In article <362e6758.1314621174 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
<johnburgin at worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>On 21 Oct 1998 16:43:18 GMT, carlton at walleye.ccbr.umn.edu (Carlton
>Hogan) wrote:
>>>In article <362dd6f4.1277652441 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>> <johnburgin at worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>On 16 Oct 1998 17:27:18 GMT, carlton at walleye.ccbr.umn.edu (Carlton
>>>Hogan) wrote:
>>>>>>>In article <3623d68e.622091374 at netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
>>>> <johnburgin at worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>was so poisonous, or caused AIDS, how could pairing the same dose
>>>>>>with another nuke *improve* clinical outcome?
>>>>>Beats me, maybe some kind of reductionist synergism, like mixing two
>>>>>highly toxic poisons, sodium with Chlorine, to make table salt.
>>>>>>>>You have aspired to your loftiest apex of genius yet. Please provide
>>>>any plausible chemical reaction through which this could occur.
>>>>>>2Na + Cl2 > 2 NaCl , um, that was what you wanted, wasn't it? jb
>>>>You are wrong about this as well. Na and Cl bond only as ionic forms
>>dissolved in water. Try and get at least one scientific fact corect
>>per decade, hmm?
>>Well, apparently you are correct. "Technically", that is. Of course,
>if one were to snort a little Chlorine gas and "pop" a little sodium
>metal, I would think the results independent of their union(table
>salt) would be nothing short of disastrous, even if they were, as you
>say so correctly, only the ionic forms dissolved in water. You can't
>even spell correct, correctly, meathead. jb
I would rather be correct on the facts, and ocassionally make a typo,
than to excrete laughable and deceptive pseudo-science.
Carlton
