Third Party Press

XRFacts , Forums and Censorship

maui said:
XRF provides elemental data .the table of elements .period, this is important valuable for German and US helmets

Kelly is a good friend , and a fellow collector
Click to expand...

So then it is your contention that you and Kelly Hicks authenticated the Champagne Rune "decals" with your handheld XRF, proclaiming that the presence of "copper" explained the "Champagne color". Do you contend that DougB did not show that the Champagne Runes are airbrushed fakes? DougB showed that the helmets you, XRFacts, and Hicks blessed were airbrushed. If XRF can't even distinguish a postwar airbrushed fake decal from a period celluloid based actual decal, then what good is it?

Handheld XRF is good for testing the composition of welds in pipelines, sorting junk metal in scrapyards, identifying lead in paint on flat surfaces, and in archeology identifying what metal an artifact is composed of and what elements are in dirt. It has completely failed in all applications that you advertised it as doing. What's interesting is I was ready to concede it's use on SS decals until that was refuted by exposure of the Great Champagne Rune Fraud. I've yet to see your good friend Hicks counter, much less address, DougB's work.
 
maui said:
XRF provides elemental data .the table of elements .period, this is important valuable for German and US helmets
Click to expand...

Without tens of thousands of comparables for your database which include every type of elemental composition, of every type of paint, from every manufacturer, from every country that these paints came from, ever used on any U.S. helmet painted during WWII in the MTO, ETO and PTO... you got nothing. Period!
 
Bugme said:
Without tens of thousands of comparables for your database which include every type of elemental composition, of every type of paint, from every manufacturer, from every country that these paints came from, ever used on any U.S. helmet painted during WWII in the MTO, ETO and PTO... you got nothing. Period!
Click to expand...

Bugme, our contention is that even if he hypothetically did that, XRFacts still could not do what he claims. Any similarities in SS helmet "readings" was due to the ray gun reading the underlying helmet steel / strata. Even those readings will vary with substrata contamination, dirt, dust, paint thickness, contaminates, grease, angle of reading, slope of area tested, etc. But I digress as this has been addressed and never countered or explained by Maui other than "we cracked the code" and telling us to get our own ray gun and prove him wrong. The funny thing is you guys at M1 actually did that and I never saw Maui respond.
 
A very self serving interview of Kelly Hicks in the October issue of Military Trader. Full of soft questions lobbed his way, that insure he comes out shining.......To include a defense of XRF & " Champagne " decals.
 
Hambone said:
Bugme, our contention is that even if he hypothetically did that, XRFacts still could not do what he claims...
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. Originally, these guys had only a handful of comparable U.S. helmets to be used as part of their vetting process on the XRF "database". So, on the off chance that XRF could have possibly, maybe worked, their baseline was already horribly deficient and far from being anything that resembled science.

We found that using only two WWII era helmets manufactured at roughly the same time by the same manufacturer shot with XRF were found to have substantially different results. And this was only TWO helmets with factory painted and baked olive drab. When more helmets were added in, it was clear that XRF would not work for authentication of U.S. helmets.

The results were crazy different on the plain helmets, so then we had to ask,what would happen when air dried paint from multiple manufacturers, produced in multiple countries, under multiple conditions, using multiple formula's was added into the mix for painted insignia? It became clear that XRF WOULD NEVER work.
 
Bugme said:
I absolutely agree. Originally, these guys had only a handful of comparable U.S. helmets to be used as part of their vetting process on the XRF "database". So, on the off chance that XRF could have possibly, maybe worked, their baseline was already horribly deficient and far from being anything that resembled science.

We found that using only two WWII era helmets manufactured at roughly the same time by the same manufacturer shot with XRF were found to have substantially different results. And this was only TWO helmets with factory painted and baked olive drab. When more helmets were added in, it was clear that XRF would not work for authentication of U.S. helmets.

The results were crazy different on the plain helmets, so then we had to ask,what would happen when air dried paint from multiple manufacturers, produced in multiple countries, under multiple conditions, using multiple formula's was added into the mix for painted insignia? It became clear that XRF WOULD NEVER work.
Click to expand...



The results were crazy different on the plain helmets, so then we had to ask,what would happen when air dried paint from multiple manufacturers, produced in multiple countries, under multiple conditions, using multiple formula's was added into the mix for painted insignia? It became clear that XRF WOULD NEVER work.

Excellent point. Since XRFacts could never do what was claimed and was always pseudo-science, it makes me look with suspicion upon those highly intelligent people who were neck-deep in both the XRFacts and the C-SS debacles touting from the roof-tops that XRFacts was "scientific proof" of C-SS authenticity. And those who eventually backed off of the XRFacts fraud should not get any credit for doing so IMO because they only did the obvious, distancing themselves from an increasingly apparent hoax that could never be supported by the evidence thus preserving their own reputations.
 
Last edited:
M45 said:
Bugme said:
The results were crazy different on the plain helmets, so then we had to ask,what would happen when air dried paint from multiple manufacturers, produced in multiple countries, under multiple conditions, using multiple formula's was added into the mix for painted insignia? It became clear that XRF WOULD NEVER work.
Click to expand...

Excellent point. Since XRFacts could never do what was claimed and was always pseudo-science, it makes me look with suspicion upon those highly intelligent people who were neck-deep in both the XRFacts and the C-SS debacles touting from the roof-tops that XRFacts was "scientific proof" of C-SS authenticity. And those who eventually backed off of the XRFacts fraud should not get any credit for doing so IMO because they only did the obvious, distancing themselves from an increasingly apparent hoax that could never be supported by the evidence thus preserving their own reputations.
Click to expand...

The XRFacts crew never released the instrument raw data, because they claimed it would help fakers, but in reality it would have exposed their claims as a hoax. The raw data wouldn't have passed statistical data analysis by meeting any reasonable confidence interval to back up their claims. So, the XRFacts crew simply used subjective interpretations and discarded the data that they felt wasn't helpful or consistent with their evaluations and proclamations of authenticity. It was good old fashioned cherry picking. Their motivations were profit and greed with complete control the lid authentication market.
 
Last edited:
BTW, Maui, can you reply substantively to what Bugme has posted about the inconsistencies in the M1 XRF testing and the XRFacts "authentication" of "decals" which were airbrushed fakes? I mean, other than things like "we cracked the code" and "you are idiots" and links to an SS helmet. I mean an actual substantive, meaningful, non-ad hominem response?
 
hekmet

Gentlemen,

The rarest , named and most desirable M35 Camo Decal hlelmets in the world Q and ET, ,,,,,,XRF certifed
 

Attachments

  • 1-IMG_6510.JPG
    1-IMG_6510.JPG
    91.4 KB · Views: 16
hekmet

Gentlemen,

The rarest , named and most desirable SS M35 Camo Decal hlelmets in the world Q and ET, ,,,,,,XRF certified
and valuable

5M
 
Last edited:
maui said:
Gentlemen,

The rarest , named and most desirable M35 Camo Decal hlelmets in the world Q and ET, ,,,,,,XRF certifed
Click to expand...

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=396087&page=2

http://www.wehrmacht-awards.com/forums/showthread.php?t=396087&page=2
Censorship in the name of "civility", which I am sure is the civility Hicks speaks of. This is how a real XRFacts discussion was shut down at WAF (looks like Hank is not a moderator there now?). Of course, KenB was expelled. :
 

Attachments

  • WAFmod XRF censor Hank 2010.JPG
    WAFmod XRF censor Hank 2010.JPG
    102.5 KB · Views: 24
US Military

USMC ..Pacific ... USMC Veteran and interesting project going on ..please contact
 
Bugme said:
Did someone hack Maui's account? this can't really be him answering, right?
Click to expand...

It's a typical David "maui" May response or post. I suppose that he realizes he can't defend his claims, so he posts nonsense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Military Rifle Journal
Back
Top