From: firstname.lastname@example.org(Steven B. Harris)
Subject: Re: Which is more dangerous: radiation or electricity?
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 1997
In <email@example.com> firstname.lastname@example.org
>On 9 Dec 1997 09:30:17 GMT, email@example.com(Steven B. Harris)
>>In <firstname.lastname@example.org> email@example.com (Jim Carr)
>>> The concern on RF is based on anecdotal information, some of it
>>> involving cops running radar guns all day.
>>At their heads. And you'd be amazed at how much cop behavior this
>>"explains." A posteriori, of course.
>Hehe! I always wondered how the police could figure in a testicular
>dose when the equipment is mounted/held at the dash level. ;)
Police figure they have giant balls, you see. Nevermind that these
days they need 10 or 20 officers to subdue a drunk, and a full SWAT
team with Ninja clothes and night vision gizmos for the guy with a
pistol who won't come out of his home.
I got a call the other day from somebody wanting to sell me a ticket
to the policeman's ball. I said I didn't realize policeman had balls
any more. To his credit, he only took a few seconds to decide to hang
up on me.
From: Steve Harris <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Orthomolecular Treatment of Cancer
Date: 26 Jun 2005 14:07:20 -0700
> Retrospective epidemiology cannot "strongly suggest" anything at
> differences of 50%.
>>That is because you guys don't have any balls, like I do. :)
Possibly you think we don't have them because we don't try to think
Gohde, I hate to tell you this, but that's not what they're for.