Thanks Aharleygyrl!

I had missed his reply.

Okay, I'm satisfied its mercury vapor.

This is a cool example of when to apply different principles and the problems encountered, even with experts.

Feeling like a yoyo is never a good experience.....;-) In the last two weeks I've gone to two hip specialists, the first was VERY good, the "top" guy in this area. But I didn't like how he approached the decision to have a hip replacement. So I go ahead and find another "hip expert" in this area. Guess what? He looks at the very same x-ray and points out several things, "important things" the other expert didn't bring up. This did not affect my decision, but did indeed give extra weight to my decision.

In the Smokin' Teeth video, I can see with hind vision, had he included the bit about how a Miner's lamp worked, by mercury absorbing the UV light, he might have save himself some aggravation! At least from me!

I'm afraid he did not help himself however. Why the hell didn't he do the video again without water? This is a no brainer.

Why did he not use the sniffer in the UV example?

The sniffer video comes off bad from the perspective of "scratching".

I can say, of course you got some mercury, "you scratched the mercury off".

I find most experts get themselves into a bind by a demonstration that they believe should prove X but they don't take into account how the demonstration may look from someone without their intimate background knowledge.

If something can be misconstrued, it will be!

The failure of course is that the expert never believes that the demonstration can be taken in the wrong way. It is after all, self evident!

Thanks for the Mercola video on cavitations and such, excellent.

One last point (isn't there always), if tests were done, I think you'd find that the mercury vapor wouldn't rise the way it does if it weren't being excited by the UV light.

Thanks again,

Savagegrace
Tweet