On Sep 2, 4:19*pm, Billy wrote more stupid
crap.

Ok,billy, it’s the fourth sophist plug in as many weeks now. But let’s
get the usual ad hominem out of the way first ok? You have proved
yet again your still a lying asshole. You never killfiled me as you
so often like to boast your false bravado. Everyone here knows your
ego could not stand not knowing when you get caught in your web of
lies. Plus you never read your own BS! Your old propaganda tricks
you learned in your draft dodging days are needing a make over there
slick! BTW billy, you wouldn't know a Gunner from a Gunny,
asshole. Pretend all you want that you were on a noble anti
everything mission to enlighten and save us from ourselves, but we
all know you’re just suffering from phthalate syndrome and a chicken
shit wannabe as well. Now days your just some old tired ass diabetic
with a bad heart and a drug addled brain swapping tall tales w/ Walter
Mitty in Life’s waiting room. Doom and Gloom, billy that’s all ya
got; doom and gloom. Funny how you still want to tell folks how to
save a world you've never seen except in NatGeo and now days, on the
Internet. Luckily there are better men than you in this world to keep
ignorance at bay. I do have to say that 7 points would put you within
grasp of the “average” group of Caliphonies. So I can see that would
be important to you to have an excuse for your ignorance.

Ok, so now we have that out of the way. You seem to be using the same
lame rhetorical propaganda crap to cover your tracks as you always
do. Let’s turn your little trick around. Why don’t you tell us what
the optimum level of organophosphate since you pretended to have read
the studies? Hummmmm? Ask the songbirds they use it. Betting you have
also. Personally I’m betting you just picked up another BS
subterfuge article off the ECONUT wire service that you never
read. You have too many NG fights going to keep your lies straight
billy and yet you still try to bring your political BS into
gardening. How much does your PAC pay you?

As I have proven so many times now you never were one for reading much
past the title of the eco propaganda rags but instead lauding some
book writer for the pseudo science used to sell his version of doom
and gloom. Never reading anything that challenges your stupid think.

Don't know for certain but I believe most women in the "present
study were Spanish speaking, were born in Mexico, lived in farmworker
households, did not complete high school, and had a family income
below the U.S. poverty threshold (table 1), 44% of mothers performed
agricultural work during their pregnancy." I wonder what the socio-
economic conditions of the 7 YO kids were as they grew up? Don't
think the IQ tests were all conducted in Spanish but admitted the
results were adjusted for bias, whatever that really means? So the
study “may suggest” all those 329 or 298 or 297 ( pick your test in
the Berkley study) migrant kids have lower IQs than their peers(?)
because of “chemicals” and we can extrapolate this “data” to be
indicative of all kids in farming households across America having
lower IQs than their peers … WTH, let’s just say the world?

(BTW, Any bets kids in Oakland would test positive in some degree for
THC contamination this weekend, hummmmmm? For sure Mendocino and
Humboldt, huh. Pick your toxins well old boy new science allows us to
detect things we never could before, nor do we know what this all
means. I believe even you were squawking recently about an Eco group
headlining finding 232 “chemicals” in newborns which I believe you
attempted to allude to as evil pesticides. But alas, we split hairs)

Using your cherry picked data, we can assume all the kids in the
American Bread Basket , where they use so much more pesticide than you
Califonies, to test on par with your kids in Salinas, adjusted for
bias of course? Regardless, let’s put IQ in some sort of perspective
shall we? First by country: http://sq.4mg.com/NationIQ.htm, now by
state: http://www.top50states.com/average-iq-score.html .
Granted these are only 2004-2006 data but still a good snapshot to
put the Berkley study in perspective.
BTW, you did catch the part on post natal in her paper didn’t ya? That
part kinda got glossed over. You and the songbirds should be OK with
your using OP.

Yet, how bias is using “adjusted bias” in IQ tests, especially on a
group of kids living in migrant camps, flying under the radar, moving
with the seasons, isolated, doing big peoples chores instead of
playing, having stick toys instead of gameboys. IQ tests certainly do
not factor all the socio-economic conditions to prove your latest doom
and gloom ploy. Not a very strong dissertation in my opinion. But
hey, you grasp all those straws you need and defend your BS beliefs
all you want, It is billy BS after all and you’ve certainly proven
your at least 7 points within the norm in CA.

No, billy boy, your little group of backyardigans singing ”We are the
World” isn’t going to feed the world and certainly it isn’t going to
save it from a lying sophist like billy et. al.

Keep picking those cherries you old fart.

( same old tired ass schizophrenic political propaganda snipped)