On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 09:32:15 GMT, "Moosh:]"
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 16:42:54 +0200, Torsten Brinch
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 14:25:11 GMT, "Moosh:]"
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 15:39:30 +0200, Torsten Brinch
wrote:

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 12:59:36 GMT, "Moosh:]"
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 11:06:02 +0200, Torsten Brinch
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 04:02:44 GMT, "Moosh:]"
wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 00:06:14 +0200, Torsten Brinch
wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 14:51:19 GMT, "Moosh:]"
wrote:
.. I've looked up the reference given and stand by my claim.
"Rapidly" is perhaps a misleading word.

Point is, you claim it breaks down rapidly in plants,
while referencing that information to a source which
says in some plants it remains bloody intact.

"Bloodywell intact", Torsten, try to be grammatical

Hello? There is inconsistency between your claim and
the source to which you reference it. Deal with it.

See below. Oh, and see the smiley. Are you a Fin?

John Riley, is that you?

Nope. Who's he?

Never mind who he is. He used the same smiley, and knitted
like a madwoman, much like you do.

There's someone over on one of the bike groups with that name IIRC.
Dunno about the knitting,

It is a very personal thing put words together -- you know, like
a voice, fingerprints, or DNA profile. Your word-knitting
is much like that of the John Riley I refer to, or should I
say close to identical.

but smilies are pretty common. I copied this
one from seeing it used by others. It's the easiest to type

It is not regarded as
persistent in significant plants. From memory, corn was
amongst these.

Well, what can one say.

That it doesn't hang about long in significant food plants. IIRC.
Even if it does, so what? Over the years I've ferretted out scores of
references and always come to a dead end as far as any harm goes.
Can you mention any harm from glyphosate?