Don't confuse indifference with what is obvious: this has been a bridge to nowhere and will continue to be so because the research process is unreliable, random, and invalid. It would not pass muster to even a hint of academic research scrutiny. As I said before -- though I recognize that any objective points will likely never be digested -- if one can not even verify which cards are coming from Bond Bread packages and Sports Star Subject packages everything else is irrelevant. That should be obvious but apparently it isn't. If one is doing a scientific experiment and they can't even identify who is in the control group and who is in the experimental group any results that follow are irrelevant. Clear enough? Probably not.
In Ted's Post 298 -- comprised mainly of Homogenized Bread cards he got when he was a kid in 1947 with the exception of two cards he identified as in later years -- it is clear that there is no material difference in the "intensity of the whiteness," the key differentiator in your words, between the backs of his cards and the supposed Sports Star Subject back you often use in your post.
If you want to blacklight every card you can gather from the Festberg find and compare them to Homogenized Bread cards, go for it, no one is going to stop you.
If people want to waste their time contributing to this "research" that's their choice. I've wasted enough time reading these posts.
By the way, I'm pretty confident there is nothing legally binding about slapping on a copyright on a Internet forum post. Not that anyone of rational mind would have the slightest interest in reproducing the information in this thread.
Copyright: Me, dumbass who spent too much time on this thread
|