Entrained Air, The Groupie, and US Gypsum Options

[Tube]

As I mentioned in Bitter Monk’s thread, I stopped reading what The Groupie had to say some years ago. But recently an associate of mine sent me a link to one of her latest blog entries:

http://txsasquatch.blogspot.com/2009/02/ar...lashpumice.html

Amazingly, after all this time, this individual finally follows the simple directions I suggested more than 2 years ago and gets exactly the results I suggested would occur:



In fact, the result is a rather striking match for the texture we see 9cm anterior of the heel on CA-19:



At this point, the rational and scientifically minded person would simply say, “Wow, it looks just the same, and nothing like real dermal ridges”
But no, The Groupie has to go through conniptions to explain away the obvious match. She decides it’s all my fault because at one time I used chopsticks to mix my plaster slurry! She equates this to a wire whisk and implies that the ridge artifacts are due to entrained air!
First off, this is a direct personal attack against me AGAIN, as it implies I’m utterly incompetent to even mix plaster of Paris. A baseless accusation of course, but by now this is common practice for The Groupie.
Ever notice how The Groupie never names the experts she claims to consult? Ever notice how The Groupie never records or publishes the correspondence she has with these experts? It’s always phone calls, and second hand anecdotes. We see it in her blog entry:

In this specific situation, had I payed more attention to the expert with USGypsum.com, this may not have gone on so long. Instead I allowed myself to be bogged down in arguments over water temperature and pancake batter. I should not have doubted this man from USGypsum.com's 25 years of experience with this product he has such an incredible knowledge of. We really should listen to those who have expertise in areas, especially when that expertise or knowledge can help us.

Who is this expert? What is their name?
To cut to the chase, I knew that her claim that the ridges we see are due to entrained air is complete and total bullshit. There are a bunch of reasons for this.
1. If these ridges were due to entrained air, we would see them on every substrate, but we don’t.
2. We don’t see them on casts made in substrates that have had a proper application of a barrier spray.
3. We don't see them occur on non-porous surfaces, like latex molds.
4. Entrained air produces little pits, not ridges! And so on…
But hey, why listen to me, I just have a Bachelor of Science degree in Pharmacy. I decided to follow up with The Groupie’s source of information; US Gypsum.
I sent the following e-mail to Kym Heitke, a technical representative with US Gypsum:
Hello, my name is Matt Crowley, and I’m writing from Seattle Washington. For some time now, I’ve been investigating a strange property of some of your casting compounds including Ultracal 30, Hydrocal B11, and ordinary plaster of Paris. When I make casts of impressions made in certain fine, dry substrates like pumice or silica without a barrier spray, I sometimes get very characteristic ridges and furrows. For some time now, I’ve been trying to understand the mechanism of this process. An associate of mine with a PhD in Geology advises me that they are “desiccation ridges”, caused by the strong capillary action of these particular substrates pulling the water from the cement slurry strongly away. To understand on a visual level what I’m talking about, I’ve created a number of webpages on the subject. Here is a good example:

http://www.orgoneresearch.com/testing_silica.htm

I fully recognize the subject of “Bigfoot” is “fringe science” but I assure you the spontaneous ridge phenomenon is absolutely real and easily reproduced. I appreciate you taking the time to read and respond to my request, which is simply this; can you help me to understand the physical mechanism that would produce these spontaneous ridges?

I’m usually home from work after about 4:00 o’clock if you want to call me at home. My home phone number is 206-XXX-XXXX

I didn’t get a response from Kym Heitke, but she forwarded my e-mail to Perry Tuttle, who has given me permission to publish his answers to my question. Here is his response to my first e-mail:

Matt,

It appears to me that your geology friend is correct. The porous nature of the material you are making the impression in is "wicking" water at uneven rates from the plaster. To rehydrate plaster properly, the slurry needs to lay undisturbed after vigorous mixing. If wicking is occuring, the suspended solids compact due to the water being withdrawn, and that creates ridges and water starved (desication) cracks on the cast.

Since this has happenned on various USG products of a wide range of formulation difference, I'm pretty confident. Also, if the dessication and ridging does not occur after you "seal" the pumice or fine silica impression, then that supports a wicking problem. We recommend to seal any surface that plaster is poured against.

Here is something to try if you don't seal the impression before pouring plaster. First, mix the plaster vigorously for at least five minutes - this will ensure that the plaster crystals are already using the water before you pour. This will also create a faster setting plaster which could solidify before the full effects of wicking take hold. I believe the fix is to use a sealer on your "mold".

We have a good website called gypsumsolutions.com that has great literature on mixing, casting, drying, etc. to help you read up on the details.

Perry Tuttle
Region Sales Mgr-West
Performance Substrates, USG

Imagine that! A technical expert at US Gypsum agrees with what Anton Wroblewski, a PhD in geology and therefore an expert in inorganic processes has been saying all along: these are DESICCATION RIDGES! Who would have thought!

I sent Mr. Tuttle another e-mail:

Mr. Tuttle;

Thank you very much for responding to my e-mail inquiry. I was fairly confident that slurry desiccation was the most likely mechanism involved in this process, and I’m glad to have received your confirmation. As a follow-up, I have read a public claim that the ridge-artifacts are due to entrained air, and not desiccation. I don’t believe this to be correct for a number of reasons, the least of which is that I’ve never seen little bubble-pits on any of the ridges in any test casts I’ve made. I’d like to get your take on this claim as well.
In addition, I would like your permission to publicly quote your answer, as well as this portion of your previous e-mail:

Matt,

It appears to me that your geology friend is correct. The porous nature of the material you are making the impression in is "wicking" water at uneven rates from the plaster. To rehydrate plaster properly, the slurry needs to lay undisturbed after vigorous mixing. If wicking is occuring, the suspended solids compact due to the water being withdrawn, and that creates ridges and water starved (desication) cracks on the cast.

His response:

Hi Matt,

It’s fine to post my opinions. Air entrainment problems, when created by poor mixing practices, tend to show up throughout a cast and do not create one isolated feature. Many times, when a mold has a particular section of contour where air can’t be fully displaced to the backside (top) of the casting, then you can get isolated air entrained features. In both cases, you should see air bubbles in cross section.

Additionally, pouring a plaster product against a porous medium can also create bubbles even though you may have mixed the slurry without entraining air. When the slurry enters an open porosity system, the air has to be pushed out somewhere and typically, it will simply find its way into the slurry. Sealing your pattern material is the way to go.

Perry

As you can see, NOWHERE does he suggest that these ridges are due to air entrainment , and in fact accepts the mechanism proposed by Dr. Wroblewski: desiccation.

What The Groupie doesn’t seem to understand about real science is that real science is OPEN. It includes references whenever possible.
The Groupie’s constant appeal to unnamed sources is a hallmark of pseudoscience.
Oh yeah, let’s have one more look at what Perry Tuttle said:

Air entrainment problems, when created by poor mixing practices, tend to show up throughout a cast and do not create one isolated feature.

Hey, I just happen to have on hand a test cast I made that I sectioned in order to debunk Chilcutt’s assertion that these ridge peaks are flat. As you can see, you DON’T see entrained air bubbles in my cast. The Groupie is full of shit, and has made yet another baseless accusation against me.

[wolftrax]

As you know I am suspiscious of her claims that she didn't get artifacts when she mixed with her hand.

First thing that stuck out was that she used her real foot for the tests that she claims didn't get artifacts, then seemed to not use her foot for the tests that did get artifacts.

The problem is if you want to do artifact tests you need a control, you need to use somehting to make oyur foot shaped impression that will nto leave fingerprints so you can tell what is dermals and what is artifacts.

This is why Bittermonk spent the time to make his fake foot. This has been told to Hovey many times.

But even with the cast that she claims does not have artifacts, I have very strong doubts she is being honest. Here is the image she posted of her cast that doesn't have artifacts:
 Pumice_Cast_My_full_foot_002.jpg ( 67.51K ) Number of downloads: 2



Now here is a closeup of the medial region of the plantar surface, going up to the ball, with arrows pointing to these lines that are on the cast.

 Hovey__s_cast.jpg ( 201.14K ) Number of downloads: 1


These lines, traveling up the side of the foot and around the ball, is not a dermal ridge pattern but one seen in casting artifacts tests consistently as well as sasquatch casts. Here's Bittermonk's test cast, lines longitudinal and around the ball of the foot:

 IMG_2225.jpg ( 25.92K ) Number of downloads: 0


This post has been edited by wolftrax: Feb 13 2009, 12:57 PM

[wolftrax]

CA-19, Onion Mtn cast, medial side ball of foot:
 IMG_0458.jpg ( 214.21K ) Number of downloads: 1

[Susan]

You guys forget you are dealing with a person who will not admit she is wrong, EVER!! She will give vague answers as to who her experts are because then you won't be able to go to those people yourselves to debunk her. In this case, Matt has gone ahead anyway and found someone to prove her wrong. Yay!

She is wrong and you are right. Just don't expect her to admit it. Remember the character of the person you are dealing with.


Good work!!!

[Bitter Monk]

In thinking on this I realized how easy it would be to disprove the entrained air theory. Creating a control cast that establishes casting artifacts you would only have to repeat the control process while introducing a barrier spray to the print. With the barrier spray in place and the mixing and pouring process replicated the lack of casting artifacts would remove entrained air as a factor.

[Tube]

Heck yeah! Good science!

Another way would be to make a roughly symmetrical "track", basically just an oval depression in a desiccant substrate, make sure the surface was smooth (I would use polyethylene sheeting to smooth down whatever "track" I made) then vertically wall off half the depression. In one half spray your barrier spray, the other half leave virgin.

NOTE TO GROUPIE: "VIRGIN" IN THIS SENSE MEANS UNTOUCHED OR UNMODIFIED. ARE YOU ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THIS CONCEPT?

That way the plaster slurry is exactly the same in each half of the "track", only the substrate surface has been modified.

I bet I can predict the outcome...

[Bitter Monk]

Brilliant!

[wolftrax]

Well here's the thing....

Matt already used a fixative on ash and using his same casting method did not get artifacts.

Bittermonk used his hand to mix the slurry and still did get artifacts.

I've seen mixing sticks as a recommmended way to mix plaster, while I've seen using one's hands discouraged because of the danger of the plaster burning the skin.

[NWSquatcher]

Just wanted to thank you guys for some really great information. Keep up the great work and looking forward to learning more.

[Drew]

Tube-

Just so I am clear, the sudden wicking of moisture from the plaster causes the rings that we are seeing on the casts. and it is solved by sealing the depression, so the water doesn't wick away too quickly.

I am curious if this is the same effect that I witnessed Sunday morning, while making pancakes.
Some Specs: Stove was on 5, pan was teflon coated, batter was Target brand pancake mix, water was room temperature tapwater.

Method: mixed, stirred, and then poured into hot pan, poured directly on the center of pan.
Cooked until bubbles popped on top of batter, and then flipped.



I know what your asking, Is it repeatable?

This post has been edited by Drew: Feb 16 2009, 09:02 AM

Attached File(s)

 SDC10640.JPG ( 47.16K ) Number of downloads: 5
 SDC10639.JPG ( 46.36K ) Number of downloads: 1
 SDC10641.JPG ( 56.71K ) Number of downloads: 1

 

[Pat B.]

Mmmmm ... looks yummy!

Never mind the casting tests .... which are excellent and thank you very much guys for all the hard work, and for posting your findings here ....

... but now I think I NEED SOME PANCAKES. Thanks a heck of a lot, Drew.

[Nightwing]

HOLY CRAP! Drew, a bigfoot obviously stepped on your pancakes!!!
As to the rest, seriously guys..great work. The thing that's interesting is that if we can get a cast with REAL dermal impressions, this kind of information is greatly helpful, as it allows us another test to use in an attempt to verify such.

[Bitter Monk]

The thing that's interesting is that if we can get a cast with REAL dermal impressions, this kind of information is greatly helpful, as it allows us another test to use in an attempt to verify such.

There you go. Under ideal conditions and with proper casting techniques real dermal ridges can be recorded in a print (and subsequent cast). Being able to sort out the real from the unreal is critical if any of the casting evidence is to ever amount to a hill of beans.

[Susan]

Now this is something I know about!! Pancakes!

Yes, that ridging definitely happens when you add more batter and the pancake expands or you spread out the batter with a spoon to make the pancake thinner.

Yummmmm........... pancakes...........

[Tube]

I've updated my website with a slightly revised essay that includes the bulk of the first post in this thread:

http://www.orgoneresearch.com/testimony_of...y_tuttle_of.htm

[MooseMan]

What is this? The entrained (to eat apples and kneel in mud) theory?

I really must show up more often.

This post has been edited by MooseMan: Mar 1 2009, 07:32 PM

[wolftrax]

I think the Melissa needs to show closeups of the casts she claims do not show casting artifacts before she keeps spouting off her big mouth.

Also, it appears she used her own foot to introduce dermals and confuse the reader for the cast she claims does not show artifacts, while not using her fott in the cast to show it does produce artifacts.

My opinion is that she cooked up this half-assed excuse to try and cover up all those times she claimed she couldn't get artifacts when she was using everything else BUT pumice.

This post has been edited by wolftrax: Mar 5 2009, 10:51 AM

[wolftrax]

Oh God, her latest bullshit is worse than ever. It just shows how displaced from reality she is.

Bittermonk's experiments PROVE that Matt's experiments were on the level and his instructions were clear. Her stating Matt's instructions were just a few sentences was a blatant lie, we all saw how he not only instructed her in how to do it but repeatedly corrected her and she refused to listen.

No, Matt doesn't have to publish his findings in a scientific paper. Anybody in their right mind (including Meldrum and James Komar, the soil scientist for the Onion Mtn. area) saw that Matt had a great case that is hard to refute. If Matt doesthat is his choice, but there is nothing to stop peopel from seeing that it is obvious that artifacts are the cause of the lines in CA-19.

I headed for the hills when what? Huh? I never headed for the hills on anything having to do with this thing, You mean when your partner Rick Noll tried to say that the artifacts from the Duwamish River were caused by pollution?

Oh wow, that conflicts with your "Entrained Air" theory doesn't it? Yeah I really ran far when I showed that Noll was lying, he knew that Matt had tested the soil that was under the tide line and didn't receive artifacts, and tested the clay that was above the tide line and did get artifacts. OOOOOOHHHHHH, yet another gaping hole in your entrained air theory! Noll knew this, as Noll had filmed Matt gathering soil from this area, and Noll wanted to get a closeup of Matt collecting soil from under the tide line, and Matt explained to him that the muddy soil didn't support artifacts. But it didn't matter to Noll, it's all just for entertainment for you guys, isn't it? I even showed the email Matt sent to Noll, and asked Matt to once again do the experiment:

http://www.bigfootforums.com/index.php?sho...st&p=424765

This is the first time I have seen you request video of Matt doing the Patty walk, in fact that had to do with Matt doing the 90 degree angle that Roger Knights witnessed and Matt had won the bet. Colobus (yes, the same Colobus who is best friends with Rick Noll and publically commented how he felt Matt Crowley was poorly treated, you know of course he was talking about you two) wanted to video Matt as at the time Matt didn't have a video camera to do it. I could be wrong, I rarely listened to anything you had to say at the time as you obviously lacked anything intelligent or meaningful to say. Some things never change.

You are full of it when it comes to the Monsterquest episode and you know it. You were and are so certain that that was Matt's Patty recreation. Once again your good old "Buddy" was there propping you up, you both working together to try to bring Matt down yet again. You both are sad. Was it like pillow talk for you both? Did it make you hot?

Here's the truth about it when I saw what you two were doing and called him on it:

Udderly ridiculous assumptions on the part of our amateur armchair conspiracy theorists here. I had asked Tube if he would like to try out wearing a Bigfoot suit to get experience with how it felt… nothing more. I told him I could use B roll for the show and he agreed to do it as did also Alan Terry.
http://www.bigfootforums.com/lofiversion/i...t20486-500.html

Heh, he said "Udder". Anyways, Hovey, lying is not your strong suit, but your friends will lap it up until you turn on them just like you did to all the people you ever associated with in this field.

This post has been edited by wolftrax: Mar 5 2009, 06:35 PM

[wolftrax]

Oh, I see she locked her forum up tight again and blocked the public from seeing it. Yeah go and hide you coward.

This post has been edited by wolftrax: Mar 5 2009, 06:37 PM

[Blackdog]

It's open now and I see she's in full ad hom attack mode. You didn't even list some of her accusations of a personal nature.
I'd post it here but I don't think it has anything to do with anything.

If she really believed she was right wouldn't she support her findings, like Matt has, with documentation instead of wasting over 760 words on personal attacks?