I don't think of water as a chemical. I think of substances that are synthesized for particular purposes as chemicals. But whatever. Who wants to defend Towle's removal of wrinkles, any takers?

John,

Philly water drawn from the Schuylkill may very well be the most toxic substance on the planet.

Soaking anything in Schuylkill Punch is a bad idea. And not disclosing such a soak should be downright criminal.

Best regards,

Eric

Gone with the stain. Dick Towle
 

Soaking a card from a notebook, to me is the same as removing a card from a GIA slab. I'm simply freeing it from a holder. One requires a hammer the other water. I'm not in any way trying to improve the card other then removing it from the page/remove the page from it. Is that hypocritical?

My issue is using a man made, specially designed chemical to remove stains, residue and make whites pop. Pressing corners/wrinkles & trimming arealso meant to deceive that a card has survived in a much nicer condition then it truly has.

Edited. I've tried it once, just to see what happens.

Vid http://youtu.be/y1QFe7T8zK8

Peter,

I will not bite on defending Dick. However, I will say that water is a chemical...with a pH very close to 7. Whatever solution he uses is close to that, chemically.

Best,

Eric

I was away for several hours or would have addressed this earlier. You are not only correct Scott, you didn't go far enough on the name issue. The litmus test I use, besides the easy rule at the top of every page, is "if someone said that to me, or in response to me, would I want to know who they are?" If the answer is yes (and I almost always want to know), then the FULL name needs to be in the post, thread or easily obtainable from that thread. This is the same rule for the last 10 yrs so it's not new news. And in that respect Paul is Pau.l Mif.sud .....thanks everyone....

Good point, I'm actually a little surprised how laid back folks are about Dick's work. Like the Plank above wouldn't bother anyone? Just me? We all know that wasn't water that did that...let alone Dick's comment on taking out wrinkles. Seems more like folks are into splitting hairs or arguing semantics on what a chemical is vs. addressing the fact that this is used to profit and done under secrecy.

Even funnier over the years there have been countless threads posting dirty items from eBay or previous auctions selling in new auctions all cleaned up etc. I don’t seem to remember the “no big deal” vibe from those threads. :)

Cheers,

John

NM

PSA doesn't like chemicals either. even if they can't detect them.

N-7 Evidence of Cleaning - When a whitener is used to whiten borders or a solution is used to remove wax, candy, gum or tobacco stains.

Nice video....I have done that many times. One of the times I remember distinctly was from an original find that I called the Trucker Boy Find. Long story but it was a west coast collection...this card had paper similar to that card in the youtube video, over about 20% of the upper back.

http://luckeycards.com/pt2123weaver.jpg

I guess I just don't see the act as different.

Some kid puts a card in a notebook with water based glue 100 years ago to display it, and somewhat to protect it.

I have SGC glue two pieces of plastic around my cards for the same reasons.

Removing them, to me is not trying to deceive anyone.

I feel so ...exposed!

:eek:

Peter, you are so weird. I drink a quart of chemicals every morning when I get up. Get with the program.

I mix a little hydrogen peroxide with mine. Those extra atoms rev me up.

Well-said, John. Earlier today I didn't mind debating the differences between water and chemicals, because I was bored and not inclined to work. Now I'm relaxed and that conversation seems incredibly stupid.

Calling something "chemical" in the purely scientific sense is meaningless in normal conversation. Can anyone name any substance or solution that isnt chemical? Of course water is chemical. So is air. So is everything else. When you get down to it, the sun is LESS likely to rise in the eastern sky tomorrow than for us to find a substance or solution that isnt chemical.

Eric, yes I do know a lot more about chemistry than some of the people posting in this thread. That doesn't mean I know much :)

I took 3 chemistry classes in high school, and 8 in college. I am not a chemist. My daughter ran some tests on tap water in Atlanta and told me that it was unfit to drink. The tap water in Seattle is incredibly drinkable. I also know that the bottled water you buy in the store is often no more pure than your local tap water, but I have no idea what you are drinking in Philadelphia.

Personally, I drink tap water unless it tastes bad or someone tells me it is unsafe. I don't like the taste of 'soft' water.

That's all I know, and water doesn't interest me enough for me to do additional research. Oh yeah, it has one less 'H' than Hydrogen Peroxide, and that makes a really big difference if you are debating on which one to drink.

You make some good points - points that shouldn't be necessary, but in the spirit of debate, are winners. But in the end, as ridiculous as this tangent might be, we still have to thank Leon for allowing this thread to continue, because it has certainly yielded a lot of entertainment today.

Can anyone disagree with that?

I agree they are not for it....unless Paragon submits a Plank on a $5 bulk submission. :D

eric
 

this is as far as I've gotten in the thread - but I wanted to suggest for your longevity that distilled water is not a source of water to sustain your life - as everything has been removed........

I think he meant 'bottled water', but I'm just guessing.

(This thread has it all)

Water has the chemical formula H2O. What comes out of the tap has a variety of other molecules in it. Most common will be elements such a calcium and magnesium which stain your bathtub and sink fixtures. There are also a number of other chemicals that haven't been completely filtered out at the water plant. When water is distilled it is evaporated and condensed to remove other products which don't have the same boiling point. The distillation process and the number of distillations will determine how pure the water is.

Water is a chemical and a solvent like other solvents. They all behave differently. Water can be extremely dangerous and reactive in certain situations.

As I mentioned before, the process of soaking in water or soaking in Towle solution is detectable. It might be cost prohibitive for the grading companies to detect it, but it is detectable.

This is a joke right?

The question is whether or not it matters. How detectable is water? How much does it change the item? Ask the same questions about Dick's chemicals. Drinking water is not going to kill you, but I'm guessing that drinking Dick's solution might make you a little sick. But maybe it's just like water - that's what some here would have us believe.

Common sense tells most of us that water is well, sort of safe. It washes stuff off, wood is basically made of water, and paper is made from wood, etc., etc. But let's not let common sense confuse the issue. After all, water is a chemical.

No, it's a fact. Distilled water has most of the minerals removed, and we need minerals in order to survive. You can drink distilled water, but why would you pay more to drink water that is less healthy?

Water is a chemical. Bleach is a chemical. Therefore water is bleach. Or, at least, there is no difference between soaking a card in water and bleaching a card. QED.

FWIW, water is not really a chemical, it's an compound - a combination of two or more elements (hydrogen and oxygen).

Shit just got real!

I have said for a while that I believe a lot of high grade cards were soaked from albums. Who cares? In a perfect world this stuff should be disclosed, but it rarely is. To me, right or wrong, it is just a part of the hobby.

Yo yo Mr. White
 

Note to auction houses and sellers, feel free to clean up cards with solvents and chemicals no need to disclose to collectors as long as nobody can tell. Sell away...

But god help you if you get your chemistry notes wrong. :D

It's like a Breaking Bad episode up in here. :)

Cheers,

John

I learned a lot, and was reminded of a lot, in 'Breaking Bad'. Great great show.

One of the best ever!

Alex, I've noticed a couple of forum members stating this. I'm sure this is part of it, but I really think that most of the high-grade slabbed cards were simply larger cards that were trimmed. Soaking card from albums, from my experience, doesn't generally create a 'perfect' card. Most album cards do not have sharp corners, and when soaked, usually still have imperfections that occurred as a result of being glued to an album page.

That is entirely possible. However, I recently purchased an N28 that was removed from an album and the corners were pretty nice.

Perhaps Dick and "gone with the stain" work under a shell company...

http://photos.imageevent.com/piojohn...ared/image.jpg

Sorry Scott, you are correct it is more healthy to drink water with minerals in it than without. I misinterpreted his post to mean that you couldn't drink distilled water.

If you are going to make statements like this please specify your definition of a chemical. If you type chemical into google the first entry is chemical substance on wikipedia which uses water as the first example. My guess is you are referring to chemical elements. Since the only elements which are liquid at room temperature and pressure are mercury and bromine, I don't think anyone was referring to soaking cards in a chemical element.

peter s
 

fabas indulcet fames.

best,
barry

geez
 

try and save a guys life and what happens :-)

It's a crazy world ain't it Henry?

Hey Barry

Lots opinions all over the place

I know for a fact that one of these T206s below was attached in a scrapbook and took a bath in 2009.

For the record, I knew the T206 was removed from a scrapbook and who I was buying it from.

Anyone want to take a guess which T206 went for a swim?

Jantz

I can see that Wonka is hung up on Brite White Borders... Ok Wonka, lets say you have a card that already has Brite White Borders but also has a streak of something running horizontally across the card and unfortunately right across the players face - you cannot tell me for a fact that you know what soaking this card in water or anything else is going to do... Would you have a problem if using the water removed all the evidence of the stain? But do not forget this card has Brite White Borders before and after the soak - no change in that regard.

I see your stance (wonka) as a double standard - its convenient for you as water is something you have dealt with. This reminds of some arguments that my wife will often pose in that "I do not do it anywhere near as much as she does".

I think you are telling me as well, that you would be ok with Dick Towles process as long as the stain removal process he uses left some evidence of the stain? Is this correct?

John,
Nothing personal here - like I said earlier its an interesting subject to me.

+1

My definition of a chemical is a substance created by chemistry (changes in the composition of molecules). There are chemicals in water - some added intentionally (chlorine), some naturally (iron, calcium), some just seep into the water supply (pesticides), but water itself is not a chemical.

Soaking a card in water is no different than soaking a card in a chemical that doesn’t leave any evidence (something you can see, smell or feel). One may not like the idea of soaking cards and that’s certainly their right, but they can not argue the fact that the end result (a card free from any evdience of soaking) is still the same rather they like the idea or not.

So chlorine, iron, and calcium are created by chemistry? These chemicals are found in nature just as water is. If you are going to make up your own definitions at least make them consistent.

We could probably play semantics the rest of our lives but in the real world hobbyists don't consider water a chemical. It is especially true in this discussion. I have no issue with using water on a card. If I was asked I would tell, it not, probably not.

Hope this helps with the intense water-chemical convo.

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/i...1200345AAlFaC0

I know what I'm talking about. I hold a water license from the State of Texas. Those are my credentials. What are yours?

Do you want to keep talking and looking more foolish and do you want to shut up at this point since you really don't know what you're talking about? I would suggest the latter, but that is up to you.

Water = Chemical compound (H2O)
Chlorine Chemical element (Cl)
Iron = Chemical element (Fe)
Calcium = Chemical element (Ca)

So it really sounds like you only consider a single element a chemical and not a compound?

A great site that plays with the semantics of Water being a chemical is http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html.

From the site

Is vitamin water okay?