| Sender: |
|
| Date: |
Fri, 19 Aug 2011 07:51:54 -0500 |
| MIME-version: |
1.0 |
| Reply-To: |
|
| Content-type: |
text/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII |
| Subject: |
|
| From: |
|
| In-Reply-To: |
|
| Content-transfer-encoding: |
7BIT |
| Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
OK, I give up. I have been singularly ineffective in making the point I was trying to make. I certainly disagree that I have manipulated anyone -- that's just garbage, Tom Matthews. But, I will stop trying to influence anyone's communication methods or behavior otherwise. My apologies to everyone on this list for wasting their time.
Donna
On Aug 19, 2011, at 6:59 AM, Phyllis Mains wrote:
> Thanks Mike. Phyllis
> Donna,
> Because of research on messaging, we stopped using the term "global warming" a few years ago and now refer to "climate change". We now use "clean energy" because it tests better than"renewable energy". Is their research to back up this claim? I also grew up on a "family farm" and think that "factory farm" is a great phrase until I see research that says otherwise.
> Thanks,
> Mike
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to: [log in to unmask] Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information: http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To unsubscribe from the IOWA-TOPICS list, send any message to:
[log in to unmask]
Check out our Listserv Lists support site for more information:
http://www.sierraclub.org/lists/faq.asp
|
|
|