GuyGadebois wrote:Just shit.
No lightning strikes and blows, what matters are the arguments.
... Here is a strong argument.
GuyGadebois wrote:Just shit.
realistic ecology wrote:izentrop wrote:Excellent article, but you will attract the wrath of the "guy" with the "wooden" club
No lightning strikes and blows, what matters are the arguments.
GuyGadebois wrote:realistic ecology wrote:izentrop wrote:Excellent article, but you will attract the wrath of the "guy" with the "wooden" club
No lightning strikes and blows, what matters are the arguments.
Arguments ? Your whole site is deceptive, manipulative, lobbyist (including the Concorde Foundation, a liberal think-tank, melting pot of old rotten people), dated, obsolete, null, partisan, poorly written, not documented. Shit splashing so far because it doesn't work and you have to go through it elsewhere to do your dirty patch.
realistic ecology wrote:A new flow of strong arguments.
GuyGadebois wrote:realistic ecology wrote:A new flow of strong arguments.
Are we having trouble with the truth and the findings? You surprise me.
realistic ecology wrote:GuyGadebois wrote:realistic ecology wrote:A new flow of strong arguments.
Are we having trouble with the truth and the findings? You surprise me.
strange how some people like to wade through strong arguments, and would like to wallow in them again.
They must be ignored, they have no other argument than to pass the buck, as in primary school "céstiquidiquié".realistic ecology wrote:strange how some people like to wade through strong arguments
izentrop wrote:They must be ignored, they have no other argument than to pass the buck, as in primary school "céstiquidiquié".realistic ecology wrote:strange how some people like to wade through strong arguments
GuyGadebois wrote:izentrop wrote:They must be ignored, they have no other argument than to pass the buck, as in primary school "céstiquidiquié".realistic ecology wrote:strange how some people like to wade through strong arguments
And you ? Aside from throwing around the same lies you learned in the 60s over and over and over again and kneeling down to what you call 'science' (aka corruption, business, marketing, waste) without realizing that the world has changed and aspires to something other than your technophile program, what do you bring to the debate? NOTHING. NEVER. Even your positions towards the climate are irrelevant, since you ardently defend those who disturb it.
Back to "Agriculture: problems and pollution, new techniques and solutions"
Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 140 guests