On 24 Aug 2005 16:24:48 -0700, "Space Cowboy" >
wrote:

>If you hang your hat on it it has to be a meaningless factoid.

Lets not get personal now Jim, I take that as an insult. You are also
an easy target if we go down that road.


>I think
>I remember you saying you dismissed the medicinal claims and not that
>the jury was still out.

You memory is faulty Jim, that's not what I said, search it yourself
if you doubt me. Besides what difference does it make, it appears that
your only use for my comments is to use them against me on some future
date anyway.

My exact words were " I don't think there is really any conclusive
evidence but there does seem to be a smoking gun. "

I went on to say:

"As for the slimming claims I do not put much faith in them. Anyone
who has met me in person would question those claims as well. I am a
very large man, both tall and wide, and drinking puerh does not
appeared to have changed that at all, and I do drink a tremendous
amount of puerh."

>You can't explain
>multiple infusions by your references.

You keep going back to that, it's nothing more than a Red Herring, I
it is irrelevant to my "caffeine is not linear within taste" argument.

> As it turns out you can't most
>things by those references. My black puer around bedtime does NOT give
>me the caffeine jitters like other teas including green puerh. That is
>supported by my arguments heretofore and your admitted body of
>conflicting scientific research on puerh which still supports my claim.

Why should your subjective judgments carry any more weight than you
give to mine?

Lets move on Jim this is starting to get boring. At least in the
beginning it was mildly thought provoking.
Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net
"In this work, when it shall be found that much is omitted, let it not be forgotten that much likewise is performed."
Samuel Johnson, 1775, upon finishing his dictionary.