And I'm sure that you'll also notice that the compilers at this
site don't refute ozone depletion as the myth that you would
suggest or have others believe.
I did notice that they hew to the Party Line - which is still tenable if
you are only aware of errors in reduction of the SATELLITE data.
. Marc de Piolenc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Biofuel List biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 12:13 PM
Subject: [biofuel] Global Warming fertilizer
And I'm sure that you'll also notice that the compilers at this
site don't refute ozone depletion as the myth that you would
suggest or have
and such
a perfectly ignorant ass in so many others is absolutely beyond
reason - unless it's intentional.
Todd Swearingen
- Original Message -
From: F. Marc de Piolenc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Biofuel List biofuel@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 12:13 AM
Subject: [biofuel] Global Warming
Subject: Re: Global warming b.s.
You keep coming back with this stuff, eh, Marc? You get debunked, you
wait a few months and then try it again as if it never happened.
Sorry - must have missed the message that debunked me; all I remember
was a lot of orthodoxy being spouted.
Will
you be
20, 2002 1:16 AM
Subject: [biofuel] Global warming fertilizer
Subject: Re: Global warming b.s.
And of course you have reputable references and are willing to
forward them for the benefit of all, yes? References which
support the claim of seasonal pre-existence and no increased in
loss
Subject: Re: Global warming b.s.
And of course you have reputable references and are willing to
forward them for the benefit of all, yes? References which
support the claim of seasonal pre-existence and no increased in
loss of stratospheric ozone?
Just to amuse myself, I did a WebFerret search.
