RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

You are the one who made fun of someone else for their ignorance of the subject and then clearly demonstrated similar ignorance yourself. That's all I was pointing out.


I never did.


Where did you get that from??.......as I have said nothing of the sort.



I never understood this logic..........especially because you never treat the opposite end of this equation with the same respect.........when someone does use it and says it did nothing you blame the hunter and never the product..........Not only that I'm a reasonably intelligent man myself and I don't need to try to jam a square peg into a round hole to know it doesn't fit.

Anyways...........we can discuss SL all day every day but we should probably leave this thread for SLG Designer out of respect for the effort to put this together and the willingness to bring it here.

Any issues with content should probably be addressed towards him or this thread will be in the toilet in no time.

Agreed?

RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

"Making Friends on the Internet -101" ... the professor speaks!

RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

How old are you 10??

This from a guy who wrote a book just to tell a one sided whiney story about a deer he killed illegally :eek:

Grow up.

RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

OK, I watched this whole thing. As someone said, science can inject a test to obtain desired results. Yes it may work "SOME" but in view of the fact these suits don't have a solid wall of carbon, they're mostly little dots between layers with open spaces between. My problem with their test, and they had to do it this way, is they used a very pure, very volitile substance to obtain their results. The things that were not involved that would be in day to day use that contaminate suits and make them loose their effectiveness. What are these things, NON-Volitile substances given off by the body. Fatty acids(the real stink in body odors)and body oils. They are not volitile enough to be purged from the carbon in any dryer. You'd have to almost catch the fabric on fire to purge fatty acids. They only used one substance and he himself said it's great for testing as it's a very volitile gas. That's why they can get such magical reactivation. Throw in other non-volitile substance, and oil base odor gases, come in contact with bacon cooking or something like that. You aren't going to purge these things with a dryer. They're non volitile, you can't get them out of the carbon, so with each used it would become less effective. Hunt on a couple hot summer or early fall days with high temps, it gets more.

So yes, we've known about carbon for decades. We use it in the drycleaning industry. Carbon holds a lot of junk. We try to purge the carbon in filters of drycleaning fluid to reduce hazardous waste. We'd strip them live steam forced through the filters from inside to out for hours. We would reduce the amount of drycleaning fluid about 50 percent by weight. Each filter contained POUNDS of carbon, not a few grams found in a scent lok type garment. There, I'm done, professor Davidmil is finished. Imonitored months of solvent recovery test from carbon filters at IFI(International Fabricare Institute) Thechemical company I worked for had an affliation with DARCO brand activated carbon.(the worlds best) Maybe if you put on a nice newsuit like these people in the opening video do every month or so you'd be alright. But for the general public, buying a $200 suit every year or so get's expensive. And another bone, scent lok in boots. Give me a break. That's blown the second time you wear them and sweat. I'm not putting a pair of $200 Danner boots in a dryer.

One other point......gases take the path of least resistance just like everything else including us. To assure the carbon works in filtration etc, it is forced through a sealed filter under pressure from the outside in. Much like your oil filter in yourcar works. First the filtered solvents are forced through a paper membrane to filter out solids, then through 2 inches of packed activated carbon. This is usually done with pumps running 20-40 pounds of pressure, not just air waving or the surface. You have an opening in the garment a lot of stink gets out just like it does between the dots of carbon. In drycleaning you also usually had a separate bank of all carbon filters that were packed from top to bottom with nothing but carbon. You needed that as a dye remover boost. And folks, these filters aren't small and depending on the solvent flow required you used any number of them. I've seen machines with 42 filters on them and each filter about the size of a mid size waste basket.

RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

i got a better site for everyone to look at, but i dont wanna start anything...lol

RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

Which one??...............PM me if you don't want to post it here.

RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

Don't be afraid to share.

RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

Nick,

I have started to look at a few of your documents and I have to tell you my immediate first impression of those.............I find it disturbing that you chose to list complete references with no guide or map for the "average" joe to go by.

I do this kind of thing day in and day out in my career so no problem.........but what percentage of average hunters do you suppose #1 will even take the time to read hundreds of pages of studies they have little or no idea what are saying?? Judging by the video it is clear that you are banking on guys just sitting through that (even that is a stretch due to it's length and level of interest).

This has always been a source of my distaste for this type of marketing............throwing a ton of data at people and banking on the fact that they are either not gonna understand it or simply not care enough to sift through it.

I am being as nice about this as I can but it really irritates me when I see a lack of knowledge targeted and exploited by anyone. I think you know as well as I and everyone else reading this that the average hunter is most likely gonna be in way over his head trying to analyze all that data properly and objectively.

The site is just not friendly to those without an elevated knowledge of science...........and it seems like you were shooting for the stereotypical Snickers commercial hunter to be overwhelmed and be left with no other option then to trust your word because they don't know what half the fancy words you threw at them even mean.

Again.........just a first impression. If you honestly believed that the average hunter would sit through that 1/2 hour video and then read hundreds of pages of documents some of which deal with upper level science and chemistry and be able to understand and follow right along then I take everything I said back.

RE: Scent-Lok Science Site
 

Look at me, I lost 100 pounds on the Scentlok diet!;)