From: sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
Subject: Re: Which is more dangerous: radiation or electricity?
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 1997
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.science,sci.physics,sci.med.physics,sci.med

In <348d6935.349949440@news.cso.uiuc.edu> p-craig1@uiuc.edu.nojunkmail
(Trish) writes:
>
>On 9 Dec 1997 09:30:17 GMT, sbharris@ix.netcom.com(Steven B. Harris)
>wrote:
>
>>In <66hrht$9r7$1@news.fsu.edu> jac@ibms48.scri.fsu.edu (Jim Carr)
>>writes:
>>
>>> 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.

                                       Steve

From: Steve Harris <sbharris@ix.netcom.com>
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
Subject: Re: Orthomolecular Treatment of Cancer
Date: 26 Jun 2005 14:07:20 -0700
Message-ID: <1119820040.068372.182330@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>

> Retrospective epidemiology cannot "strongly suggest" anything at
> differences of 50%.

>>That is because you guys don't have any balls, like I do. :)

COMMENT:

Possibly you think we don't have them because we don't try to think
with them?

Gohde, I hate to tell you this, but that's not what they're for.

SBH