Mark Thorson wrote:
> "Bob (this one)" wrote:
>> Your characterizing Mr. Pastorio as a liar when in fact, he
>> was not doing so cost you another 13 Points, for two
>> reasons: First you knew full well that he wasn't lying, and
>> that is, itself, a lie merely designed to cause distress.
>> And, second, you offered it as a sneaky, blind-side attack.

So it wasn't a blind-side attack? And your statement was
truthful that I had lied about there not being a food-grade
torch?

Did you demonstrate that there is a "food-grade" torch?

These are your words:
"The last time this came up, one of the lies that Bob
Pastorio tried to float was that you couldn't buy a
food-grade torch."

Did you demonstrate there is a "food-grade" torch?

No. You didn't. No. You can't. No. There isn't one.

> Did you not post the following (quoted in its entirety)
> on Monday?
>
>> Mark Thorson wrote:
>>> The facts are that a) this product produces a blue cone
>>> of flame indicating a temperature certainly high
>>> enough to carmelize anything that is carmelizable,
>>> and b) its fuel does not contain the hazards which
>>> would require the State of California warning that
>>> Bernomatic's other propane- and butane-fuelled are
>>> required to carry.
>
>> *NONE* of BernzOmatic's products carry that warning. Only
>> the MSDS mentions it.
>>
>>> This is a product which is free of carcinogens.

This "free of carcinogens" lie is a Mark Thorson invention
borne out by no supporting information and directly
contradicted by BernzOmatic customer service people. A
demonstrable lie.

Making up things and trying to get people to believe them is
lying.

>> <LOL> A lighter to caramelize foods. Bwah...
>>
>> BernzOmatic's customer service people say that the fuel for
>> this is their standard product.
>>
>> Pastorio
>
> I'm aware you've already given a garbled
> explanation for this,

Nice try sludgewit, but your shabbiness continues.
Excerpting as you do so you can slime your way to still
defending a clearly false position is exactly what I have
come to know and love about you. My *continued* explanations
detailed it very clearly, as you certainly know.

How garbled is "BernzOmatic's customer service people say
that the fuel for this is their standard product" on Planet
Thorson? Does that not say that the lighter and the fuel are
being considered differently? Is that too complex for you?

> but here's your chance
> to give a clear version of how your posting
> can possibly be truthful, given that I've
> already posted scanned images of a Bernzomatic
> product that has the State of California warning
> to alt.binaries.food.

Poor dishonest Marky can't seem to get his quotations in order.

I said on Monday:
"*NO* BernzOmatic products carry the California warning.
Period. They all use the same, unaltered fuels. Period."

> In your more recent postings, you seem to be
> trying to make a distinction between a "product"
> and "fuel", but in the last sentence I quoted
> above, you don't seem to be doing that.

Of course not, And you could offer hundreds more that don['t
do it. Because that wasn't the sentence that offered the
idea. The one I just quoted made that clear enough to
everybody but you. This one: "*NO* BernzOmatic products
carry the California warning. Period. They all use the same,
unaltered fuels. Period."

> Can you be more clear about this? In what
> sense is your statement that "*NONE* of
> BernzOmatic's products carry that warning."
> not contradicted by the images I posted?

The distinction is clear enough when you get a 12-year-old
to parse the sentences above.
They say (clearly) "*NO* BernzOmatic products carry the
California warning. Period." Which *could* include
everything under the BernzOmatic label. Until you reach the
next sentence, which says, "They all use the same, unaltered
fuels. Period."

See...? No, I'm sure you don't.

And I notice you had nothing to say to this:
*NONE* of the BernzOmatic products had the California
warning on them. *NONE* of the other similar products from
other companies had the California warning on them, either.
Not for propane, butane or MAPP gas. The cylinders
themselves, of course, were so labeled.

So, in addition to your toy lighter, here are a few more
BernzOmatic products without California warnings. They were
all packaged in transparent plastic with fuel cylinder and
attachments:
Basic Use Kit TS3000KC
Basic use Plumber's Kit - PK1001KC
Basic Use - Quickfire - TS3000KC
Power Cell - 94477
3-in-1 Micro torch - ST2200T - butane

I also noted that the ubiquitous, red Bic fire lighter had
no California warning anywhere on the package.

I guess they must all be made with "food-grade" fuels.

I'm still wondering why you won't call BernzOmatic customer
service and ask them instead of all your unfounded guesses,
wishful conjectures and outright lies.

> My explanation is that they are not flouting the law.
> The Flexible Utility Lighter is totally legal and safe.
> The generic butane MSDS does not apply to this product.

Your explanation is bullshit. By law, the company *must*
publish an appropriate MSDS for all such products. They have.

Your explanation is dust in the wind, moron.

Pastorio