New Post
Hot Topic
New Poll
Moved Topic
Sticky Topic
No New Post
Old Hot Topic
Old Poll
Announcement
Closed Topic
An alternative explanation ...
It may have ...
It may have ...
Like the drugs themselves, it may have ...
Is this thread outa gas, or what?
Signature:
uncledive
Mayfield suspended again.
Abnormal User
Total Posts: 2640
Joined 05/27/2009
It is certainly possible ...
An alternative explanation ...
It may have ...
It may have ...
Like the drugs themselves, it may have ...
Is this thread outa gas, or what?
An alternative explanation ...
It may have ...
It may have ...
Like the drugs themselves, it may have ...
Is this thread outa gas, or what?
Abnormal User
Total Posts: 9051
Joined
Signature:
It’s not what’s written, but how you read it. 
Ultimate Insider
Total Posts: 906
Joined 05/08/2009
“ True, there is no facts to support the conspiracy theory. Are there any that disprove it, or is it just your belief?”
This is the height of idiocy. To assume that the complete lack of evidence of a thing’s existence, proves that thing’s existence, is simple idiocy.
By that twisted mutation of logic, NASCAR has video of JM shooting meth. It must, because there is no proof they don’t.
If you are going to be stupid, just start the post with that, so I can overlook it.
“ If you believe that NASCAR would throw mysterious debris cautions, or that NASCAR lied regarding Tim Richmond's drug tests”
NASCAR uses debris cautions to “improve” the “quality” of their “product,” and this has been witnessed by millions of fans. Not much to debate there about either the reality or the reason. How does JM failing a drug test, and lying about his medication, “improve” NASCAR’s product? Sorry, but just because you can string phrases together, it doesn’t mean they form a train of logic.
Regarding other drug test, you have proof they lied? I’d be interested. Unless it was proof like, “There is no proof, which proves it.”
“ If NASCAR wanted a definitive test at a lab which is independent of all parties, then why didn't NASCAR do so with Sample A?”
They did. AEGIS is not owned by NASCAR, it is an independent lab that NASCAR hires to do independent drug test evaluations. And your man either failed or turned up a false positive. Now, why wouldn’t he agree to a court-chosen lab for a ‘B’ sample test?
“ I don't feel that the second test should be used in such a way. It only seems fair to me that since NASCAR chose their own lab, that JM should be allowed to choose his own lab as well...”
This is simply childish. “You got one, so I get one.” This is not a playground, it is a legal battle.
NASCAR chose a well-respected, accredited, independent lab, not for the Jeremy Mayfield case, but for all their drug testing. Can you demonstrate in any way that AEGIS is not honest, accurate, or competent, using information about other specific cases?
NASCAR did NOT choose AEGIS just for this case.
And “fair” is “equal access before the law. There is no law that specifies that a defendant must be allowed to choose the lab.
In fact, “fair” (which can also mean “impartial and unbiased”) would most obviously be achieved best by a having a disinterested third party choose the lab. This would be fair to both sides.
You are saying that JM should get to pick the lab for his case, because NASACR picked a lab for all its cases. No parity there.
“ You appear to not know much about hair drug tests. I'm no expert on the matter either, but from everything I've read, hair tests are much more accurate, and overall better, than urine samples.
Well, why don’t you do some research about why or why not this method hasn’t been suggested By JM to clear himself? Instead of saying, “I don’t think you know and I know I don’t know, so believe what I say,” try backing it up with facts. JM is the one who said he can’t do a hair test because he keep his hair too short. Care to set him straight?
“ Because there will always be some doubt when it comes to urine. You can't "spike" a hair test. And since sample A has already been testing, I do not believe it can be tested again.”
So your position here is that there is no honest person anywhere in the process, and that everyone in the entire world wants to screw JM? There is absolutely no way to get a good test from the B sample, or any other urine test? In that case, why keep pushing LabCorp? And if labCorop did the test and it came back positive for meth, you would claim they got bought out by NASACR too.
Besides which, if a lab can spike a sample, it can falsify data. Basically, even if you see JM suing meth right in front of you, you can deny it, claiming temporary insanity. You can claim everyone in the entire world except you, is out to get JM. And it makes you look foolish.
What it comes down to, is you believe firmly in a NASCAR conspiracy, even though you admit there is Zero evidence to support it.
Can you come up with even one FACT that indicates that NASSCAR tampered with a sample? As another poster says, no one from NASCAR ever handles the samples; they go straight to the lab. Can you show any evidence at all (not supposition, and “”the lack of evidence is proof” only works for Mulder and Scully) that AEGIS deliberately tampered with the sample?
Do you have a single FACT which supports your belief? Because you haven’t presented it so far.
I am totally willing to give JM the benefit of the doubt. I have no way of knowing if he ever used anything, and his bizarre behavior could just be because he is a weird dude.
But I will not accept any of the wholly unsubstantiated drivel you keep proposing. Back up any of what you say with anything except “bizarre coincidences” (which cut both ways, by the way) and I will admit you have point. But right now, you have nothing.
Nothing.
This is the height of idiocy. To assume that the complete lack of evidence of a thing’s existence, proves that thing’s existence, is simple idiocy.
By that twisted mutation of logic, NASCAR has video of JM shooting meth. It must, because there is no proof they don’t.
If you are going to be stupid, just start the post with that, so I can overlook it.
“ If you believe that NASCAR would throw mysterious debris cautions, or that NASCAR lied regarding Tim Richmond's drug tests”
NASCAR uses debris cautions to “improve” the “quality” of their “product,” and this has been witnessed by millions of fans. Not much to debate there about either the reality or the reason. How does JM failing a drug test, and lying about his medication, “improve” NASCAR’s product? Sorry, but just because you can string phrases together, it doesn’t mean they form a train of logic.
Regarding other drug test, you have proof they lied? I’d be interested. Unless it was proof like, “There is no proof, which proves it.”
“ If NASCAR wanted a definitive test at a lab which is independent of all parties, then why didn't NASCAR do so with Sample A?”
They did. AEGIS is not owned by NASCAR, it is an independent lab that NASCAR hires to do independent drug test evaluations. And your man either failed or turned up a false positive. Now, why wouldn’t he agree to a court-chosen lab for a ‘B’ sample test?
“ I don't feel that the second test should be used in such a way. It only seems fair to me that since NASCAR chose their own lab, that JM should be allowed to choose his own lab as well...”
This is simply childish. “You got one, so I get one.” This is not a playground, it is a legal battle.
NASCAR chose a well-respected, accredited, independent lab, not for the Jeremy Mayfield case, but for all their drug testing. Can you demonstrate in any way that AEGIS is not honest, accurate, or competent, using information about other specific cases?
NASCAR did NOT choose AEGIS just for this case.
And “fair” is “equal access before the law. There is no law that specifies that a defendant must be allowed to choose the lab.
In fact, “fair” (which can also mean “impartial and unbiased”) would most obviously be achieved best by a having a disinterested third party choose the lab. This would be fair to both sides.
You are saying that JM should get to pick the lab for his case, because NASACR picked a lab for all its cases. No parity there.
“ You appear to not know much about hair drug tests. I'm no expert on the matter either, but from everything I've read, hair tests are much more accurate, and overall better, than urine samples.
Well, why don’t you do some research about why or why not this method hasn’t been suggested By JM to clear himself? Instead of saying, “I don’t think you know and I know I don’t know, so believe what I say,” try backing it up with facts. JM is the one who said he can’t do a hair test because he keep his hair too short. Care to set him straight?
“ Because there will always be some doubt when it comes to urine. You can't "spike" a hair test. And since sample A has already been testing, I do not believe it can be tested again.”
So your position here is that there is no honest person anywhere in the process, and that everyone in the entire world wants to screw JM? There is absolutely no way to get a good test from the B sample, or any other urine test? In that case, why keep pushing LabCorp? And if labCorop did the test and it came back positive for meth, you would claim they got bought out by NASACR too.
Besides which, if a lab can spike a sample, it can falsify data. Basically, even if you see JM suing meth right in front of you, you can deny it, claiming temporary insanity. You can claim everyone in the entire world except you, is out to get JM. And it makes you look foolish.
What it comes down to, is you believe firmly in a NASCAR conspiracy, even though you admit there is Zero evidence to support it.
Can you come up with even one FACT that indicates that NASSCAR tampered with a sample? As another poster says, no one from NASCAR ever handles the samples; they go straight to the lab. Can you show any evidence at all (not supposition, and “”the lack of evidence is proof” only works for Mulder and Scully) that AEGIS deliberately tampered with the sample?
Do you have a single FACT which supports your belief? Because you haven’t presented it so far.
I am totally willing to give JM the benefit of the doubt. I have no way of knowing if he ever used anything, and his bizarre behavior could just be because he is a weird dude.
But I will not accept any of the wholly unsubstantiated drivel you keep proposing. Back up any of what you say with anything except “bizarre coincidences” (which cut both ways, by the way) and I will admit you have point. But right now, you have nothing.
Nothing.
Abnormal User
Total Posts: 8636
Joined
It is certainly possible ...
An alternative explanation ...
It may have ...
It may have ...
Like the drugs themselves, it may have ...
Is this thread outa gas, or what?
It would appear the Maalox did its job
Signature:
“Four in a row is pretty cool and all but who needs Championships? I’m out there to win hearts!” - Kyle Busch on Jimmie Johnson
Abnormal User
Total Posts: 8000
Joined
It is certainly possible ...
An alternative explanation ...
It may have ...
It may have ...
Like the drugs themselves, it may have ...
Is this thread outa gas, or what?
When one believes that the car is out of gas, one doesn't continue to step on the throttle just to keep saying that the car is out of gas. Makes no sense.
Signature:
#11, #1, #88, #14, #19, #29, #39, #31
Abnormal User
Total Posts: 8000
Joined
This is the height of idiocy. To assume that the complete lack of evidence of a thing’s existence, proves that thing’s existence, is simple idiocy.....
Very nice try!
Signature:
#11, #1, #88, #14, #19, #29, #39, #31
Abnormal User
Total Posts: 1853
Joined
It is certainly possible ...
An alternative explanation ...
It may have ...
It may have ...
Like the drugs themselves, it may have ...
Is this thread outa gas, or what?
It would appear the Maalox did its job
It ran out at about page 6
Abnormal User
Total Posts: 2640
Joined 05/27/2009
It is certainly possible ...
An alternative explanation ...
It may have ...
It may have ...
Like the drugs themselves, it may have ...
Is this thread outa gas, or what?
When one believes that the car is out of gas, one doesn't continue to step on the throttle just to keep saying that the car is out of gas. Makes no sense.
One gets some fuel. Preferably fresh fuel ... not watered down or turning to varnish because it's so old.
Carry on.
Signature:
uncledive
Abnormal User
Total Posts: 8000
Joined
It is certainly possible ...
An alternative explanation ...
It may have ...
It may have ...
Like the drugs themselves, it may have ...
Is this thread outa gas, or what?
When one believes that the car is out of gas, one doesn't continue to step on the throttle just to keep saying that the car is out of gas. Makes no sense.
One gets some fuel. Preferably fresh fuel ... not watered down or turning to varnish because it's so old.
Carry on.
LOL So why do you keep posting?
Signature:
#11, #1, #88, #14, #19, #29, #39, #31
Abnormal User
Total Posts: 2640
Joined 05/27/2009
LOL So why do you keep posting?
In order to maintain some semblance of contact with yourself. You may have forgotten, but I have seen a pic of you in heels.
Signature:
uncledive
