Skunk Baxter
Well-Known Member
This is completely false. Nowhere on that link does it say anything at all about Mylar. Your link refers to a broad category of plastic films used in a wide variety of applications, some of which may or may not include Mylar, but none of which are specifically identified in your article. As you say yourself in the thread's opening post, Mylar is a specific type of plastic sheeting developed by Dupont, so you do know the difference. Here, read your own link -Apparently I'm not the only one doing comparisons!
Here's a direct comparison between a brand of Aluminum Foil and Reflective Mylar(metallized plastic films). http://www.troutcreektruss.com/Products/Rigid-Board-Comparison.pdf
How many people here use automotive window tinting as reflective material in their grow rooms? None, right?The table provides some notable differences between pure aluminum foil that is used on
WeatherTite RigidBoard and a metallized plastic that is commonly used on competitive
products....
Most metallized plastics are used for window treatments to reduce glare, however they are not as
efficient in stopping radiant heat transfer, in addition metallized plastics are generally less
expensive plastic films due to their lower performance, generally 30-40% less expensive. A
typical example would be aftermarket automotive window tinting –the outside surface is
reflective but you can still see through the film, now try that with pure aluminum foil film.
This is a piece of promotional material put out by a company to sell their insulating product; of course they're going to brag it up by making the most favorable comparisons possible between that and whatever competing product they can find. The fact that they don't even specify which particular product they're comparing themselves to ought to raise a red flag right off the bat, and the fact that they offer no substantiation of their comparison - and don't even say what testing methods were employed - makes their promotional material worthless in this discussion. I can call myself a unicorn if i want, and put up a website claiming that I've been tested and found to be a unicorn. But that doesn't mean my website would be valid evidence in an argument about the existence of unicorns.
I'm sorry to say this, but this is a perfect example of why an increasing number of people don't take anything you say seriously. You show a pattern of using anything you can get your hands on to win an argument, with no regard at all for whether or not the information is accurate, or whether it even has anything to do with the particular point you're debating. You make it sound good because you're a very good writer, and a smart guy, but the more closely people look at what you're saying, the more they notice all the bullshit that's mixed in with the good information. And they get tired of having to trying to figure out which parts are the good information, and which parts are the bullshit, so they stop paying any attention to you at all.
You're not trying to help people, you're just trying to get as many people as possible to pat you on the head and tell you how smart you are. I'm sorry to get so personal, but the fact is the bullshit you're tossing out is doing more harm than good, and if you're going to keep doing that then people need to call you on it. After this one, I'll never take anything you say seriously again.