At 02:26 PM 6/6/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Subj: Tests and Measurements
>From: Ian Kelley
>
>>Subj: Tests and Measurements
>>From: Dennis C. Lee
>>
>>If analysis on EG finds radioactive elements yet no radioactivity is
>>detected, I'd say that there is something funny about the analysis. This is
>>assuming that these new materials do not also mess with our ability to
>>detect radioactivity. I feel fairly confident that EG does indeed test
>>negative for radioactivity. Who in his right mind would try to market a
>>product made for human consumption that was radioactive?
In the other corner, we find Ian loaded for beef:
>
>Yes, we do test (negative) for radioactivity... It is very possible for a
>"radioactive" element not to be radioactive... Run your counter over a
>McDonalds hamburger, I belive that they contain uranium <G>
>
>Ian
>--
>Ian Kelley (iank@teleport.com)
>ONE Enterprises hompeage (http://www.teleport.com/~iank)
Being the self appointed Judge, I say:
Now it becomes impossible to jest with a jester. But I can start saving a
lot of money, for the radiation standards that I purchase may not be
radioactive.
But not to worry, I will trade my laboratory uranium for a Quarter Pounder
with Cheese. Ian didn't mention cheese. Maybe I should stick with the
beef. It's a shame that they don't use cow brains in Big Mac's, then I
could get radiation and ORME's at the same time!
Can I visit you in Stockholm at Nobel Time?
HEY BINGA, FORGET ABOUT THIS ONE. WHEN YOU EDIT YOU WOULD PROBABLY CUT OUT
THE BEEF.
Computers are fun, aren't they?
_______________________________
Joe Champion discpub@netzone.com
http://www.netzone.com/~discpub