private ownership...some people don't like to see women dancing around with no tops on (believe it or not, it's true!)...other people like it but see it as a stumbling block for their faith (see me)...but who the hell am i to tell the owner of a club that he can't have that kind of entertainment in his place?? even if everyone else detests it...who am i to tell him that he absolutely can't do that??? if i don't like it, i don't have to go there... private property rocks!
I looked back through the thread and didn't see where you 'cited' anything. In addition, as I wrote to Cohen earlier, the quotes I posted early in this discussion are from my thesis but they are not my words. They are from transcripts of testimony at Congressional Hearings on ETS from a board certified toxicologist. The reason I picked those particular passages is that they explain why the EPA Report, which many other government agencies have relied on in their consideration of the issue, is fundamentally flawed, if its conclusions were not outright fraudulently created. Your answer is 'several government agencies have done extensive testing...' which is nonsensical since my argument supercedes yours. I said the governments conclusions were wrong, then you say the government has made conclusions. Doesn't help your case, slick. Besides the fact that the EPA Report was NOT a study done by the EPA, or any other government agency. It was an meta-analysis, which is a cross reference of other people's studies. Since I know that you are stupid enough to answer that 'then there ARE studies that conclude there is harm' let me preempt you by saying that those studies did NOT conclude toward the EPA's eventual position. Other agencies like OSHA relied heavily on the EPA's conclusions as well. There is a reason the Courts rejected the EPA's findings, mainly that they were created, not discovered. You might want to stop now since you're taking a bath. And its not even Saturday yet.
So are you trying to dodge the question I posed to you earlier? BTW, calling me every name in the book and insinuating that you are smarter than me in doing so is truly pathetic. But if it makes you happy... Why don't you answer the question...Which is a healthier environment? (assuming nothing else unhealthy is in the room) A) A room full of non smokers B) A room full of smokers and in turn, second hand smoke A simple answer of "A" or "B" will do just fine...unless you feel like calling me a moron after a long winded, yet empty argument of course.
I don't know if you're talking to me, but I didn't call anyone a moron in this thread. I also answered "A" was more healthy.
A. Actually I've resaved this post a couple of times already because I have to keep deleting my jokes. But the short of it is that it makes no difference whether in a zero sum comparison (and more importantly excluding ALL other confounding factors) "A" is the right answer.
Sigh. The room would also be 'healthier' without the salted peanuts, the alcohol, and the big screen TV. Then it wouldn't be a bar, it would be a church. But at least you apologized for being confused.
You're comeback is so predictable. Who said anything about it being a bar? I said a room thesis boy. I also prefaced it by saying there is nothing else unhealthy in the room. Face it..you lose. Buh Bye
The thread may be but my question wasn't thesis boy. Check it out, it should be a few replies up. Anyway, NEXT. Buh Bye.
This goes for you and Hayes street. But, as the Rev. Rodney King Jr. said "Can't we all just get along?"
