The 22 gallons per bag clean comes from every drop of water they can imagine per bag. That includes all the water it takes to build the buildings but the bags are made in, the water used to create the fuel to transport the bags, the water used in the vehicle manufacturing, the water that the truck driver drinks as he transports bags, etc.…That is where I got my initial 22 gallons for a pound of plastic. I didn't read every work cited at the end so I am not sure if that number is found there.
This is the link that takes you to all the references. http://waterfootprint.org/media/downloads/Zygmunt_2007.pdf
Assuming that this would be a civil action, not criminal, the burdon of proof would be on the plaintiff; in this case "Noahfecks" as he is bringing the charge. So yes, my terminology was incorrect.I think you're backwards. Burden of proof is for the one asserting the claim
burden of proof
n. the requirement that the plaintiff (the party bringing a civil lawsuit) show by a "preponderance of evidence" or "weight of evidence" that all the facts necessary to win a judgment are presented and are probably true. In a criminal trial the burden of proof required of the prosecutor is to prove the guilt of the accused "beyond a reasonable doubt," a much more difficult task. Unless there is a complete failure to present substantial evidence of a vital fact (usually called an "element of the cause of action"), the ultimate decision as to whether the plaintiff has met his/her burden of proof rests with the jury or the judge if there is no jury. However, the burden of proof is not always on the plaintiff. In some issues it may shift to the defendant if he/she raises a factual issue in defense, such as a claim that he/she was not the registered owner of the car that hit the plaintiff, so the defendant has the burden to prove that defense. If at the close of the plaintiff's presentation he/she has not produced any evidence on a necessary fact (e.g. any evidence of damage) then the case may be dismissed without the defendant having to put on any evidence.
NEVER mention e-bikes over there.The best mix of smart ass remarks, intelligent conversation, scientific notation and witty comebacks. Everywhere else in the interweb it deteriorates into a mess. This thread is a perfect example of why RME is my favorite. It's like a mountain bike forum but without all the ass holes, which would be an empty room basically.
I wish you the best of luck in life sirDo some ground work, pick up the phone and call some companies that produce plastic bags, find some plastics experts to talk to, hit the books. Those are some simple research techniques that will garner hard data, and in turn that data will either prove or disprove the claim that it takes around 22 gallons of water to produce a plastic bag. The difference between this and Bigfoot is that plastic bags exist, we know who makes them and we can find out how with relatively little effort.
The burden of proof falls on your shoulders because you are the one who is disputing the claim. Your choice is to produce a verifiable rebuttal or stop saying that there is no "supporting evidence". The evidence is there, the manufactures have it, you just have to find it. Not everything is as simple as conducting a Google search.
I really don't care how much water it takes to make a plastic bag, but I'm really tired of people whining about how the "facts aren't there!" when they search the internet. The internet, Google, FaceSpace, whatever are wonderful tools; but they are not the end all be all. At a certain point you've got to take it upon yourself to get dirty and find out for yourself away from the keyboard. As you've repeatedly said in this thread, think for yourself.