Discussion:
Weedkiller found in wide range of breakfast foods aimed at children
(too old to reply)
p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
2018-08-19 18:53:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food

Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
punk ass dole whore troll, religious maniac, lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian,
the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky
Scaly Ron
2018-08-19 18:59:48 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 19:53:52 +0100, "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
Pooh, no worries, we have lots of hunny flavoured corn syrup!
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
--
Scaly Ron - ***@hotmail.invalid - Ubuntu/Vista Dual Boot
Registered Linux User #666 - Ubuntu User #666 (12.04 LTS)
ACF "Hall of Shame": http://dl.dropbox.com/u/7365303/ACF/SL.html
** IMPROVE THE ACF EXPERIENCE. PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLLS! **
BurfordTJustice
2018-08-19 20:00:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
<***@ccanoemail.ca> wrote in message news:***@4ax.com...
: On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 19:53:52 +0100, "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
: <***@fluffyunderbelly.invalid> wrote:
:
: >
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
: >
: >Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
: >
:
:
:
: The "Environmental Working Group" has certainly succeeded
: in "making the news" with this topic - my daughter is a farmer and
: has recently fielded questions from her city friends.
: .. perhaps EWG is seeking more donations from the media exposure ?
: Apparently, EWG's safe limit is about 1/10000 of Canada's
: safe limit. ... I'd say that there are many many more important
: issues to tackle ..
: John T.
:
:
:
BurfordTJustice
2018-08-19 20:03:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
That might help explain your kooky behavior.





"p-0''0-h the cat (coder)" <***@fluffyunderbelly.invalid> wrote in
message news:***@4ax.com...
:
:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
:
: Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
:
: Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
:
: --
: p-0.0-h the cat
:
: Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
: Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey
Boy,
: Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
: the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll
infâme,
: the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife
troll,
: shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
: smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
: liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up
chav,
: punk ass dole whore troll, religious maniac, lycanthropic schizotypal
lesbian,
: the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.
:
: NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist
:
: Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
: By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.
:
: Signature integrity check
: md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896
:
: I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky
:
Norman Wells
2018-08-19 20:34:09 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
It's got nothing to do with bees.

It's got nothing to do with 'yummy' either since it's tasteless.

It can be detected only because of incredibly sensitive techniques.

And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.

Soryy to disappoint.
%
2018-08-19 20:39:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
It's got nothing to do with bees.
It's got nothing to do with 'yummy' either since it's tasteless.
It can be detected only because of incredibly sensitive techniques.
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
Soryy to disappoint.
i want some and you should be soryy
p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
2018-08-19 21:08:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
It's got nothing to do with bees.
It's got nothing to do with 'yummy' either since it's tasteless.
It can be detected only because of incredibly sensitive techniques.
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Post by Norman Wells
Soryy to disappoint.
Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
punk ass dole whore troll, religious maniac, lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian,
the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky
Norman Wells
2018-08-19 21:30:42 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
It's got nothing to do with bees.
It's got nothing to do with 'yummy' either since it's tasteless.
It can be detected only because of incredibly sensitive techniques.
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Because there's absolutely no evidence to the contrary.
%
2018-08-19 21:34:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
It's got nothing to do with bees.
It's got nothing to do with 'yummy' either since it's tasteless.
It can be detected only because of incredibly sensitive techniques.
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Because there's absolutely no evidence to the contrary.
do they enhance your boner
p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
2018-08-19 22:06:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
It's got nothing to do with bees.
It's got nothing to do with 'yummy' either since it's tasteless.
It can be detected only because of incredibly sensitive techniques.
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Because there's absolutely no evidence to the contrary.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?

Unqualified assurances are worth jack shit in my world.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
punk ass dole whore troll, religious maniac, lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian,
the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky
Norman Wells
2018-08-20 08:27:29 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
It's got nothing to do with bees.
It's got nothing to do with 'yummy' either since it's tasteless.
It can be detected only because of incredibly sensitive techniques.
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Because there's absolutely no evidence to the contrary.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Unqualified assurances are worth jack shit in my world.
It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to give the
evidence that it isn't.
p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
2018-08-20 09:10:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
It's got nothing to do with bees.
It's got nothing to do with 'yummy' either since it's tasteless.
It can be detected only because of incredibly sensitive techniques.
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Because there's absolutely no evidence to the contrary.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Unqualified assurances are worth jack shit in my world.
It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to give the
evidence that it isn't.
I don't have to prove anything. You're the one making claims about
safety. Are you qualified to make those claims? Yes or No.

Sent from my iFurryUnderbelly.
--
p-0.0-h the cat

Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker, Resident evil, Monkey Boy,
Certifiable criminal, Spineless cowardly scum, textbook Psychopath,
the SCOURGE, l33t p00h d3 tr0ll, p00h == lam3r, p00h == tr0ll, troll infâme,
the OVERCAT [The BEARPAIR are dead, and we are its murderers], lowlife troll,
shyster [pending approval by STATE_TERROR], cripple, sociopath, kook,
smug prick, smartarse, arsehole, moron, idiot, imbecile, snittish scumbag,
liar, total ******* retard, shill, pooh-seur, scouringerer, jumped up chav,
punk ass dole whore troll, religious maniac, lycanthropic schizotypal lesbian,
the most complete ignoid, joker, and furball.

NewsGroups Numbrer One Terrorist

Honorary SHYSTER and FRAUD awarded for services to Haberdashery.
By Appointment to God Frank-Lin.

Signature integrity check
md5 Checksum: be0b2a8c486d83ce7db9a459b26c4896

I mark any message from »Q« the troll as stinky
Norman Wells
2018-08-20 09:47:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food
Yummy. Don't forget the hunny mummy. Wot, no bees?
It's got nothing to do with bees.
It's got nothing to do with 'yummy' either since it's tasteless.
It can be detected only because of incredibly sensitive techniques.
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Because there's absolutely no evidence to the contrary.
How do you know? What qualifies you to offer this assurance?
Unqualified assurances are worth jack shit in my world.
It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to give the
evidence that it isn't.
I don't have to prove anything.
No, neither do I. The default position is that it's safe. Just as the
default position is that your mobile phone is safe.
devnull
2018-08-20 12:51:14 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
No, neither do I.  The default position is that it's safe.  Just as
the default position is that your mobile phone is safe.
The jury is still out on cell phones so I'm on the fence on that issue.

However, before takeoff, I assume my airplane is unsafe...which is why
prudent pilots do a pre-flight check.

And I also assume farm chemicals that kill anything are unsafe for me
too.  BT corn? You'd have to put a gun to my head to get me to eat that
crap.  Though gut microbiome science is just emerging, I suspect in time
my distrust of farm chemicals and GMOs will be vindicated.

I strongly believe someday humanity will regret polluting the soil and
water with all this toxic crap.  Sadly it will be too late if you want a
clean environment.

We've already polluted the oceans with mercury and most of us have
stopped eating mercury-laced ocean fish. No one disputes that mercury is
a toxin but maybe that's because there are no corporations profiting by
spraying it on the environment?
Frank
2018-08-20 13:18:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by devnull
No, neither do I.  The default position is that it's safe.  Just as
the default position is that your mobile phone is safe.
The jury is still out on cell phones so I'm on the fence on that issue.
However, before takeoff, I assume my airplane is unsafe...which is why
prudent pilots do a pre-flight check.
And I also assume farm chemicals that kill anything are unsafe for me
too.  BT corn? You'd have to put a gun to my head to get me to eat that
crap.  Though gut microbiome science is just emerging, I suspect in time
my distrust of farm chemicals and GMOs will be vindicated.
I strongly believe someday humanity will regret polluting the soil and
water with all this toxic crap.  Sadly it will be too late if you want a
clean environment.
We've already polluted the oceans with mercury and most of us have
stopped eating mercury-laced ocean fish. No one disputes that mercury is
a toxin but maybe that's because there are no corporations profiting by
spraying it on the environment?
As a chemist I think chemophobia is largely based on ignorance of the
relationship between toxicity and dosage.

Anyone that has ever studied chemistry knows about Avogadro's constant
which is the number of molecules in one mole of a substance, 6.02
×10 to the 23. A mole of water is 18 ml.

Analytical techniques today can measure down to the part per trillion
level so you can practically find any chemical anywhere. The fact that
it is present does not mean it is going to harm you.

A lot of the chemicals in the environment are naturally occurring and at
high levels may be toxic. Some of the worlds most toxic materials are
natural products.
Norman Wells
2018-08-20 13:47:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by devnull
No, neither do I.  The default position is that it's safe.  Just as
the default position is that your mobile phone is safe.
The jury is still out on cell phones so I'm on the fence on that issue.
Fine. Come back when you're rational.
Post by devnull
However, before takeoff, I assume my airplane is unsafe...which is why
prudent pilots do a pre-flight check.
And I also assume farm chemicals that kill anything are unsafe for me
too.
No, you can rest easy. That's been tested to exhaustion for you.
Post by devnull
  BT corn? You'd have to put a gun to my head to get me to eat that
crap.  Though gut microbiome science is just emerging, I suspect in time
my distrust of farm chemicals and GMOs will be vindicated.
Of course. Gut microbiomes will save the day.

How they grow more crops, though, is another matter.
Post by devnull
I strongly believe someday humanity will regret polluting the soil and
water with all this toxic crap.  Sadly it will be too late if you want a
clean environment.
No, not so. All herbicides and pesticides have a certain persistence in
the environment. They have to in order to work. 70 years ago, in the
infancy of synthetic pesticides, when there was very little in the way
of regulation and the dangers were largely unappreciated, some
pesticides and herbicides that were used had very high persistence,
particularly the organochlorine insecticides like DDT that could persist
for years. These have all been banned for decades.

Any more recent agrochemicals have to have rigorous studies carried out
on them to determine how they are metabolised in animals, ie how they're
broken down, what into, and how they are excreted, and similar studies
have to be effected in soils.

You can see some facts about glyphosate here:

http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/archive/glyphotech.html#fate

Half of it in soils disappears in 47 days. It does not accumulate in
the environment. It does not accumulate in the body. It is not
building up problems for the future.
Post by devnull
We've already polluted the oceans with mercury and most of us have
stopped eating mercury-laced ocean fish. No one disputes that mercury is
a toxin but maybe that's because there are no corporations profiting by
spraying it on the environment?
No-one in the agrochemical sector or farming community sprays mercury
anywhere. Nor, as far as I'm aware, have they ever done so. It
accumulates in the environment because it is an element that can neither
be created nor destroyed. Organic compounds like glyphosate are
different entirely.
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
2018-08-20 11:56:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to give the
evidence that it isn't.
I don't have to prove anything.
Some help for mathematically challenged 'Norman'..

<https://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/20005.8.shtml>

Y.
--
Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
'Many of the Europeans who want Israel to go away don't even know why
they do. Nearly a third of those interviewed conceded that they have
no idea what the Israeli - Arab conflict is all about. It's enough to
know that Israelis are Jews'
(Suzanne Fields)
<http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/>
<http://www.palwatch.org/>
Norman Wells
2018-08-20 13:17:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
Post by p-0''0-h the cat (coder)
Post by Norman Wells
It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to give the
evidence that it isn't.
I don't have to prove anything.
Some help for mathematically challenged 'Norman'..
<https://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/20005.8.shtml>
Can anyone explain the relevance of this drivel please?
Pamela
2018-08-20 15:20:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 09:27:29 +0100, Norman Wells
Post by Norman Wells
It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to
give the evidence that it isn't.
I don't have to prove anything.
Some help for mathematically challenged 'Norman'..
<https://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/20005.8.shtml>
Can anyone explain the relevance of this drivel please?
Pehraps there's some educational material there to help you understand
about differentials because you had a big misunderstanding about it
recently.

Seems other people are coming to the same conclusion as I reached about
your limited mathematical and science abilities.
Norman Wells
2018-08-20 16:10:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 09:27:29 +0100, Norman Wells
Post by Norman Wells
It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to
give the evidence that it isn't.
I don't have to prove anything.
Some help for mathematically challenged 'Norman'..
<https://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/20005.8.shtml>
Can anyone explain the relevance of this drivel please?
Pehraps there's some educational material there to help you understand
about differentials because you had a big misunderstanding about it
recently.
Seems other people are coming to the same conclusion as I reached about
your limited mathematical and science abilities.
You never rise out of the ad hom gutter in debate, do you?

Do you *ever* have anything worthwhile to contribute?
Pamela
2018-08-20 20:42:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Scaly Ron
"p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 09:27:29 +0100, Norman Wells
Post by Norman Wells
It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to
give the evidence that it isn't.
I don't have to prove anything.
Some help for mathematically challenged 'Norman'..
<https://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/20005.8.shtml>
Can anyone explain the relevance of this drivel please?
Pehraps there's some educational material there to help you
understand about differentials because you had a big
misunderstanding about it recently.
Seems other people are coming to the same conclusion as I reached
about your limited mathematical and science abilities.
You never rise out of the ad hom gutter in debate, do you?
You made a series of assertions and then say you're unable to justify
them because you can't prove a negative. However your assertions
claimed negative outcomes of testing and were not an absense of results
that can't be proven.

Don't you think it's time to stop or is it deliberate trolling?
Norman Wells
2018-08-20 21:17:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Pamela
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Scaly Ron
"p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 09:27:29 +0100, Norman Wells
Post by Norman Wells
It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to
give the evidence that it isn't.
I don't have to prove anything.
Some help for mathematically challenged 'Norman'..
<https://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/20005.8.shtml>
Can anyone explain the relevance of this drivel please?
Pehraps there's some educational material there to help you
understand about differentials because you had a big
misunderstanding about it recently.
Seems other people are coming to the same conclusion as I reached
about your limited mathematical and science abilities.
You never rise out of the ad hom gutter in debate, do you?
You made a series of assertions and then say you're unable to justify
them because you can't prove a negative. However your assertions
claimed negative outcomes of testing and were not an absense of results
that can't be proven.
Don't you think it's time to stop or is it deliberate trolling?
Is that supposed to be a positive contribution?
BurfordTJustice
2018-08-21 12:24:05 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Pamela" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:***@81.171.118.178...
: On 17:10 20 Aug 2018, Norman Wells wrote:
:
: > On 20/08/2018 16:20, Pamela wrote:
: >> On 14:17 20 Aug 2018, Norman Wells wrote:
: >>
: >>> On 20/08/2018 12:56, Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein wrote:
: >>>> "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)"
: >>>> <***@fluffyunderbelly.invalid> wrote:
: >>>>> On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 09:27:29 +0100, Norman Wells
: >>>>> <***@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
: >>>>>>
: >>>>>>
: >>>>>> It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to
: >>>>>> give the evidence that it isn't.
: >>>>
: >>>>> I don't have to prove anything.
: >>>>
: >>>> Some help for mathematically challenged 'Norman'..
: >>>>
: >>>> <https://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/20005.8.shtml>
: >>>
: >>> Can anyone explain the relevance of this drivel please?
: >>
: >> Pehraps there's some educational material there to help you
: >> understand about differentials because you had a big
: >> misunderstanding about it recently.
: >>
: >> Seems other people are coming to the same conclusion as I reached
: >> about your limited mathematical and science abilities.
: >
: > You never rise out of the ad hom gutter in debate, do you?
:
: You made a series of assertions and then say you're unable to justify
: them because you can't prove a negative. However your assertions
: claimed negative outcomes of testing and were not an absense of results
: that can't be proven.
:
: Don't you think it's time to stop or is it deliberate trolling?
:
:

BurfordTJustice
2018-08-20 20:21:17 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Pamela" <***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:***@81.171.92.183...
: On 14:17 20 Aug 2018, Norman Wells wrote:
:
: > On 20/08/2018 12:56, Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein wrote:
: >> "p-0''0-h the cat (coder)" <***@fluffyunderbelly.invalid>
: >> wrote:
: >>> On Mon, 20 Aug 2018 09:27:29 +0100, Norman Wells
: >>> <***@unseen.ac.am> wrote:
: >>
: >>>> It's impossible to prove a negative. So, it's up to you to
: >>>> give the evidence that it isn't.
: >>
: >>> I don't have to prove anything.
: >>
: >> Some help for mathematically challenged 'Norman'..
: >>
: >> <https://www.math.hmc.edu/funfacts/ffiles/20005.8.shtml>
: >
: > Can anyone explain the relevance of this drivel please?
:
: Pehraps there's some educational material there to help you understand
: about differentials because you had a big misunderstanding about it
: recently.
:
: Seems other people are coming to the same conclusion as I reached about
: your limited mathematical and science abilities.
Paul Cummins
2018-08-20 12:53:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
You'll be able to produce the research confirmign this then?
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
====
Visit North Kent's 2nd biggest supplier of Sour Grapes
http://www.grapesdirect.co.uk
Norman Wells
2018-08-20 13:16:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Cummins
Post by Norman Wells
And it's totally harmless at the concentrations detected.
You'll be able to produce the research confirmign this then?
It's all in the safety dossier submitted to the regulatory authorities
throughout the world, and examined by the relevant committees before
being given the stamp of approval to be sold.

Some of the information in that dossier has to do with determining the
'no-effect' level of the substance obtained by dosing animals with
graded amounts over extended periods. Any ill effects have to be noted,
and the internal organs are examined after the animals are sacrificed,
to ensure that no detectable changes have occurred.

With the no-effect level determined per kilogram of body weight, that is
divided by a hundred to determine the maximum acceptable residue level
to be allowed on anything for human consumption. Then the actual
residue levels are determined for the intended uses of the product, and
rules made to ensure that only those uses that give rise to residue
levels below the maximum are approved.

In general, actual residue levels fall well below the maximum allowed.

You can sleep easy in your bed tonight. You are not being affected in
the slightest by any approved agrochemical.
Paul Cummins
2018-08-20 17:09:00 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Paul Cummins
You'll be able to produce the research confirmign this then?
It's all in the safety dossier submitted to the regulatory
authorities throughout the world, and examined by the relevant
committees before being given the stamp of approval to be sold.
You'll be able to produce the safety sheet required by law then?

Or the EFSA report, like this one...

https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/5263

Pretty much all of which says "further consideration needed"

Funny that - don't see anthing saying "safe"

Now, would you like to borrow my spade so you can move your goalposts?
--
Paul Cummins - Always a NetHead
Wasting Bandwidth since 1981
====
Visit North Kent's 2nd biggest supplier of Sour Grapes
http://www.grapesdirect.co.uk
Norman Wells
2018-08-20 18:14:06 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Paul Cummins
Post by Norman Wells
Post by Paul Cummins
You'll be able to produce the research confirmign this then?
It's all in the safety dossier submitted to the regulatory
authorities throughout the world, and examined by the relevant
committees before being given the stamp of approval to be sold.
You'll be able to produce the safety sheet required by law then?
You're welcome to study this:

http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/archive/glyphotech.html#fate

That's actually got proper information and data in it, including a lot
about acute and chronic toxicity, carcinogenicity, endocrine disruption,
reproductive and teratogenic effects etc etc etc.

If you can find any bad news there about its toxicity, do let us know.
Post by Paul Cummins
Or the EFSA report, like this one...
https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/5263
Pretty much all of which says "further consideration needed"
Funny that - don't see anthing saying "safe"
Doesn't say anything about it being unsafe either. Typical EU waffle.
Post by Paul Cummins
Now, would you like to borrow my spade so you can move your goalposts?
BurfordTJustice
2018-08-20 20:22:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Norman Wells" <***@unseen.ac.am> wrote in message news:***@mid.individual.net...
: On 20/08/2018 18:09, Paul Cummins wrote:
: > In article <***@mid.individual.net>, ***@unseen.ac.am (Norman
: > Wells) wrote:
: >
: >>> You'll be able to produce the research confirmign this then?
: >>
: >> It's all in the safety dossier submitted to the regulatory
: >> authorities throughout the world, and examined by the relevant
: >> committees before being given the stamp of approval to be sold.
: >
: > You'll be able to produce the safety sheet required by law then?
:
: You're welcome to study this:
:
: http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/archive/glyphotech.html#fate
:
: That's actually got proper information and data in it, including a lot
: about acute and chronic toxicity, carcinogenicity, endocrine disruption,
: reproductive and teratogenic effects etc etc etc.
:
: If you can find any bad news there about its toxicity, do let us know.
:
: > Or the EFSA report, like this one...
: >
: > https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/5263
: >
: > Pretty much all of which says "further consideration needed"
: >
: > Funny that - don't see anthing saying "safe"
:
: Doesn't say anything about it being unsafe either. Typical EU waffle.
:
:
: > Now, would you like to borrow my spade so you can move your goalposts?
:
:
Loading...