{OT} Sueing Starbucks..

Hi!!!

Hi. ;-)

Cathy

Would you two get a room?

;-)

Can I watch.

Talk out of your ass much? You have absolutely no basis for that claim. Typical of a fundie to believe things for which there is no evidence.

Why do you think they're having so much trouble with the Muslims in Paris right now?

Charles of Schaumburg

You know dizziot is dumber than a box of rocks. And my sister saw the tests run several times a day at the plant, she had to reorganize them into spreadsheets that the plant could fill in daily and have a running record on the computer. They had to test pH, bacteria count, heavy metal content and a whole host of other issues. Bottled water only has to be tested for 2 things in Illinois and one is bacteria count. And it only has to be tested ONCE. Some tests on the water were run every hour, some every other hour. If it got outside of limits, they literally had to shut off the water, so they worked to keep it well inside the limits, despite the fact that the main water pipe out of the plant, a 20 incher, was laid down in the 1880's or 1890's. . . . They had to replace it shortly after my sister started with a 24-incher. The 20-incher finally broke after over 110 years of service.

So I'd say old Dizziot is talking through his hat on this one. Typical left-wing environmental whacko. Speaks of what he knows not of. My sister isn't a computer geek, but in the year she was there, she reorganized the billing function from mostly paper to a computerized system that prints out uniform billing and tracks receiving and billing uniformly as well. She knows of what she speaks and she's got the hash marks to prove it.

That's another thing the whippersnappers don't get is hash marks. They think hash marks are just stripes on a sleeve or something. . . . Usually by the time you started getting hash marks in service, you'd been through a few experiences not on the usual list of things to do. Same thing with computers. If you've been in this business a few years, you've had to figure your way out of a few problems that weren't on the curricula at college, or in the textbooks, either. And usually, they were some pretty tight jams not of your own making. Anyone with hash marks usually has some common sense, or they don't stay in the business. Except for, apparently, Gary Burn-More. And we don't get real hash marks like in the service, but most people in the business a long time develop an quiet attitude, except when the fit hits the shan. Very similar to Tom Highway in 'Heartbreak Ridge'. I know you've been around service people with similar attitude.

Charles of Schaumburg

Bottled water has religious significance for LIEbrawls. They have to carry it everywhere they go.

Do I find it significant that the French cheese-eating surrender monkeys started the bottled water craze? Yes. The French? PTUI!

Charles of Schaumburg

I can only hope... ;)

Oh, Nice!

Er, those particular newcomers don't like having to do it orally?

("M'sieur et Madame, you are een La Belle France now. Thees ees 'ow you _must_ do eet 'ere. Observez, eef you plees...")

Dumbshit. You were wrong and I was right, so how what does that make you?

So what, rightard? Just because they don't have to doesn't mean they don't. Your claims that bottled water looks "like mud" compared to thoroughly-tested tap-water is not supported by the evidence.

I'd say that you're demonstrating what a logically-handicapped moron you are.

Typical right-wing fundie idiot.

How ironic, from the idiot who spoke of what (the quality of bottled water) he knew nothing of.

The testing she did is irrelevant, fool. She could have tested until she was blue in the face and it is not evidence that her resulting tap water made bottled water "look like mud".

You really take things literally, don't you. He was making a euphemistic comparison. Surely you are intelligent enough to tell the difference between sarcasm and reality.

Appearently you're as stupid as your rightarded friend. Lack of required testing for quality does not mean that testing for quality is not performed.

The real jist of that article is "bottled water sold in the United States is not necessarily cleaner or safer than most tap water".

See the weasel words "not necessarily" and "most"? This article is not claiming that bottled water is necessarily, or even generally, inferior to tap water. It's just saying that it's not necessarily better, and gives some example to prove it. Some examples of tap water would also be "less than ideal", if that was the article that one wanted to write.

The ONLY way that the fundy's STUPID claim that water leaving his sister's facitlity made bottled water "look like mud" would be to directly that grade of water water what a reasonable sampling of bottled water. I HIGHLY doubt that the result of the comparison would be that the bottled water was "like mud" in comparision, "government requirements" or not.

Actually, he was.

Nope.

Good thing our invasion and occupation of Iraq solves the "radical Muslim problem", eh?

Make my day and make yourself Ground Zero.

I nailed him because it's that kind of sloppy thinking that gets us into messes like Iraq "because we were attacked". I'd like to see some of you idiots learn how to think.

If he made a claim that was not supported by the facts, why did he not admit it? He could have easily said "okay, I exaggerated, but the point is that tap water is often as good, or even better, than bottled water". I would then have respect for him. I would even have accepted a jab at me for being too precise, as you gave me.

Instead, as is so typical with the egotistical idiots so common today, he sticks to his guns and claimes that I'm as "dumb as a box of rocks", even though I'm clearly correct - his anecdote about his sister's required extensive testing is not evidence of the resulting tap-water being vastly superior-to (water-to-mud, in his words) bottled water. I therefore have no respect for him, and treat him like the stupid twit that he is.