Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.

Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I was
looking for some rebuttal from scientific perspective in RELEVANCE to
FOOD DIGESTION in human body. So if you (referring to idiots only)
are idiotic enough to attack me go ahead but try to remove your
ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title exists only at
high school level. In college it is offered under many different title
that would fall under the categories of
- General Chemisty
- Organic Chemistry
- Inorganic Chemistry
- Analytical Chemistr
- Biochemistry
etc.

So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among these.

Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).

Manda Ruby wrote:
> Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.
>
> Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I was
> looking for some rebuttal from scientific perspective in RELEVANCE to
> FOOD DIGESTION in human body. So if you (referring to idiots only)
> are idiotic enough to attack me go ahead but try to remove your
> ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title exists only at
> high school level. In college it is offered under many different title
> that would fall under the categories of
> - General Chemisty
> - Organic Chemistry
> - Inorganic Chemistry
> - Analytical Chemistr
> - Biochemistry
> etc.
>
> So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among these.
>
> Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
> your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
> sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).

Ah, well that explains everything -- thanks!

On 8/16/2010 14:42, Manda Ruby wrote:
> Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.
>
> Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I was
> looking for some rebuttal from scientific perspective in RELEVANCE to
> FOOD DIGESTION in human body.

The first time you posted the "Top 5 Worst Foods..." topic, you only
gave a link and didn't add any thoughts of your own. The second time you
posted it, you asked for "Any comments?" You didn't ask for rebuttals,
for specific comments, for only intelligent comments, or for only those
comments you wish to hear. You asked for any comments, and that's what
you got.



> So if you (referring to idiots only)
> are idiotic enough to attack me go ahead but try to remove your
> ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title exists only at
> high school level. In college it is offered under many different title
> that would fall under the categories of
> - General Chemisty
> - Organic Chemistry
> - Inorganic Chemistry
> - Analytical Chemistr
> - Biochemistry
> etc.
> So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among these.

Are you telling me you're in graduate school? Because you talk like a
sophomore.




> Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
> your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
> sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).

Be careful what you wish for, and shut the **** up.

"Pennyaline" > wrote in message
...
> On 8/16/2010 14:42, Manda Ruby wrote:
snipped inane drivel

> The first time you posted the "Top 5 Worst Foods..." topic, you only gave
> a link and didn't add any thoughts of your own. The second time you posted
> it, you asked for "Any comments?" You didn't ask for rebuttals, for
> specific comments, for only intelligent comments, or for only those
> comments you wish to hear. You asked for any comments, and that's what you
> got.
>
>
>
>> So if you (referring to idiots only)
>> are idiotic enough to attack me go ahead but try to remove your
>> ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title exists only at
>> high school level. In college it is offered under many different title
>> that would fall under the categories of
>> - General Chemisty
>> - Organic Chemistry
>> - Inorganic Chemistry
>> - Analytical Chemistr
>> - Biochemistry
>> etc.
>> So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among these.
>
> Are you telling me you're in graduate school? Because you talk like a
> sophomore.
>
>

Penny, please. Sophomores everywhere shudder at the comparison. I have an
incoming college junior at home and this is way beneath anything she or her
friends would conjure up.

>
>
>> Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
>> your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
>> sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).
>
> Be careful what you wish for, and shut the **** up.

STFU is a comment usually ending a Mandy Ruby ramble.
-ginny

"Virginia Tadrzynski" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Pennyaline" > wrote in message
> ...

>>
>> Are you telling me you're in graduate school? Because you talk like a
>> sophomore.
>>
>>
>
> Penny, please. Sophomores everywhere shudder at the comparison. I have
> an incoming college junior at home and this is way beneath anything she or
> her friends would conjure up.

Also an undergraduate at 47. lol Maybe my writing here can be sophomoric
at times. Ok, most times.

"Manda Ruby" > ha scritto nel messaggio
> Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.
>
> Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I was
> looking for some rebuttal from scientific perspective in RELEVANCE to
> FOOD DIGESTION in human body. So if you (referring to idiots only)
> are idiotic enough to attack me go ahead but try to remove your
> ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title exists only at
> high school level. In college it is offered under many different title
> that would fall under the categories of
> - General Chemisty
> - Organic Chemistry
> - Inorganic Chemistry
> - Analytical Chemistr
> - Biochemistry
> etc.
>
> So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among these.
>
> Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
> your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
> sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).

You know what? So what? It wouldn't take a science degree to know that was
all bull hockey. You knew what dirty water you were roiling up when you
posted that. There is such a thing as scientific thinking, and apparently
you want us to do yours for you.

Stop being so bloody rude or go away.

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 13:42:12 -0700 (PDT), Manda Ruby wrote:

> Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
> your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
> sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).

Is anybody that responded a chemistry major, or qualified to teach
chemistry?

-sw

amandaF wrote:

> Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I was
> looking for some rebuttal from scientific perspective in RELEVANCE to
> FOOD DIGESTION in human body. So if you (referring to idiots only)
> are idiotic enough to attack me go ahead but try to remove your
> ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title exists only at
> high school level. In college it is offered under many different title
> that would fall under the categories of
> - General Chemisty
> - Organic Chemistry
> - Inorganic Chemistry
> - Analytical Chemistr
> - Biochemistry
> etc.
>
> So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among these.
>
> Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
> your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
> sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).

....and yet, a chemist who chooses one of the specialties you list above must
have ALREADY mastered the chemistry which is taught at the high school
level, right? So anything which can be seen as nonsense and riddled with
fallacies and fiction at the lower level will still be nonsense, fallacies,
and fiction at the higher level, won't it?

Bob

On Aug 16, 3:16*pm, "Bob Terwilliger" >
wrote:
> amandaF wrote:
> > Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I was
> > looking for *some rebuttal from scientific perspective in RELEVANCE to
> > FOOD DIGESTION in human body. * So if you (referring to idiots only)
> > are idiotic enough to attack me *go ahead but try to remove your
> > ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title exists only at
> > high school level. In college it is offered under many different title
> > that would fall under the categories of
> > - General Chemisty
> > - Organic Chemistry
> > - Inorganic Chemistry
> > - Analytical Chemistr
> > - Biochemistry
> > etc.
>
> > So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among these.
>
> > Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
> > your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
> > sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).
>
> ...and yet, a chemist who chooses one of the specialties you list above must
> have ALREADY mastered the chemistry which is taught at the high school
> level, right? So anything which can be seen as nonsense and riddled with
> fallacies and fiction at the lower level will still be nonsense, fallacies,
> and fiction at the higher level, won't it?

Don't feel flattred about what I am about to say. Your response is the
only post I opended and skimmed through in this thread. I will just
tell you this: The guy who told me that spciy food is VERY bad from
the digestive tract is a PhD chemist who did some research work in
Biochemistry. Not that that'd make him expert in this topic on spciy
food.

And not that I expected people from cooking forum to know for sure
how BAD is the spicy food to the digestive tract but in case anyone
have read up on the topic, I was hoping that she/he would share.
Instead, all I got was a bunch of losers trying to find fault with the
question, which OBVIOUSLY is typical thought processing in them.
Can't say that I was surprised.

>
> Bob- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Manda Ruby wrote:
> On Aug 16, 3:16 pm, "Bob Terwilliger" >
> wrote:
>> amandaF wrote:
>>> Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I
>>> was looking for some rebuttal from scientific perspective in
>>> RELEVANCE to FOOD DIGESTION in human body. So if you (referring to
>>> idiots only) are idiotic enough to attack me go ahead but try to
>>> remove your ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title
>>> exists only at high school level. In college it is offered under
>>> many different title that would fall under the categories of
>>> - General Chemisty
>>> - Organic Chemistry
>>> - Inorganic Chemistry
>>> - Analytical Chemistr
>>> - Biochemistry
>>> etc.
>>
>>> So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among
>>> these.
>>
>>> Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
>>> your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
>>> sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).
>>
>> ...and yet, a chemist who chooses one of the specialties you list
>> above must have ALREADY mastered the chemistry which is taught at
>> the high school level, right? So anything which can be seen as
>> nonsense and riddled with fallacies and fiction at the lower level
>> will still be nonsense, fallacies, and fiction at the higher level,
>> won't it?
>
> Don't feel flattred about what I am about to say. Your response is the
> only post I opended and skimmed through in this thread. I will just
> tell you this: The guy who told me that spciy food is VERY bad from
> the digestive tract is a PhD chemist who did some research work in
> Biochemistry. Not that that'd make him expert in this topic on spciy
> food.
>
> And not that I expected people from cooking forum to know for sure
> how BAD is the spicy food to the digestive tract but in case anyone
> have read up on the topic, I was hoping that she/he would share.
> Instead, all I got was a bunch of losers trying to find fault with the
> question, which OBVIOUSLY is typical thought processing in them.
> Can't say that I was surprised.

The people of many entire cultures thrive on spicy food - how on earth
can it be bad for you? For one thing, our bodies adapt to it, at least
somewhat.

Group, I am beginning to see your point.

-S-


>>
>> Bob- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -

On Tue, 17 Aug 2010 15:13:15 -0700 (PDT), Manda Ruby
> wrote:

>And not that I expected people from cooking forum to know for sure
>how BAD is the spicy food to the digestive tract but in case anyone
>have read up on the topic, I was hoping that she/he would share.
>Instead, all I got was a bunch of losers trying to find fault with the
>question, which OBVIOUSLY is typical thought processing in them.
>Can't say that I was surprised.

You want someone else to do your research for you but you state that
all you get is a "bunch of losers".
So, if you're not surprised, here's a suggestion: Do your own research
and quit posting your stupid, inane questions or bare-assed links to
the group.
Then, when and if you find some credible research, post your findings
or at least a link to them. Remember, I said credible. Until then, why
don't you just STFU.

Ross.

"The guy who told me that spciy food is VERY bad from
the digestive tract is a PhD chemist who did some research work in
Biochemistry. Not that that'd make him expert in this topic on spciy
food."-manda

Maybe you could shut some of us up by linking us to his research. Until then, it sounds like a pretty STFU crowd here.

"Gorio" > wrote in message
...
>
> "The guy who told me that spciy food is VERY bad from
> the digestive tract is a PhD chemist who did some research work in
> Biochemistry. Not that that'd make him expert in this topic on spciy
> food."-manda
>
> Maybe you could shut some of us up by linking us to his research. Until
> then, it sounds like a pretty STFU crowd here.
>
> --
> Gorio


"Manda" apparently can't figure out how to spell "spicy" so who on earth is
going to take this post seriously? Oh, and tell everyone in Asia, Europe,
North and South and Central America to stop eating spicy foods. They've
only been doing it for centuries. Maybe what "Manda" needs is a high
colonic.

Jill

Jill wrote:

> "Manda" apparently can't figure out how to spell "spicy" so who on earth
> is going to take this post seriously? Oh, and tell everyone in Asia,
> Europe, North and South and Central America to stop eating spicy foods.
> They've only been doing it for centuries.

Tradition is not a supporting argument. The best determinant of a healthy
diet in a population is that population's expected lifespan. None of the
regions associated with spicy cuisine are noted for being particularly
long-lived. Taken by itself, that would indicate that eating spicy foods is
not conducive to a long life, but of course there are many other factors at
work, chief among them being the fact that tropical climates are usually
more disease-ridden.

Also, I'm not at all sure why you associate Europe with spicy food. By and
large, spicy food is the exception throughout Europe. I can post a few
European recipes which support that statement if you like. :-)

Bob

In article
>,
Manda Ruby > wrote:

> And not that I expected people from cooking forum to know for sure
> how BAD is the spicy food to the digestive tract but in case anyone
> have read up on the topic, I was hoping that she/he would share.
> Instead, all I got was a bunch of losers trying to find fault with the
> question, which OBVIOUSLY is typical thought processing in them.
> Can't say that I was surprised.

Then one wonders why you bothered.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

On 8/17/2010 10:40 PM, Miche wrote:
> In article
> >,
> Manda > wrote:
>
>> And not that I expected people from cooking forum to know for sure
>> how BAD is the spicy food to the digestive tract but in case anyone
>> have read up on the topic, I was hoping that she/he would share.
>> Instead, all I got was a bunch of losers trying to find fault with the
>> question, which OBVIOUSLY is typical thought processing in them.
>> Can't say that I was surprised.
>
> Then one wonders why you bothered.
>
> Miche
>


Do you /really/ wonder? (or were you just being kind?) ;-)

Bob

In article >,
zxcvbob > wrote:

> On 8/17/2010 10:40 PM, Miche wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> > Manda > wrote:
> >
> >> And not that I expected people from cooking forum to know for sure
> >> how BAD is the spicy food to the digestive tract but in case anyone
> >> have read up on the topic, I was hoping that she/he would share.
> >> Instead, all I got was a bunch of losers trying to find fault with the
> >> question, which OBVIOUSLY is typical thought processing in them.
> >> Can't say that I was surprised.
> >
> > Then one wonders why you bothered.
>
>
> Do you /really/ wonder? (or were you just being kind?) ;-)

That was sarcasm. I'm done being kind.

Miche

--
Electricians do it in three phases

amandaF wrote:

> And not that I expected people from cooking forum to know for sure how
> BAD is the spicy food to the digestive tract but in case anyone have read
> up on the topic, I was hoping that she/he would share. Instead, all I got
> was a bunch of losers trying to find fault with the question,

As you've already admitted, you wanted to discuss whether spicy food is bad
for people, but you didn't actually start the discussion on that topic. You
posted a link to what most people recognize as a crackpot site, and then
asked for comments about the site. That's exactly what you got.

If you want to start a NEW discussion about the adverse effects of spicy
food, why not just start a thread entitled, "What's the medical community's
opinion of spicy food? Good, bad, or indifferent?"

I have seen conflicting reports on the subject. On one hand, capsaicin does
not actually corrode tissues the way acids or bases will. But the way
tissues react to capsaicin can complicate normal digestive processes. You
personally seem to react badly to spicy foods, so you personally should
avoid them. But there are billions of people who eat spicy food regularly
with no ill effects.

Bob

On Aug 17, 6:13*pm, Manda Ruby > wrote:
> On Aug 16, 3:16*pm, "Bob Terwilliger" >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > amandaF wrote:
> > > Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I was
> > > looking for *some rebuttal from scientific perspective in RELEVANCE to
> > > FOOD DIGESTION in human body. * So if you (referring to idiots only)
> > > are idiotic enough to attack me *go ahead but try to remove your
> > > ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title exists only at
> > > high school level. In college it is offered under many different title
> > > that would fall under the categories of
> > > - General Chemisty
> > > - Organic Chemistry
> > > - Inorganic Chemistry
> > > - Analytical Chemistr
> > > - Biochemistry
> > > etc.
>
> > > So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among these.
>
> > > Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
> > > your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
> > > sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).
>
> > ...and yet, a chemist who chooses one of the specialties you list above must
> > have ALREADY mastered the chemistry which is taught at the high school
> > level, right? So anything which can be seen as nonsense and riddled with
> > fallacies and fiction at the lower level will still be nonsense, fallacies,
> > and fiction at the higher level, won't it?
>
> Don't feel flattred about what I am about to say. Your response is the
> only post I opended and skimmed through in this thread. I will just
> tell you this: The guy who told me that spciy food is VERY bad from
> the digestive tract is a PhD chemist who did some research work in
> Biochemistry. Not that that'd make him expert in this topic on spciy
> food.

I can't tell whether that last sentence is sarcasm or sincere.

"some research work in biochemistry" is not impressive credentials.
He seems only marginally more authoritative than the proverbial
man on the street.

In article
>,
Cindy Hamilton > wrote:

> On Aug 17, 6:13*pm, Manda Ruby > wrote:
> > On Aug 16, 3:16*pm, "Bob Terwilliger" >

[deleted all that Bob posted, as AmandaF didn't respond to it anyway]

> > Don't feel flattred about what I am about to say. Your response is the
> > only post I opended and skimmed through

> I can't tell whether that last sentence is sarcasm or sincere.

It's pretty hard to tell just *what* AmandaF means, isn't it? And even
if you could, what's the point in responding? She doesn't have time to
read posts on this group. She started this thread, and yet she has
admitted that she only read one reply! And she *skimmed* it!

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Aug 18, 1:30*pm, Dan Abel > wrote:
> In article
> >,
> *Cindy Hamilton > wrote:
>
> > On Aug 17, 6:13*pm, Manda Ruby > wrote:
> > > On Aug 16, 3:16*pm, "Bob Terwilliger" >
>
> [deleted all that Bob posted, as AmandaF didn't respond to it anyway]
>
> > > Don't feel flattred about what I am about to say. Your response is the
> > > only post I opended and skimmed through
> > I can't tell whether that last sentence is sarcasm or sincere.
>
> It's pretty hard to tell just *what* AmandaF means, isn't it? *And even
> if you could, what's the point in responding? *

I know I shouldn't respond, but it's a weird sort of compulsion.
There's a guy in rec.arts.movies.current-films who lives in
Canada and just rails about how un-American Hollywood is.
I get the same reaction when I read his posts, too.

It's a character flaw. I just can't keep from amusing myself
by responding to those posts.

Cindy Hamilton

On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:02:28 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton wrote:

> On Aug 17, 6:13*pm, Manda Ruby > wrote:
>>
> I will just
>> tell you this: The guy who told me that spciy food is VERY bad from
>> the digestive tract is a PhD chemist who did some research work in
>> Biochemistry. Not that that'd make him expert in this topic on spciy
>> food.
>
> I can't tell whether that last sentence is sarcasm or sincere.
>
> "some research work in biochemistry" is not impressive credentials.
> He seems only marginally more authoritative than the proverbial
> man on the street.

make that 'the man on the street who alternates muttering to himself and
shouting incoherently' and you've got it.

your pal,
blake

On Aug 18, 3:50*pm, blake murphy > wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Aug 2010 06:02:28 -0700 (PDT), Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Aug 17, 6:13*pm, Manda Ruby > wrote:
>
> > I will just
> >> tell you this: The guy who told me that spciy food is VERY bad from
> >> the digestive tract is a PhD chemist who did some research work in
> >> Biochemistry. Not that that'd make him expert in this topic on spciy
> >> food.
>
> > I can't tell whether that last sentence is sarcasm or sincere.
>
> > "some research work in biochemistry" is not impressive credentials.
> > He seems only marginally more authoritative than the proverbial
> > man on the street.
>
> make that 'the man on the street who alternates muttering to himself and
> shouting incoherently' and you've got it.

Buggrit! Millennium hand and shrimp! I told 'em. I told 'em.

Cindy Hamilton

Manda Ruby wrote:
> Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.
>
> Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I was
> looking for some rebuttal from scientific perspective

Mark Twain once suggested that one never argue with a fool because
people might not be able to tell the difference. The link you posted is
not, IMHO, worthy of rebuttal. We are giving you, however, the benefit
of the doubt.

-S-

Steve Freides wrote:
> Manda Ruby wrote:
>> Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.
>>
>> Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I
>> was looking for some rebuttal from scientific perspective
>
> Mark Twain once suggested that one never argue with a fool because
> people might not be able to tell the difference. The link you posted
> is not, IMHO, worthy of rebuttal. We are giving you, however, the
> benefit of the doubt.

Speaking for myself, that benefit expired long ago.

nancy

I doubt those qualified to do so would wish to research against this idiocy. Most do research to PROVE something, not disprove the plethera bullshit like this freak suggests.

I love the argument "prove to me God doesn't exist." Proving the non-existence of most things is stupid as you can't prove a negative. Prove to me there isn't a T-rex with a pink hat in the room with me.

This is so stoopid on a pragmatic level, it sounds like you're just mad that the rest of the world doesn't agree with your "common sense."

You're brilliant...the rest of the world is stoopid, eh?

The fact that nobody has done research to prove this hypothesis correct is pretty convincing proof to its illegitmacy.

Isn't it strange that animals, that have had no means or cooking, prefer cooked meat over raw? Most folks I know in the science realm support that it wasn't so much our eating of meat that advanced us, rather the cooking of the meat which makes it easier to digest that put us on top.

This sort of thing, though, BEGS for a pseudoscientist to research for the sole purpose of validation (for the pseudoscientist and the hypothesis.)

On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 13:42:12 -0700 (PDT), Manda Ruby wrote:

> Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.
>
> Regardless of what the guy's motive was in posting those 5 food, I was
> looking for some rebuttal from scientific perspective in RELEVANCE to
> FOOD DIGESTION in human body. So if you (referring to idiots only)
> are idiotic enough to attack me go ahead but try to remove your
> ignorance by learnign that Chemistry as a subject title exists only at
> high school level. In college it is offered under many different title
> that would fall under the categories of
> - General Chemisty
> - Organic Chemistry
> - Inorganic Chemistry
> - Analytical Chemistr
> - Biochemistry
> etc.
>
> So, in graduate school, one must choose a specialization among these.
>
> Try looking up the courses at a university wesbite before you spew
> your ignorance as if I am suppoed to understand everything under the
> sun. "Stoopid" is all I will call you (and you know who you are).

get the **** out here with 'scientific perspective.' the guy is obviously
a quack and huckster. if you can't see that, you don't have a whole lot of
room to be calling people 'idiots.'

blake

"Manda Ruby" > wrote in message
...
> Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.

Obviously you were just looking for an excuse to insult people.
Go away.

"news" > ha scritto nel messaggio
...
>
> "Manda Ruby" wrote in message

>> Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.
>
> Obviously you were just looking for an excuse to insult people.

Ahh, now we are the "Useful Information Bank"!

In article >,
"Giusi" > wrote:

> > "Manda Ruby" wrote in message
>
> >> Obviously, only a few resposnes had any useful info.
> >
> > Obviously you were just looking for an excuse to insult people.
>
> Ahh, now we are the "Useful Information Bank"!

Made me wonder exactly what homework assignment she had, that she wanted
us to do for her?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA