Reply to Thread

Message:: [QUOTE="TomCorona, post: 545092, member: 17621"]If it was pre-conceived, it was based on, as I started out saying, my good friend's 40 plus years of experience in the field. I've since read much information verifying that it can be and is done successfuly pretty routinely,which is what I suspected, but looking for further verfication. If oyu call that a pre-conceived notion, then, perhaps it is, but, it certainly seems many have their own notions as well, which should form the basis of an "accuracy oriented" discussion.  I guess "cleaning" was the wrong word. I was told I had the "jargon" wrong. I should have chosen "conserve" or "not harshly" as a term, then perhaps that would have steered the issue in a more "non-entertaining" fashion, but it was what it was. My apologies for not knowing the particular "jargon" as I said, I was new (my buddy wasn't), and I was trying to reference his knowledge and looked for a definate "right or wrong". Perhaps that was another mistake on my part. I assumed I could get factual verification, one way or the other, and obviously that failed miserably. I encountered  much sarcasm very early on and only started returning it when it seemed any points I was trying to make were well lost. Like I said. I did finally get that verifcation and have since tested the theories (as well as a few others), and ma comfortable thinking what I think, all points considered. That obviously stands in contrast with the group here, (which obviously stands in contrast to what I was trying to verify), which left me with the decision for myself which sources were correct, factual, which were not, and which were simply opinions. I've made that decision and I'll live with it. I will continue to use this blog for information, but for more of a reference than accuracy. Thank you for your response.[/QUOTE]

Create my FREE Account!

Log in or Sign up

Reply to Thread

Useful Searches