84.1

Strictly speaking,
There is no west at the north pole,
A destination that requires the traveler
To lose her directions.
If ice was forgetting,
Methane is memory.
Or should she have said:
If the Ice Age was a trauma,
Then methane Nachträglichkeit”?

84.2

Strictly speaking,
there’s no west at the north pole,
which requires the traveler
to forfeit her directions.
If the ice was forgetting,
then methane is memory.
Shouldn’t she have said:
“If the Ice Age was the trauma,
then this methane the Nachträglichkeit”?

84.3

Strictly speaking,
there’s no west at the north pole,
which makes the traveler
to forfeit directions.
If the ice was forgetfulness,
then methane will be memory.
She put it differently:
“If the Ice Age = trauma,
then this methane = Nachträglichkeit.”

84.4

Strictly speaking,
there’s no west at the north pole,
which makes the traveler
forfeit directions.
If the ice had been forgetfulness,
then this methane will be memory.
She preferred to put it this way:
“Ice Age = trauma;
this methane = Nachträglichkeit.”

84.5

Strictly speaking,
there’s no west at the north pole,
which makes the traveler
forfeit directions.
Had the ice been forgetfulness,
this methane will have been memory.
She put it this way:
“Ice Age = T1;
this methane = T2.”

84.6

Strictly speaking,
there’s no west at the north pole,
which makes the traveler
forfeit directions.
Had the ice been forgetfulness,
this methane memory . . .
She put it:
“Tundradum;
Tundradee.”

84.7

Strictly speaking,
there’s no west at the north pole,
which makes the traveler
forfeit directions.
Had the ice been forgetfulness,
this methane memory . . .
We now can see
stability was agrilogistics’
ruse.