Suppose the science table were turned and the results showed that smoking improves health. You would then have two good arguments: “I enjoy smoking,” and “Smoking is good for me and our secondhand smoke is good for you damn nonsmokers.” The only argument I would have is, “I don’t like to smoke and I don’t like secondhand smoke.” In its present state of development, science happens to make me look like a prudent prude and you a happy-go-lucky fun-seeker. Except for a referee that has changed from alchemy to chemistry and earth-centered to sun-centered, we feed each other the same argument. We agree on a good glass of red wine, let science be damned. To agreement. (clink) Cheers.

Of course not. I'm from North Carolina, I just happen to live in the deserts of Islamica now, where even the suggestion of being from Israel would be enough to get me a prompt 'melon treatment' from all the villagefolk. Thanks for trying, though, and way to misspell Israel!

Hey, congratulations on replying to your own comment, and in an extraordinary dim fashion matched only by the dimness of your original comment. Let's leave it at this, klosterfobik: If was was an adverb, it would still be improperly used, since a) an adjective (like "delicate") can't modify an adverb, b) you're using it as a noun, and c) IT'S NOT AN ADVERB, dumbass, it's a linking verb (i.e., a form of 'to be'). Dim, dim, dim