View Single Post
  #13 (permalink)   Report Post  
Randall Nortman
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 2005-08-20, Vox Humana > wrote:
>
> "Randall Nortman" > wrote in message
> nk.net...

[...]
>> > 2. Have a sample of bread tested to see if it is a real concern

>>
>> I initially debated about whether this was a serious suggestion. It
>> certainly could have been intended as such by somebody more curious
>> than frugal, as it would certainly be more expensive than just buying
>> a Fibrament stone. However, that poster later made a post clearly
>> intended to insult me, so I'm thinking it wasn't a serious suggestion.
>>

>
> Sure it was a serious suggestion and one that would have settled the issue
> completely, giving you both an answer to your specific question and telling
> you if you had been contaminating yourself by using the tiles.


Then I certainly owe you an apology for misinterpreting your post.
However, as I said, it's less expensive and less troublesome to simply
buy a certified food-safe stone and be done with it. If anybody else
is curious and wants to contribute to a reasearch fund to answer the
question properly, I would certainly be interested in knowing the
answer myself and would contribute, though only out of academic
curiousity, as I would almost certainly have already replaced my
quarry tiles well before the lab results came back.

> Subsequent to my initial and very responsible suggestion, YOU stated
> very clearly that you are paranoid, among other things. To refresh
> your memory, here is how YOU described yourself:
>
> "(And I'm sure the pundits here have already guessed
> that somebody as clearly psychotically paranoid about environmental
> health as I am would also logically be a green-blooded tree-hugging
> hybrid-driving birkenstock-wearing neo-hippie.)"
>
> Once someone says that they are "psychotically paranoid" then it is
> illogical to be insulted when others agree.


Your post referring to my "psychological pathosis" came before the
post of mine that you quote (by about 45 minutes), and it is largely
why I was being sarcastically self-deprecating in my post. However, I
*did* say in my original post that my wife and I are being
"intentionally paranoid". I meant to imply by this that our choice to
be paranoid is carefully considered and, in a roundabout way,
perfectly rational.

Forgive me if I overreacted to your jest. I don't actually drive a
hybrid, though I probably will when we need to replace one of our
current cars, and I long ago gave up Birkenstocks in favor of $20
sandals from Target. I find trees are rather unpleasant to hug, and I
seem to get enough iron in my diet to keep my blood quite red.

--
Randall