On 2018-08-11 1:09 PM, graham wrote:
> On 2018-08-11 11:04 AM, Terry Coombs wrote:

> NO! He claimed it was the seed!!!
> If it had been the pollen, Monsanto wouldn't have had a case as 50% of
> the genome would have been non-Monsanto.
> He'd obviously kept their seed back for re-planting without paying the fee.
> I don't approve of Monsanto either but I don't like liars!!!!


True.... I guess. The claim was that the farmer noticed that some of the
canola survived after the field had been treated with RoundUp. He then
harvested the seed from those plants that were growing on his property
without him having planted the original ones.