# SmashTheState **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 30, 2009, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731 "2009-07-30T01:00:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/161 "2009-07-31T04:04:19Z")
> [@ivn1188](#): > > Just so we’re clear, your argument is still “Your stupid!”, right? Are you still stupid? Yes? Then his argument probably has not changed. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/162 "2009-07-31T04:10:00Z")
I’ll just say this. I see a big long post from Smash? I just cruise on by… ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/163 "2009-07-31T04:29:36Z")
> [@SmashTheState](#): > > This whole message boards stinks of shopkeepers and factotums. The stench of spiritual death and materialist excess is unmistakable. Don’t know about anyone else, but IMHO this may just be the greatest potential sig line in the history of this board. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/164 "2009-07-31T04:32:01Z")
By the way, just in case Smashy or Kimmy decide to be intellectually honest and actually think things through instead of just spouting woo (ayieeeee! Mythbusters! Neckbeards! Dawkins! The state must be smashed!!!), here’s a set of little back-of-the-napkin calculations to try, and some suggested steps to take after you’re done. -Figure out the average metabolized dose of methanol and formaldehyde from a can of diet soda. -Figure out what the half life is for those metabolites in the average human body. -Figure out how many cans of soda the average human would need in order to hit the LD50 on either methanol or formaldehyde. -Figure out how quickly the average human would need to chug that number of cans of soda in order to hit the LD50. -Figure out how many cubic litres of soda that would be, and how many pounds of liquid someone would have added to their gut in that span of time. -Figure out if, along the way, the person would reach the LD50 for caffeine first. -At this point, figure out if your claims are hysterical, shrieking ignorant blabbering, or if you really do have a leg to stand on as to the ‘danger’ of Nutra Sweet. -Once you figure that out, ask yourself why you jumped to such a nonsensical, absurd conclusion without performing due dilligence. -Then ask yourself why you attempted to spread such a fiction. -Then ask yourself what remedy you should take to avoid making such egregious errors in the future. -Then figure out whether or not you owe Jack further abuse or an apology and your thanks for his grandmotherly kindness. -Ask yourself “is auto-sterilization via weedwhacker right for you and the human genepool?” ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/165 "2009-07-31T04:32:15Z")
> [@ivn1188](#): > > Just so we’re clear, your argument is still “Your stupid!”, right? Actually, I believe his argument is, and always has been, “ **You’re** stupid!” ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/166 "2009-07-31T04:36:28Z")
Say this much, sure seems to bring out the best in folks. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/167 "2009-07-31T04:42:23Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > -cubic litres of soda Oops, cut and paste error Consider that simply “liters”, was “cubic meters”. ---
**Author:** ![SmashTheState](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@SmashTheState](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SmashTheState)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/168 "2009-07-31T05:05:00Z")
Methanol, when it occurs naturally as a breakdown product in fruit, is produced simultaneously with ethanol. According to the literature available, ethanol provides protection against the effects of methanol, and indeed, ethanol is used by hospitals in cases of methanol poisoning. On their own website, Monsanto admits that methanol is a breakdown product of aspartame, but says in their defence that there is more methanol in an apple than a can of diet cola. While this is true as far as it goes, (a) many people are consuming considerably more than one can of diet cola worth of aspartame on a daily basis, and (b) an apple contains methanol and its antagonist, ethanol, in equal parts. Furthermore, there is considerable evidence that chronic consumption of methanol causes a whole host of ill effects, even when consumed in amounts too small to cause immediate damage. Probably the best known effect is damage to the optic nerve, which is both cumulative and irreversible. Jackmannii will want a citation because despite supposedly being a medical professional, he appears completely oblivious to 20 years worth of growing concern about the long-term effects of aspartame by some decidedly un-“woo” scientists. Here’s an article entitled “[ASPARTAME: METHANOL AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH](http://www.mpwhi.com/aspartame_methanol_and_public_health.pdf)” by Dr. Woodrow C. Montre, published in the Journal of Applied Nutrition (Volume 36, Number 1, 1984) which, according to the IAACN, is a peer-reviewed publication. Oh, and FinnAgain? You’re painful to watch. Most people here are probably aware that you really don’t have any idea what you’re talking about. Regardless of whether I’m all full of “woo,” there is no way you’d ever know except by trying to pick what you think are the most popular people here and then aping whatever they say. It’s pathetic in the literal sense that it inspires pathos. I tried to ignore you in the hope a public spanking wouldn’t be required, but you are persistent enough to cause a measurable and significant drop in signal-to-noise ratio. Please either get your own opinions or stop. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 5:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/169 "2009-07-31T05:05:17Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > This is every male member of the Straight Dope. 😉 > > [http://hollywoodphony.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/neckbeard.jpg](http://hollywoodphony.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/neckbeard.jpg) Didn’t I see that guy on Cops? :eek: ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/170 "2009-07-31T05:25:15Z")
> [@Red\_Skeezix](#): > > That tl;dr crap should be considered thread shitting or at least as deplorable as _pulls up a lawn chair_. ! That was me, I believe. Actually, if I had wanted to shit on the thread, I hope I could have done a better job than that. I was being a smart ass. So what? ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/171 "2009-07-31T05:25:22Z")
> [@SmashTheState](#): > > Jackmannii will want a citation because despite supposedly being a medical professional, he appears completely oblivious to 20 years worth of growing concern about the long-term effects of aspartame by some decidedly un-“woo” scientists. Here’s an article entitled “[ASPARTAME: METHANOL AND THE PUBLIC HEALTH](http://www.mpwhi.com/aspartame_methanol_and_public_health.pdf)” by Dr. Woodrow C. Montre, published in the Journal of Applied Nutrition (Volume 36, Number 1, 1984) which, according to the IAACN, is a peer-reviewed publication. Good lord you’re unbelievably stupid. You link to a _25 year old position paper_, not even a longitudinal study, in order to prove the “growing concern” over _the last 20 years._ The modern research shows that Nutra Sweet is safe. Try citing some of that, instead. Or as is your MO, act like a whiny bitch and get all upset that your shitty cite wasn’t simply accepted on faith. In any case, your cite’s conclusion is that we need more testing before greatly increased consumption. We’ve already greatly increased consumption of the (then) “new” chemical.So, engage your brain (briefly) and ask yourself how many cases of rather clearly identifiable methanol we tend to see in diet soda drinkers. Ask yourself what would be a more accurate cite to prove your claims, a 25 year old position paper or an actual, ya know, statistical study. Then provide a cite for that, instead of a totally irrelevant cite that you’re too dumb to realize doesn’t even address your actual claim. > [@SmashTheState](#): > > Oh, and FinnAgain? You’re painful to watch. I know. That pain you’re feeling, between your ears? It’s neurons firing. Just go with it, it gets easier after a while. Soon, you may even get to _like_ the sensation. > [@SmashTheState](#): > > Most people here are probably aware that you really don’t have any idea what you’re talking about. S’okay. I’ll let my reputation of being able to provide cites for my claims stand against your demonstrated behavior if people really wanted to compare the two of us. Also, you’re having delusions of multiplicity, idiot. > [@SmashTheState](#): > > Regardless of whether I’m all full of “woo,” there is no way you’d ever know except by trying to pick what you think are the most popular people here and then aping whatever they say. 1. Again this aggressive, fanciful idiocy. You, Kimmy and ivn just like making shit up when you’re backed into a corner. You know nothing about me and understand even less. If this was a school you’d have to stay late after class just to fail. I “ape” the most popular people here? You are so pathetically stupid and full of shit that it’s truly remarkable. 2. Actually, my training in research methodology, critical thinking and biological science is how I recognized what bullshit you were peddling from the brief mention that Jack made. > [@SmashTheState](#): > > I tried to ignore you in the hope a public spanking wouldn’t be required, but you are persistent enough to cause a measurable and significant drop in signal-to-noise ratio. Get a shaman to directly intuit my meaning then, eh? It’s probably an archetype (http: [//www.flickr.com/photos/33627798@N00/163169443/](https://www.flickr.com/photos/33627798@N00/163169443/)) though. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/172 "2009-07-31T05:48:07Z")
Some cites, while I’m at it. [ > [@](#): > > ``` > Using the most current food consumption data available for the U.S. population, the average intake of aspartame was > > ``` > > determined to be 4.9 mg/kg bw/day (95th > percentile 13.3 mg/kg bw/day in the United States). The U.S. Food and Drug > Administration (FDA) established an ADI of 50 mg/kg bw for aspartame and the European Food Safety Authority recently confirmed its previously established ADI for aspartame of 40 mg/kg bw/day. Therefore, current use levels of aspartame, even by high users in special subgroups, remains well below ADI levels. > […] > Recently, the Soffritti group reported a study of lifetime aspartame exposure in rats. The authors interpreted their findings as evidence of a carcinogenic effect. Furthermore, the authors speculated that metabolism of the methyl group in aspartame to formaldehyde may account for the carcinogenicity they claim to have observed in their experiments, but this conclusions fails to take into account the fact that the body routinely metabolizes methyl groups from many other > sources. In addition, recent reevaluation of epidemiological studies of formaldehyde has revealed uncertainties in the classification of formaldehyde as a human carcinogen. Numerous expert reviews of the Soffritti reports and this panel have identified numerous potential flaws in the studies, and have concluded that the study does not provide evidence of carcinogenicity of aspartame. > > ``` > The long-term studies on the toxicity of aspartame now include seven chronic studies of at least 2 years duration with mice or rats to assess carcinogenic potential and chronic toxicity, and two studies of 32 to 36 weeks duration to evaluate the tumor promotional activity of aspartame in rats. Extensive peer review and reevaluation of data and study protocols has occurred for several studies in different parts of the world. In all cases, the conclusions of the reviews by > > ``` > > authoritative agencies, including the present Expert Panel, have been that aspartame does not have carcinogenic or cancer-promoting activity. In conclusion, in can be confidently stated that there is no credible evidence that aspartame is carcinogenic. > […] > In summary, there has been extensive investigation of the possibility of neurotoxic effects due to consumption of aspartame. The data from these studies, in general, do not support the hypothesis that aspartame in the human diet will affect nervous system function, learning, or behavior. It is likely that the lack of changes in neural function in response to changes in plasma and brain amino acid levels, following even large doses of aspartame, is a reflection of the protection of brain function. This may be due to the great nutritional variation that is present in the diversity of human diets and dietary intakes. > […] > Human clinical studies with daily doses of 75 mg/kg bw/day (more than 15 times the estimated daily average intake and 1.5 times the established ADI by the FDA) of aspartame for 24 weeks were not associated with any significant changes in clinical measures or adverse effects. The effect of aspartame on behavior, cognitive function, and seizures has been studied extensively in animals, and in healthy children, hyperactive children, sugar-sensitive children, healthy adults, individuals with Parkinson’s disease, and individuals suffering from depression. Overall, the weight of the evidence indicates that aspartame has no effect on behavior, cognitive function, neural function, or seizures in any of these groups. > […] > Epidemiological studies on aspartame include several case-control studies and one well-conducted prospective epidemiological study with a large cohort (n = 473,984), in which the consumption of aspartame was measured. The studies provide no evidence to support an association between aspartame and brain or hematopoietic tumor development. > […] > The current weight of evidence is that aspartame is safe at current levels of consumption as a nonnutritive sweetener. Consumption remains well below established ADI levels, even among special high user sub-populations. No credible > evidence was found that aspartame is carcinogenic, neurotoxic, or has any other adverse effect on health whenconsumed even at levels many times the established ADI levels. ]([Aspartame Sweetener | Ajinomoto Health and Nutrition](http://www.aboutaspartame.com/pdf/Critical_Reviews_evaluation_summary.pdf)) [ > [@](#): > > Methanol, or wood alcohol, can be very dangerous and is capable of causing permanent loss of vision if consumed. Experiments have shown that methanol damages the human body through the buildup of formate, not formaldehyde as some claim (Tephly,1991). Since aspartame is broken down into methanol in the intestine, this led some to claim that aspartame leads to methanol-poisoning. Further experiments dealing with aspartame’s digestion have indicated that even high rates of aspartame consumption do not lead to increases in the levels of formate in the blood. These experiments show that formate is excreted into the kidneys as quickly as it is formed, as measured by the concentration of formate in urine from 0 to 4 hours after “aspartame loading” and from 4 to 8 hours after loading. These findings indicate that aspartame does not cause methanol poisoning (Stegink et al., 1981). ]([http://healthpsych.psy.vanderbilt.edu/aspartameWebpage.htm](http://healthpsych.psy.vanderbilt.edu/aspartameWebpage.htm)) [ > [@](#): > > In their article on lifetime exposure to aspartame in rats, Soffritti et al. (2007) purported that their study demonstrated increased carcinogenic effects in female rats as a result of exposure beginning during prenatal life. > We believe that this article (Soffritti et al. 2007) has methodologic and conceptual weaknesses that require exposition. > […] > The findings are of questionable biological significance for a number of reasons. The lymphoma/leukemia incidences in the high-dose group, which were the only significant differences from control, were within or near the reported historical control ranges. Similarly, the mammary gland carcinoma incidence in high-dose females (again, the only significant difference from control) was similar to historical controls. In their article, Soffritti et al. (2007) stated that their study disproved the conclusions of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA 2006) that the incidences of lymphomas/leukemias observed in the first report (Soffritti et al. 2006) were “unrelated to aspartame given the high background incidence of chronic inflammatory changes in the lungs …” (EFSA 2006). The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA 2007) agreed with the EFSA assessment. It is not clear to us how this study disproved the EFSA’s conclusions. Soffritti et al. (2007) indicated that the lung was often the site of lymphoma again in this study, which is not surprising because they used the same infected colony. Studies in the 1960s demonstrated that the progression of chronic pneumonia in rats resulted in lymphoid neoplasmas, and elimination of chronic respiratory disease in rat colonies reduced the incidence of pulmonary lymphoid neoplasias to near zero (Cotchin and Roe 1967). Rats with pulmonary infections developed lesions in multiple sites earlier than rats free from pulmonary disease (Cotchin and Roe 1967). The establishment of pathogen-free animal suppliers for toxicity research was impelled for this reason. Therefore, we believe it is highly likely that the present findings are due to infection and not aspartame consumption. ]([http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2430246](http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2430246)) ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/173 "2009-07-31T05:58:38Z")
[ > [@](#): > > The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has been asked by the European Commission to assess the carcinogenicity study performed by the European Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences (ERF) on the artificial sweetener aspartame, which was reported in publications in 2005 and 2006. The ERF considered that the results of their study indicate that aspartame is a ‘multipotential carcinogenic agent’, based on increases in malignant tumour-bearing animals, lymphomas/leukaemias (primarily in female rats), transitional cell carcinomas of the renal pelvis and ureter, also in female rats, and malignant schwannomas of peripheral nerves. EFSA asked its Scientific Panel on Food Additives, Flavourings, Processing Aids and Materials in Contact with Food (AFC) to review the study as a matter of high priority. > […] > The Panel takes note of the previous evaluations of aspartame by the SCF and other expert bodies, the negative results of recent carcinogenicity studies carried out by the US National Toxicology Program on aspartame in transgenic mice. The Panel was also informed about a recent epidemiological study carried out by the US National Cancer Institute in which no increase in brain or blood related cancers was reported to be associated with aspartame consumption. The Panel also takes note of the comprehensive studies on the substance indicating that aspartame does not have genotoxic activity. > > Kinetic data in humans indicate that dose levels around the acceptable daily intake (ADI) (40 mg/kg bw/d), even when taken as a bolus dose, do not lead to systemic exposure to aspartame. Furthermore, exposure to any of its breakdown products, including methanol or formaldehyde, is negligible. > > The Panel considers that no significant new data have emerged since 2002 on aspects other than carcinogenicity and there is therefore no reason to review the previous SCF opinion on aspartame. > > The Panel notes that dietary exposure to intense sweeteners in the population has been assessed in a number of European countries. In all of these studies, dietary exposure to aspartame was well below the ADI of 40 mg/kg bw (up to 10 mg /kg bw), even in high consumers. > > In summary, the Panel concludes, on the basis of all the evidence currently available from the ERF study, other recent studies and previous evaluations that there is no reason to revise the previously established ADI for aspartame of 40 mg/kg bw. ]([http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa\_locale-1178620753812\_1178620765743.htm](http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753812_1178620765743.htm)) [Why rodent-based experiments that show damaging effects at ultra-high dosages can not be extrapolated to human populations.](http://cerhr.niehs.nih.gov/chemicals/methanol/pubcomm/Kenneth_McMartin.pdf) Etc, etc etc… ---
**Author:** ![ivn1188](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e480ec/32.png) [@ivn1188](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivn1188)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/174 "2009-07-31T06:08:23Z")
> [@SmashTheState](#): > > Oh, and FinnAgain? You’re painful to watch. Most people here are probably aware that you really don’t have any idea what you’re talking about. Regardless of whether I’m all full of “woo,” there is no way you’d ever know except by trying to pick what you think are the most popular people here and then aping whatever they say. It’s pathetic in the literal sense that it inspires pathos. I tried to ignore you in the hope a public spanking wouldn’t be required, but you are persistent enough to cause a measurable and significant drop in signal-to-noise ratio. Please either get your own opinions or stop. Exactly. BTW, can someone who isn’t drunk right now count up the number of times that dipshit has used the word stupid? And BTW, **Finnagain** : tl;dr. ---
**Author:** ![ivn1188](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e480ec/32.png) [@ivn1188](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivn1188)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 6:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/175 "2009-07-31T06:11:23Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > Actually, I believe his argument is, and always has been, “ **You’re** stupid!” Do you hear that noise? It’s the world’s biggest whoosh, or alternatively, the sound of one tard crapping. ---
**Author:** ![FoieGrasIsEvil](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foiegrasisevil/32/16638_2.png) [@FoieGrasIsEvil](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FoieGrasIsEvil)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 6:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/176 "2009-07-31T06:25:33Z")
> [@ivn1188](#): > > Exactly. > > BTW, can someone who isn’t drunk right now count up the number of times that dipshit has used the word stupid? > > And BTW, **Finnagain** : > > tl;dr. Are you serious? Have you read this thread? What is your position, then? ---
**Author:** ![Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Kimmy\_Gibbler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimmy_Gibbler)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/177 "2009-07-31T06:36:54Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > Have you read this thread? What is your position, then? Have you, chief? Did you happen to catch who started it? Do try to keep up, **FGIE**. ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/178 "2009-07-31T10:45:42Z")
> [@ivn1188](#): > > Do you hear that noise? It’s the world’s biggest whoosh, or alternatively, the sound of one tard crapping. Or it could be, you know, noise. ---
**Author:** ![Idle\_Thoughts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/838e76/32.png) [@Idle\_Thoughts](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Idle_Thoughts)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 11:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/179 "2009-07-31T11:33:47Z")
Can’t I just think that **Kimmy, Ivn** and **Smashy** are all morons? I mean, I thought I could, but then again, **Ivn** seemed to be pitting **StS** …so I don’t know whose side I’m supposed to be on. 😕 ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [July 31, 2009, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731/180 "2009-07-31T11:51:45Z")
> [@Idle\_Thoughts](#): > > Can’t I just think that **Kimmy, Ivn** and **Smashy** are all morons? > I mean, I thought I could, but then again, **Ivn** seemed to be pitting **StS** …so I don’t know whose side I’m supposed to be on. 😕 Is it necessary to take sides in a tardfight, or can’t you just point and laugh regardless? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/smashthestate/504731.md?page=10)