Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth
On a card whose appearance has changed that much, and in the manner it has changed, what is your basis for assigning the burden of proof to those who believe more than water is involved? From my perspective the burden is on those who claim it's only water.
|
Peter,
Did you ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe that the stains in the REA scan are more pronounced than they really are? Maybe it was the scanner settings? I'm not saying that the card hasn't been cleaned. It has. But I am saying that maybe the card wasn't that bad to begin with. Maybe it was the scanner? Let me give you an example. Below is a post card that I purchased from Sterling a few months back. I wanted the post card, I was willing to live with the heavy stains. However, when I got the card in hand, the stains were barely noticeable. The only thing I could think of was that maybe Lee's scanner settings made the stains appear worse than they really are. Later, I'll scan it with my own scanner and show you the difference. You'll swear it was cleaned. But I can tell you it's the honest truth that I didnt do anything to the card at all. So, when you say "the appearance has changed that much..." maybe it really hasn't changed all that much? Again, I'm not suggesting that it hasn't been cleaned. It has. But I am suggesting that maybe the stains weren't as bad as REA's scanner made them out to be. Then again, all that sounds too complicated. I guess its just easier to blame GWTS, PSA, PWCC and everybody else, right?
