"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 03:09:35 GMT, "David Kendra"
wrote:


"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 22:47:54 GMT, "David Kendra"
wrote:

But not if the wheat is engineered to resist the roundup. And you
don't
have to worry about that nasty "up to a point" concept anymore ;-)

Bah, if you mean control you need to get at the grass weeds early in
any case.

LMAO...keep trying Torsten.

Laugh away, you know I am right. Or otta.

Hmm...mighty sure of yourself. And who voted and made you god? From the
sounds of others in this thread, I suspect no one. Keep trying - why dont
you try giving evidence to support your god-like claim.

How much wheat do you actually grow?

This year nothing, it is all maize.

Bt perhaps? ;-)

Dave



Dave

Bummer
about the cursing. Only frustrated folks need to curse and then it
makes
others not want to listen to what you are saying. In fact IMO it
weakens
your case.

Bwhahaha. An American offended by one of the ****ing most commonly
used word in ****ing common American.

"Torsten Brinch" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 17:04:13 GMT, "David Kendra"
wrote:

I would appreciate your opinion as to why Puma is a better "wheat"
herbicide
than Roundup. Thanks.

Huh? If you want a herbicide to kill wheat, Roundup would be the
better of the two. Roundup just ****ing kills wheat, while Puma is
well tolerated up to a point.