Reply to thread

what part of that was posted from jacks book dont you understand?



I didnt say that The BOOK did get past it



and it dosent say it is harmless NOW does it? no it clearly says that a study in 1894 concluded it was harmless.....................and then states that since then severl reports have agreed...............



then it goes on to say that the US Governement said it was harmless in 1976 clearly not 100 years ago and clearly not ROKER saying it


and so then are these the points you clain to have proven wrong?


these two here this is your argument ? where you mopped the floor with me?


Back
Top