- Joined
- Nov 20, 2010
- Messages
- 6,930
- Reaction score
- 2,472
So he admitted that he cheated but only a tiny amount or he cheated and only a little trace was found? So he basically is saying I cheated but it wasn’t significant! What is this BS? Imagine Lance Armstrong saying I only blood doped just a little so can I keep my gold? Or a killer saying I only used a bebe gun to kill am I still a killer? Can someone please explain this BS excuse?
You're not actually this stupid, are you? I pinch of salt in a swimming pool has zero effect on the salinity of that kind of volume of water.
Similarly, a near zero concentration of a PED substance is an indication of trace contamination that has no actual PED effect. The point of taking PED is to get PED effects.
If I get pulled over and take a blood alcohol test that shows .000000001% BAC, when legal intoxication is .08%, I would make the case that I'm not intoxicated. And I would be right.
This is not me saying he didn't cheat, or that you should believe his claims. This is me saying you are stupid for not understanding that very basic point of argument.