View Drop Down
Marketing Master
Marketing Master


Joined: 12/March/2004
Status: Offline
Points: 4656
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nightrider Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/July/2009 at 5:47am
Let me be very clear when I say that I have a degree in Chemestry and all this " GREEN " way of thinking has gotten out of hand with the intent of making money and not saving the planet. Plastic bags went from 700$ a ton down to 70 cents..........so companies don't recycle or want to pick them up any more.............alum. dropped so did copper and all other metals. Steel went from 150$ / ton to 35 $ / ton so recyling of steel is loosing demand..............Now as far as the chemicals..............NO NEED to worry or panic........................THE DOSE MAKES THE POISON.
 
lET ME GIVE YOU ANOTHER 10 THINGS THAT SHOULD BE BANNED FROM EVERY HOUSE THAT IS FAR MOR DANGEROUS AND DAMAGING.
 
CIGARETTES
 
COFFEE
 
ALCOHOL
 
ALL SOFT DRINKS AND ENERGY DRINKS
 
DOGS AND CATS.....ESPECIALLY CAT LITTER
 
SUGAR
 
SALT
 
MILK
 
ALL AEROSOL PRODUCTS
 
WOOD BURNING STOVES
 
Like I said.....ONLY THE DOSE MAKES THE POISON. LET'S NOT BE A SOCIETY OF IGNORANT BLIND FOLLOWING OTHER BLIND IGNORAMUS.
 
                                                   Nightrider
 
 
Back to Top
Ken_Is_OK View Drop Down
Carpet Cleaning Specialist
Carpet Cleaning Specialist


Joined: 13/February/2007
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 523
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ken_Is_OK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27/July/2009 at 7:52am
Originally posted by lilypotter lilypotter wrote:

Thank you for the quick response and ideas you people have provided me with. I agree to the point that the dirt on my floor is soap scum. Surely will give a try. Saturday i started Google research for the best cleaning supplies and studied conventional cleaning supplies contain toxic chemicals that negatively affect every system in our body. Here is the article that tells about effects and alternatives to conventional cleaning supplies : http://www.sustainlane.com/reviews/ten-products-you-should-ban-from-your-home-forever/YSDLWL22O1U2SBV7D13YUD3KXWOR. It helped me a lot.
spamDead
Back to Top
Mark McMaster View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 22/October/2007
Location: Trenton,Ontario
Status: Offline
Points: 170
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mark McMaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19/August/2009 at 6:45pm
 Best thing to do is hire a PROFESSIONAL!.  I was very vague with my first answer as I was trying to figure if you were a pro or what. Ask 10 people and you will get 10 different answers. I don't do carpets so I don't know but my profession is hard surface.
 I guarantee that I can get it back to new tho.
Don't take your organs to heaven.....
Heaven knows we need them here

www.mcmastertile.com
Back to Top
Ljunki View Drop Down
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 28/September/2009
Status: Offline
Points: 5
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ljunki Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28/September/2009 at 1:59am

Language and Thought

    by Dan Slobin of the University of California, Berkeley No one would disagree with the claim that language and thought interact in many significant ways. There is great disagreement, however, about the proposition that each specific language has its own influence on the thought and action of its speakers. On the one hand, anyone who has learned more than one language is struck by the many ways in which languages differ from one another. But on the other hand, we expect human beings everywhere to have similar ways of experiencing the world.  (maple story mesos)

Comparisons of different languages can lead one to pay attention to 'universals'--the ways in which all languages are similar, and to 'particulars' --the ways in which each individual language, or type of language, is special, even unique. Linguists and other social scientists interested in universals have formulated theories to describe and explain human language and human language behavior in general terms as species-specific capacities of human beings. However, the idea that different languages may influence thinking in different ways has been present in many cultures and has given rise to many philosophical treatises. Because it is so difficult to pin down effects of a particular language on a particular thought pattern, this issue remains unresolved. It comes in and out of fashion and often evokes considerable energy in efforts to support or refute it.

Relativity and Determinism 

There are two problems to confront in this arena: linguistic relativity and linguistic determinism. Relativity is easy to demonstrate. In order to speak any language, you have to pay attention to the meanings that are grammatically marked in that language. For example, in English it is necessary to mark the verb to indicate the time of occurrence of an event you are speaking about: It's raining; It rained; and so forth. In Turkish, however, it is impossible to simply say, 'It rained last night'. This language, like many American Indian languages, has more than one past tense, depending on one's source of knowledge of the event. In Turkish, there are two past tenses--one to report direct experience and the other to report events that you know about only by inference or hearsay. Thus, if you were out in the rain last night, you will say, 'It rained last night' using the past-tense form that indicates that you were a witness to the rain; but if you wake up in the morning and see the wet street and garden, you are obliged to use the other past-tense form--the one that indicates that you were not a witness to the rain itself.  wow gold

Differences of this sort have fascinated linguists and anthropologists for centuries. They have reported hundreds of facts about 'exotic' languages, such as verbs that are marked or chosen according to the shape of an object that is being handled (Navajo) or for the relative ages of speaker and hearer (Korean). Such facts are grist for the mill of linguistic relativity. And, indeed, they can be found quite readily in 'nonexotic' languages as well. To cite a fact about English that is well known to linguists: It is not appropriate to say Richard Nixon has worked in Washington, but it is perfectly OK to say Gerald Ford has worked in Washington. Why? English restricts the present perfect tense ('has worked') to assertions about people who are alive. Exotic!

Proponents of linguistic determinism argue that such differences between languages influence the ways people think--perhaps the ways in which whole cultures are organized. Among the strongest statements of this position are those by Benjamin Lee Whorf and his teacher, Edward Sapir, in the first half of this century--hence the label, 'The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis', for the theory of linguistic relativity and determinism. Whorf proposed: 'We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way--an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language' (Whorf, 1940; in Carroll, 1956, pp. 213-4). And, in the words of Sapir: 'Human beings...are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their society. ...The fact of the matter is that the "real world" is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group' (Sapir, 1929; in Manlbaum, 1958, p. 162).  world of warcraft power leveling

Investigating Language and Thought

How can such bold claims be substantiated beyond examination of individual languages themselves? If one takes the hypothesis seriously, it should be possible to show that Turks are more sensitive to evidence than are Americans, but that Americans are more aware of death than Turks. Clearly, the hypothesis cannot be supported on so grand a level. Rather, experimental psychologists and cognitive anthropologists have sought to find small differences, on controlled tasks, between speakers of various languages. Maybe Navajos are somewhat more sensitive to shapes of objects, for example. 

The results have been mixed. In most cases, human thought and action are overdetermined by an array of causes, so the structure of language may not play a central causal role. Linguistic determinism can best be demonstrated in situations in which language is the principal means of drawing people's attention to a particular aspect of experience. For example, if you regularly speak a language in which you must pick a form of second-person address (you) that marks your social relationship to your interlocutor--such as Spanish tu ('you' for friends and family and for those socially subordinate) vs. usted ('you' for those socially above in status or for those with whom you have no close connection) or French tu versus vous--you must categorize every person you talk to in terms of the relevant social dimensions. (As a thought experiment of linguistic determinism, think of the categorizations of social relationships that would have to be made if Spanish became the common language of the United States.)

world of warcraft gold,Going beyond thought experiments, some of the most convincing research demonstrating some degree of linguistic determinism is being conducted under the direction of Stephen C. Levinson at the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics in Nijmegen, The Netherlands. Levinson and his collaborators distinguish between languages that describe spatial relations in terms of the body (like English 'right/left', 'front/back') and those that orient to fixed points in the environment (like 'north/south/east/west' in some aboriginal Australian languages). In a language of the second type one would refer, for example, to 'your north shoulder' or 'the bottle at the west end of the table'; in narrating a past event, one would have to remember how the actions related to the compass points. Thus, in order to speak this type of language, you always have to know where you are with respect to the compass points, whether you are speaking or not. And Levinson's group have shown, in extensive cross-linguistic and cross-cultur studies, that this is, in fact, the case.

Much more research needs to be done, but it is not likely that the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis will be supported in the strong form quoted above. For one, language is only one factor that influences cognition and behavior. For another, if the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis were really true, second language learning and translation would be far harder than they are. However, because language is so pervasive--and because we must always make cognitive decisions while speaking--weaker versions of the hypothesis will continue to attract scientific attention. (For a lively debate on many of these issues, with much new evidence from several fields, read Gumperz and Levinson 1996.)

Suggested Readings 

Gumperz, J. J., and Levinson, S. C. 1996. Rethinking linguistic relativity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Lucy, John A. 1992. Language diversity and thought: A reformulation of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. ambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. aion gold
Sapir, E. 1929. "The status of linguistics as a science". Language 5. 207-14. Reprinted in The selected writings of Edward Sapir in language, culture, and personality, ed. by D. G. Mandelbaum, 160-6. Berkeley: University of California Press. 
Whorf, B. L. 1940. "Science and linguistics". Technology Review 42: 227-31, 247-8. Reprinted in Language, thought, and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, ed. by J. B. Carroll, 207-19. Cambridge, MA: The Technology Press of MIT/New York: Wiley. 1956.

Back to Top
FuzzSucker View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 02/February/2008
Location: Lost and Found
Status: Offline
Points: 206
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FuzzSucker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26/October/2009 at 12:47pm
that's the strangest spam I have ever seen. It has links for warcraft?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.06
Copyright ©2001-2023 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.283 seconds.