--- "E.D. Seevers" <[email protected]> wrote: > You have no evidence that it > doesn't do harm, yet you are promoting introducing > chemicals onto valuable > information not to mention nature. Firstly, how can I disprove a legend? Am I also going to prove that bigfoot doesn't exist? After all, nobody has proved bigfoot doesn't exist, therefore he must, right? The whole notion that I should provide evidence that it does no harm is a logical fallacy of appealing to lack of proof of the negative. This is a well known logical fallacy. Moreover, I am not promoting using shaving cream. I am pointing out that the assertion that shaving cream harms tombstones is without evidenciary basis. If I point out that saying the alphabet backwards is not dangerous, am I also promoting people saying the alphabet backwards? > Write something > with shaving cream on > your own vehicle or the side of a brick and watch > the results. We are talking about tombstones, not cars. There is no need to pretend that I said it was safe to put shaving cream on anything imaginable. What I said was that there is no evidence that shows the claim that shaving cream harms tombstones is true. Brock Way __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

I'm really sorry that universities haven't found it necessary to study the effect of shaving cream on tombstones. Hundreds of years of archeological and conservatory experience with the effects of similar substances, that occur naturally, on stone monuments has led to the logical conclusion that if you add acid, oil, and wax (all contained in shaving cream) to permiable stone, the stone will break down. It would probably take years and thousands of dollars to follow the deterioration of stones treated with shaving cream against untreated stones. Sounds like a really good project the government would fund.<smirk> It happens fast enough with nature. Hopefully more short-sighted and stubborn people will not hasten the erosion of these fragile monuments. Brec Morton

I am in agreement with all of you who recommend taking precaution... why take the chance of harming the old stones. It is so sad.. as I have seen, An old cemetery filled with stones that are unreadable, lost forever are the names and dates for those who lie beneath them. Sad for the genealogist who knows their ancestor lies somewhere in a particular cemetery and they have no idea or clue as to which stone is theirs. This is the reason this past year family members chipped in donations for one of our ancestors to have a flat stone placed at the foot of the old stone that has been deteriorating rapidly over the past several years. Mary C. CA. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brec Morton" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 1:32 PM Subject: Re: [MO-CEM] shaving cream on tombstones > Why tempt fate when there are non-invasive ways of achieving the same > thing? > Years of observation of the effects of similar chemicals' effects on > stones > apparently have no sway? Just a shaving cream specific test will suffice? > When the faces of the stones are finally flat (as have been many I have > seen > in cemeteries) there is no going back. The information is lost forever. > Seems like for you the easy way works, regardless of the ultimate, even if > it is just remotely possible, effect it may have. Is that correct? Get in > and get out? I'm not trying to be nasty but, again, why add something > foreign to the stone when it is not necessary? All it takes is a "little" > extra effort. > Brec Morton > > Brock Way wrote: > > I hope in the meanwhile people and websites can > refrain from suggesting that these studies have > already been done, and that the results are in. > > Brock Way > > > ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > Burnett [email protected] > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > >

With the permission of and under the direction of the sextant of The Rural Cemetery, Stockton, CA., we applied shaving cream to several of 'my' family headstones for photographic purposes approximately 4 years ago. The sextant said he would monitor them to see if there was any degradation. To date, he has not notified me that there was any damage caused by the use of shaving cream. George I just attended a DAR meeting. Our speaker was there speaking about the old ranch cemeteries in Texas. She said styrofoam works great on the stones and doesn't damage the stone. Alice ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett [email protected] ============================== New! Family Tree Maker 2005. Build your tree and search for your ancestors at the same time. Share your tree with family and friends. Learn more: http://landing.ancestry.com/familytreemaker/2005/tour aspx?sourceid=14599&targetid=5429

Do you carry a rabbit's foot with you when you travel, too? After all, err on the side of caution, right? You see, erring on the side of caution is logical only inasmuch as the danger presented is real, and is illogical to apply to legendary threats. Brock Way --- Ginny <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree--err on the side of caution. > > Ginny > Durham, NC __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

--- Brec Morton <[email protected]> wrote: > Years of observation of the effects of similar > chemicals' effects on stones > apparently have no sway? Just a shaving cream > specific test will suffice? Yet more claims are of no use at all. There are plenty of claims of observations of Bigfoot and UFOs - that doesn't make them any more real. What is of use is actual evidence, rather than just yet another claim. Rather than make yet another claim, why not just show the evidence? > Seems like for you the easy way works, regardless of > the ultimate, even if > it is just remotely possible, effect it may have. Is > that correct? Get in > and get out? I'm not trying to be nasty but, again, > why add something > foreign to the stone when it is not necessary? I don't think you are being nasty, but you are clearly being presumptuous. I don't use shaving cream. So that pretty much destroys your strawman argument that I am just lazy, or whatever. Moreover, you miss the point. The point is not that there is a reason to add anything to the stone...the point is that claiming adding shaving cream to the stone is harmful is baseless. There is a difference. Brock Way __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

I just attended a DAR meeting. Our speaker was there speaking about the old ranch cemeteries in Texas. She said styrofoam works great on the stones and doesn't damage the stone. Alice

--- Brec Morton <[email protected]> wrote: > It would probably take years and thousands of > dollars to follow the > deterioration of stones treated with shaving cream > against untreated stones. I hope in the meanwhile people and websites can refrain from suggesting that these studies have already been done, and that the results are in. Brock Way __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Hello everyone, I've been through this topic before on various lists. Everyone is not going to agree, no matter what facts are presented. Depending on which side you are on, you can find information to back your stand. In some cases, no one seems to check the information's date. The date of the article should be considered with the information in it. This is the first time I remember hearing about aluminum foil. Depending on the marker, I can imagine this might work. I've also heard black lights can help. I haven't found a portable black light yet to try. There are markers that unless vandals attack them would seem to last forever. There are others that as soon as they were placed on the grave started to deteriorate. No matter what you use, if it touches the marker, there will be some that are damaged. I've actually seen some that to touch them left my fingers white. When I gently blew across one, there was white in the air. The wind, rain, sleet and hail had and was destroying those type markers. The trick is to do NO damage to a particular stone, which may depend on it's construction materials. I'm not a expert in different types of tombstones. Here's an old answer on a heating conversation from the KS Cemeteries list archives http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/index/KS-CEMETERIES you may find interesting. http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/KS-CEMETERIES/2004-08/1093915007 Orlena ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Brock Way <[email protected]> wrote: I hate to be the one to break the news, but the idea that shaving cream harms tombstones is a legend, with no basis in reality at all. The "information" posted in the savinggraves link given below is based on a KNOWN HOAX. It is simply a copycat of the well known "Ban DHMO" hoax. Anyone who is willing to accept the suggestion that shaving cream can harm tombstones really should first familarize themselves with the original hoax. You can find a great "Ban DHMO" site here: http://www.dhmo.org/ Just like the 'Ban DHMO' hoax, the 'ban shaving cream' hoax works on the same basis...a reliance on the fact that people are wholly unfamiliar with chemistry in general, and will spend no time at all investigating the claims made by the hoax, and instead just blindly accept them as fact, and then pass it on to other unsuspecting folks - - just like all hoaxes. But even a cursory investigation into the matter will reveal that the claims made against the constituents in shaving cream are not just wrong, but are ridiculous. For example, from the savinggraves link just cited: "These have many ingredients harmful to tombstones (like butane) and in some cases can be abrasive." Please...butane? Butane is *a gas*. It has a boiling point (-0.5 C) that is below the freezing point of water (the major constituent of shaving cream), and is used as a propellant. Butane is under pressure in the can, but when released from the can, is under normal pressure of one atmosphere, and is thus volatilized long before it could even be applied to the stone. There are lots of sites all over the internet that make all kinds of claims. Some of them cite the evidence that shows their claim is true. The rest make claims without seeing any need for substantiating documentation at all. These latter claims are called legends, and like bigfoot and the abominable snowman, people believe them. Ask yourself this question: If shaving cream harms tombstones, then where is the evidence that it does? Not "where is yet another site that makes the same claim", but where is the evidence itself? Has anyone ever seen any actual evidence (data, measurements, anything)? Of course you haven't, because there isn't any. And there isn't any because it is the product of a KNOWN HOAX. I am going to quote E.D. here "There is a great deal of information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of misinformation is available." You said that right...there is a lot of MISINFORMATION available. Brock Way Genealogy without documentation is mythology. From: "E.D. Seevers" Subject: RE: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:51:29 -0600 I don't know how familiar you are with tombstone rubbings, but you might want to read this article before you do. Many older stones are very fragile and rubbings can deteriorate them further. There is a great deal of information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of misinformation is available. The best practice is to just be careful and remember that future generations may want to view these valuable resources also. http://www.savinggraves.com/education/bookshelf/rubbings.htm The information under this heading is particularly useful... A NOTE ABOUT SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK. I've found that 3D moldings of the stone work very well and aluminum foil is great. It can be purchased cheaply at discount stores. __________________________________________________

I mentioned the link within the savinggraves page which provided detailed information on why you should not use shaving cream. It can be found at the end of the first paragraph under the heading A NOTE ABOUT SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK All of these effects take time but why speed the process. Thanks for listening. Brec Morton

I have to step in here on this and point out that promoting the idea that shaving crean is harmless is going to be doing damage to already fragile stones. If you follow the links within the savinggraves link it goes to a page which discusses the reasons for not using shaving cream. Shaving cream contains acids, oils, and waxes that break down the structure of the stone (particularly marble and soft limestone are easily affected by acid); clog the pores of the stone (which changes the ability of the stone to breathe and dry), provide an excellent growth medium for molds and fungi which break down the stone; and the waxes and oils absorb water which, when it freezes, causes tiny amounts of stone to be broken off in the freeze-thaw cycle. All of these effects have been documented for years by professionals who are charged with preserving monuments and stone buildings. Acid rain, which is actually less acidic than shaving cream has been destroying marble and limestone statues and buildings for years. Sandstone monuments are especially brittle and easily subject to damage caused by rubbing in any form and from excess moisture absorbance. In fact most of the sandstone monuments in cemeteries are the hardest to read because of the slow erosion of there surfaces by daily exposure to rain and wind. Do we need to accelerate this? I would first go with the idea of using a strong natural or artificial light to create shadows in the letters (my best tombstone photos have been taken at or near noon when the sun is just crossing the stone and the shadows of the letters are in stark contrast to the bright face of the stone or by using a mirror to reflect the sun and achieve the same effect). Next I would go with a careful use of the profile method using aluminum foil gently pressed into the depressions. You would be surprised at how well this works. It removes the distractions of the mottled coloring of the aged stone crossing letters which disguises them. (take a picture of the stone with and without the aluminum foil.) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brock Way" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:25 AM Subject: [MO-CEM] shaving cream on tombstones {was:I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS} I hate to be the one to break the news, but the idea that shaving cream harms tombstones is a legend, with no basis in reality at all. The "information" posted in the savinggraves link given below is based on a KNOWN HOAX. It is simply a copycat of the well known "Ban DHMO" hoax. Anyone who is willing to accept the suggestion that shaving cream can harm tombstones really should first familarize themselves with the original hoax. You can find a great "Ban DHMO" site here: http://www.dhmo.org/ Just like the 'Ban DHMO' hoax, the 'ban shaving cream' hoax works on the same basis...a reliance on the fact that people are wholly unfamiliar with chemistry in general, and will spend no time at all investigating the claims made by the hoax, and instead just blindly accept them as fact, and then pass it on to other unsuspecting folks - - just like all hoaxes. But even a cursory investigation into the matter will reveal that the claims made against the constituents in shaving cream are not just wrong, but are ridiculous. For example, from the savinggraves link just cited: "These have many ingredients harmful to tombstones (like butane) and in some cases can be abrasive." Please...butane? Butane is *a gas*. It has a boiling point (-0.5 C) that is below the freezing point of water (the major constituent of shaving cream), and is used as a propellant. Butane is under pressure in the can, but when released from the can, is under normal pressure of one atmosphere, and is thus volatilized long before it could even be applied to the stone. There are lots of sites all over the internet that make all kinds of claims. Some of them cite the evidence that shows their claim is true. The rest make claims without seeing any need for substantiating documentation at all. These latter claims are called legends, and like bigfoot and the abominable snowman, people believe them. Ask yourself this question: If shaving cream harms tombstones, then where is the evidence that it does? Not "where is yet another site that makes the same claim", but where is the evidence itself? Has anyone ever seen any actual evidence (data, measurements, anything)? Of course you haven't, because there isn't any. And there isn't any because it is the product of a KNOWN HOAX. I am going to quote E.D. here "There is a great deal of information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of misinformation is available." You said that right...there is a lot of MISINFORMATION available. Brock Way Genealogy without documentation is mythology. From: "E.D. Seevers" <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:51:29 -0600 I don't know how familiar you are with tombstone rubbings, but you might want to read this article before you do. Many older stones are very fragile and rubbings can deteriorate them further. There is a great deal of information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of misinformation is available. The best practice is to just be careful and remember that future generations may want to view these valuable resources also. http://www.savinggraves.com/education/bookshelf/rubbings.htm The information under this heading is particularly useful... A NOTE ABOUT SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK. I've found that 3D moldings of the stone work very well and aluminum foil is great. It can be purchased cheaply at discount stores. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett [email protected] ============================== Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx

--- Brec Morton <[email protected]> wrote: > All of these effects have been documented for years > by professionals who are charged with preserving > monuments and stone buildings. I haven't seen any documentation on shaving cream effects AT ALL. And you certainly haven't shown any documentation on it. And savinggraves certainly hasn't shown any documentation on it. If there is so much documentation on it, then where is it? Let's see this documentation, if it really exists. There is certainly no shortage of places that *claim* shaving cream causes harm. What there is, is a shortage of EVIDENCE that the claim is true. Why do people post yet another website with the same CLAIM, as if yet another re-iteration of the same CLAIM is somehow evidence? Evidence and claims are different things. I am tired of claims masquerading as evidence. If there is evidence, then let's see it. Brock Way __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Believe what you want. Yes, I've read the sites on both sides. I'm saying that to introduce any chemical by anyone not professionally trained to clean and restore stones can be and is damaging to the stone. We're discussing valuable information, at least to historians and genealogists. Yes, I do have someone that I consult who has experience and education in the use of chemicals. Not only are we quite possibly damaging stones with the best intentions at heart, but what are we leaving at cemeteries for nature? I deal mainly with very rural cemeteries. I find animals of all kinds at them. Do they eat what we leave behind? Isn't this a major concern for our national park system? And in our oceans and waterways? So you're saying it's alright to use chemicals. Think about all the implications. Are any of us carrying enough water to these sites to completely dilute and clean away what we are using? Be it shaving cream or anything else? Bottom line, be responsible. Read it all for yourself and make your own decisions. There are comments on both sides of the fence. Do remember that this is a resource that should be left for future generations. Most of us have been taught to err on the side of safety. Many don't believe that rubbings can be harmful to some stones. It is. Rub your hand across some of the stones and feel the particles you are sweeping away. Research thoroughly and use safe methods. -----Original Message----- From: Brock Way [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:26 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [MO-CEM] shaving cream on tombstones {was:I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS} I hate to be the one to break the news, but the idea that shaving cream harms tombstones is a legend, with no basis in reality at all. The "information" posted in the savinggraves link given below is based on a KNOWN HOAX. It is simply a copycat of the well known "Ban DHMO" hoax. Anyone who is willing to accept the suggestion that shaving cream can harm tombstones really should first familarize themselves with the original hoax. You can find a great "Ban DHMO" site here: http://www.dhmo.org/ Just like the 'Ban DHMO' hoax, the 'ban shaving cream' hoax works on the same basis...a reliance on the fact that people are wholly unfamiliar with chemistry in general, and will spend no time at all investigating the claims made by the hoax, and instead just blindly accept them as fact, and then pass it on to other unsuspecting folks - - just like all hoaxes. But even a cursory investigation into the matter will reveal that the claims made against the constituents in shaving cream are not just wrong, but are ridiculous. For example, from the savinggraves link just cited: "These have many ingredients harmful to tombstones (like butane) and in some cases can be abrasive." Please...butane? Butane is *a gas*. It has a boiling point (-0.5 C) that is below the freezing point of water (the major constituent of shaving cream), and is used as a propellant. Butane is under pressure in the can, but when released from the can, is under normal pressure of one atmosphere, and is thus volatilized long before it could even be applied to the stone. There are lots of sites all over the internet that make all kinds of claims. Some of them cite the evidence that shows their claim is true. The rest make claims without seeing any need for substantiating documentation at all. These latter claims are called legends, and like bigfoot and the abominable snowman, people believe them. Ask yourself this question: If shaving cream harms tombstones, then where is the evidence that it does? Not "where is yet another site that makes the same claim", but where is the evidence itself? Has anyone ever seen any actual evidence (data, measurements, anything)? Of course you haven't, because there isn't any. And there isn't any because it is the product of a KNOWN HOAX. I am going to quote E.D. here "There is a great deal of information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of misinformation is available." You said that right...there is a lot of MISINFORMATION available. Brock Way Genealogy without documentation is mythology. From: "E.D. Seevers" <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:51:29 -0600 I don't know how familiar you are with tombstone rubbings, but you might want to read this article before you do. Many older stones are very fragile and rubbings can deteriorate them further. There is a great deal of information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of misinformation is available. The best practice is to just be careful and remember that future generations may want to view these valuable resources also. http://www.savinggraves.com/education/bookshelf/rubbings.htm The information under this heading is particularly useful... A NOTE ABOUT SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK. I've found that 3D moldings of the stone work very well and aluminum foil is great. It can be purchased cheaply at discount stores. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett [email protected] ============================== Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx

Friday, March 03, 2006 Dear Listers, Having worked as a chemist for a long time and not scientifically investigated the "shaving cream" issue, I have chosen to avoid the issue for the sake of simply listing a tombstone. Instead, I have chosen the most innocuous method of all, LIGHT. Check out the link following: http://cemeteries.missouri.org/Photo.html#Light . If light is shined obliquely across the face of an engraved tombstone, shadows will form in the recessed portion of the engraving and the contrast with the lighted face makes the lettering just stand out. This is dependent upon sunlight and in the absence of the Sun, a million candlepower, rechargeable, Q-Light makes it easy to read, a line at a time. I admit to using untried chemicals when it is absolutely necessary to clean moss and lichens off of a stone. I have used it on the stones of my ancestors only. Sincerely yours, Wayne Johnson ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brock Way" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 5:25 AM Subject: [MO-CEM] shaving cream on tombstones {was:I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS} > I hate to be the one to break the news, but the idea > that shaving cream harms tombstones is a legend, with > no basis in reality at all. > > The "information" posted in the savinggraves link > given below is based on a KNOWN HOAX. It is simply a > copycat of the well known "Ban DHMO" hoax. Anyone who > is willing to accept the suggestion that shaving cream > can harm tombstones really should first familarize > themselves with the original hoax. You can find a > great "Ban DHMO" site here: > > http://www.dhmo.org/ > > Just like the 'Ban DHMO' hoax, the 'ban shaving cream' > hoax works on the same basis...a reliance on the fact > that people are wholly unfamiliar with chemistry in > general, and will spend no time at all investigating > the claims made by the hoax, and instead just blindly > accept them as fact, and then pass it on to other > unsuspecting folks - - just like all hoaxes. > > But even a cursory investigation into the matter will > reveal that the claims made against the constituents > in shaving cream are not just wrong, but are > ridiculous. For example, from the savinggraves link > just cited: > > "These have many ingredients harmful to tombstones > (like butane) and in some cases can be abrasive." > > Please...butane? Butane is *a gas*. It has a boiling > point (-0.5 C) that is below the freezing point of > water (the major constituent of shaving cream), and is > used as a propellant. Butane is under pressure in the > can, but when released from the can, is under normal > pressure of one atmosphere, and is thus volatilized > long before it could even be applied to the stone. > > There are lots of sites all over the internet that > make all kinds of claims. Some of them cite the > evidence that shows their claim is true. The rest make > claims without seeing any need for substantiating > documentation at all. These latter claims are called > legends, and like bigfoot and the abominable snowman, > people believe them. > > Ask yourself this question: If shaving cream harms > tombstones, then where is the evidence that it does? > Not "where is yet another site that makes the same > claim", but where is the evidence itself? Has anyone > ever seen any actual evidence (data, measurements, > anything)? Of course you haven't, because there isn't > any. And there isn't any because it is the product of > a KNOWN HOAX. > > I am going to quote E.D. here "There is a great deal > of > information out there on caring for old tombstones and > a lot of misinformation is available." > > You said that right...there is a lot of MISINFORMATION > available. > > Brock Way > Genealogy without documentation is mythology. > > > From: "E.D. Seevers" <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS > Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:51:29 -0600 > > > > I don't know how familiar you are with tombstone > rubbings, but you might > want to read this article before you do. Many older > stones are very fragile > and rubbings can deteriorate them further. There is a > great deal of > information out there on caring for old tombstones and > a lot of > misinformation is available. The best practice is to > just be careful and > remember that future generations may want to view > these valuable resources > also. > > http://www.savinggraves.com/education/bookshelf/rubbings.htm > > The information under this heading is particularly > useful... A NOTE ABOUT > SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK. I've found that 3D > moldings of the stone > work very well and aluminum foil is great. It can be > purchased cheaply at > discount stores. > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett [email protected] > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx > >

I agree. I use it on my family's stones. Linda > I hate to be the one to break the news, but the idea > that shaving cream harms tombstones is a legend, with > no basis in reality at all. > > The "information" posted in the savinggraves link > given below is based on a KNOWN HOAX. It is simply a > copycat of the well known "Ban DHMO" hoax. Anyone who > is willing to accept the suggestion that shaving cream > can harm tombstones really should first familarize > themselves with the original hoax. You can find a > great "Ban DHMO" site here: > > http://www.dhmo.org/ > > Just like the 'Ban DHMO' hoax, the 'ban shaving cream' > hoax works on the same basis...a reliance on the fact > that people are wholly unfamiliar with chemistry in > general, and will spend no time at all investigating > the claims made by the hoax, and instead just blindly > accept them as fact, and then pass it on to other > unsuspecting folks - - just like all hoaxes. > > But even a cursory investigation into the matter will > reveal that the claims made against the constituents > in shaving cream are not just wrong, but are > ridiculous. For example, from the savinggraves link > just cited: > > "These have many ingredients harmful to tombstones > (like butane) and in some cases can be abrasive." > > Please...butane? Butane is *a gas*. It has a boiling > point (-0.5 C) that is below the freezing point of > water (the major constituent of shaving cream), and is > used as a propellant. Butane is under pressure in the > can, but when released from the can, is under normal > pressure of one atmosphere, and is thus volatilized > long before it could even be applied to the stone. > > There are lots of sites all over the internet that > make all kinds of claims. Some of them cite the > evidence that shows their claim is true. The rest make > claims without seeing any need for substantiating > documentation at all. These latter claims are called > legends, and like bigfoot and the abominable snowman, > people believe them. > > Ask yourself this question: If shaving cream harms > tombstones, then where is the evidence that it does? > Not "where is yet another site that makes the same > claim", but where is the evidence itself? Has anyone > ever seen any actual evidence (data, measurements, > anything)? Of course you haven't, because there isn't > any. And there isn't any because it is the product of > a KNOWN HOAX. > > I am going to quote E.D. here "There is a great deal > of > information out there on caring for old tombstones and > a lot of misinformation is available." > > You said that right...there is a lot of MISINFORMATION > available. > > Brock Way > Genealogy without documentation is mythology. > > > From: "E.D. Seevers" <[email protected]> > Subject: RE: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS > Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:51:29 -0600 > > > > I don't know how familiar you are with tombstone > rubbings, but you might > want to read this article before you do. Many older > stones are very fragile > and rubbings can deteriorate them further. There is a > great deal of > information out there on caring for old tombstones and > a lot of > misinformation is available. The best practice is to > just be careful and > remember that future generations may want to view > these valuable resources > also. > > http://www.savinggraves.com/education/bookshelf/rubbings.htm > > The information under this heading is particularly > useful... A NOTE ABOUT > SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK. I've found that 3D > moldings of the stone > work very well and aluminum foil is great. It can be > purchased cheaply at > discount stores. > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett [email protected] > > ============================== > Search Family and Local Histories for stories about your family and the > areas they lived. Over 85 million names added in the last 12 months. > Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13966/rd.ashx >

--- "E.D. Seevers" <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm saying > that to introduce any chemical by anyone not > professionally trained to clean > and restore stones can be and is damaging to the > stone. And that's where we differ. You claim that it "is damaging", but you offer nothing in the way of evidence to substantiate your claim. There is no evidence at all to suggest it takes any special talent to apply shaving cream to a tombstone without damaging it. You say it "is damaging"...I say it "is legendary". Brock Way __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

I hate to be the one to break the news, but the idea that shaving cream harms tombstones is a legend, with no basis in reality at all. The "information" posted in the savinggraves link given below is based on a KNOWN HOAX. It is simply a copycat of the well known "Ban DHMO" hoax. Anyone who is willing to accept the suggestion that shaving cream can harm tombstones really should first familarize themselves with the original hoax. You can find a great "Ban DHMO" site here: http://www.dhmo.org/ Just like the 'Ban DHMO' hoax, the 'ban shaving cream' hoax works on the same basis...a reliance on the fact that people are wholly unfamiliar with chemistry in general, and will spend no time at all investigating the claims made by the hoax, and instead just blindly accept them as fact, and then pass it on to other unsuspecting folks - - just like all hoaxes. But even a cursory investigation into the matter will reveal that the claims made against the constituents in shaving cream are not just wrong, but are ridiculous. For example, from the savinggraves link just cited: "These have many ingredients harmful to tombstones (like butane) and in some cases can be abrasive." Please...butane? Butane is *a gas*. It has a boiling point (-0.5 C) that is below the freezing point of water (the major constituent of shaving cream), and is used as a propellant. Butane is under pressure in the can, but when released from the can, is under normal pressure of one atmosphere, and is thus volatilized long before it could even be applied to the stone. There are lots of sites all over the internet that make all kinds of claims. Some of them cite the evidence that shows their claim is true. The rest make claims without seeing any need for substantiating documentation at all. These latter claims are called legends, and like bigfoot and the abominable snowman, people believe them. Ask yourself this question: If shaving cream harms tombstones, then where is the evidence that it does? Not "where is yet another site that makes the same claim", but where is the evidence itself? Has anyone ever seen any actual evidence (data, measurements, anything)? Of course you haven't, because there isn't any. And there isn't any because it is the product of a KNOWN HOAX. I am going to quote E.D. here "There is a great deal of information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of misinformation is available." You said that right...there is a lot of MISINFORMATION available. Brock Way Genealogy without documentation is mythology. From: "E.D. Seevers" <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2006 14:51:29 -0600 I don't know how familiar you are with tombstone rubbings, but you might want to read this article before you do. Many older stones are very fragile and rubbings can deteriorate them further. There is a great deal of information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of misinformation is available. The best practice is to just be careful and remember that future generations may want to view these valuable resources also. http://www.savinggraves.com/education/bookshelf/rubbings.htm The information under this heading is particularly useful... A NOTE ABOUT SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK. I've found that 3D moldings of the stone work very well and aluminum foil is great. It can be purchased cheaply at discount stores. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com

Thanking you again for the wonderful information. I have printed it out and will arrive at the cemeteries fully and correctly prepared. Mary C. CA. ----- Original Message ----- From: "E.D. Seevers" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 12:51 PM Subject: RE: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS >I don't know how familiar you are with tombstone rubbings, but you might > want to read this article before you do. Many older stones are very > fragile > and rubbings can deteriorate them further. There is a great deal of > information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of > misinformation is available. The best practice is to just be careful and > remember that future generations may want to view these valuable resources > also. > > http://www.savinggraves.com/education/bookshelf/rubbings.htm > > The information under this heading is particularly useful... A NOTE ABOUT > SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK. I've found that 3D moldings of the stone > work very well and aluminum foil is great. It can be purchased cheaply at > discount stores. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of > [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 1:53 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS > > This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. > > Classification: Query > > Message Board URL: > > http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/an/AN.2ADE/700 > > Message Board Post: > > Hi, > > I have photographed an unknown (sign is missing) very old cemetery located > in Sikeston, Scott, Missouri and would be happy to share what information > I > have. Here are some of the legible surnames (many infants, children and > entire families: > > ?-CORK > ALDRICH > BECK > BLAIR (17 ky Cav) > BOND > BOND-RICE > BRADLEY > BRATCHER > BREWINGTON > BUCHANAN > CHAPPELL > COLE > COLLARD > COUCH > COX > CUNNINGHAM > DANIEL > DELOIN > DRY > EDWARDS > EVANS > GIVENS > GRIMES > GRISBY > GUES > HERBERT > HOLDEN > HOLMES > HOLT > JOHN, W.A. > JOHNSON > KING > LAY > MCELREATH > MOTT > NELSON > NIX > NOYES > PERDUE > PORTER > RAINBOLT > SCOTT > SPENCER > STORGEON > STORGIN > THOMAS > TUBBS > WALKER-BLAIR > WARD > WATSON > WILLIAMS > > I have taken over 110 pictures and plan to return to see if I can uncover > some of the stones that need rubbing to read. However, all photos I now > have are legible. > > If you would to ask about a particular surname, please feel free to email > me. If, in fact, it is one (or more) that you are interested in, I will > only charge $1.00 per photo along with a transcription of the stone. This > is only to help me cover processing; certainly not to "get rich". I plan > on > archiving entire cemeteries in the surrounding 100 mile radius of where I > live and placing them on CD ROM for genealogical benefit for all of us to > share. > > You may use PayPal to my email address: [email protected] > > Thanks so much! > > > > > ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > political > announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, > etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for > removal. > Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett > [email protected] > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > > > ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== > NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, > political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal > messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be > grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen > Burnett [email protected] > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > >

I don't know how familiar you are with tombstone rubbings, but you might want to read this article before you do. Many older stones are very fragile and rubbings can deteriorate them further. There is a great deal of information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of misinformation is available. The best practice is to just be careful and remember that future generations may want to view these valuable resources also. http://www.savinggraves.com/education/bookshelf/rubbings.htm The information under this heading is particularly useful... A NOTE ABOUT SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK. I've found that 3D moldings of the stone work very well and aluminum foil is great. It can be purchased cheaply at discount stores. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 1:53 PM To: [email protected] Subject: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. Classification: Query Message Board URL: http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/an/AN.2ADE/700 Message Board Post: Hi, I have photographed an unknown (sign is missing) very old cemetery located in Sikeston, Scott, Missouri and would be happy to share what information I have. Here are some of the legible surnames (many infants, children and entire families: ?-CORK ALDRICH BECK BLAIR (17 ky Cav) BOND BOND-RICE BRADLEY BRATCHER BREWINGTON BUCHANAN CHAPPELL COLE COLLARD COUCH COX CUNNINGHAM DANIEL DELOIN DRY EDWARDS EVANS GIVENS GRIMES GRISBY GUES HERBERT HOLDEN HOLMES HOLT JOHN, W.A. JOHNSON KING LAY MCELREATH MOTT NELSON NIX NOYES PERDUE PORTER RAINBOLT SCOTT SPENCER STORGEON STORGIN THOMAS TUBBS WALKER-BLAIR WARD WATSON WILLIAMS I have taken over 110 pictures and plan to return to see if I can uncover some of the stones that need rubbing to read. However, all photos I now have are legible. If you would to ask about a particular surname, please feel free to email me. If, in fact, it is one (or more) that you are interested in, I will only charge $1.00 per photo along with a transcription of the stone. This is only to help me cover processing; certainly not to "get rich". I plan on archiving entire cemeteries in the surrounding 100 mile radius of where I live and placing them on CD ROM for genealogical benefit for all of us to share. You may use PayPal to my email address: [email protected] Thanks so much! ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett [email protected] ============================== Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx

----- Original Message ----- From: "Mary" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 2:18 PM Subject: Re: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS > Ed, I am so thankful you took the time to send this information. > I am sure no one would knowingly harm these old stones, and many > including myself, > until last year, thought a chalk rubbing would be acceptable. > > Just recently added a stone to the base of an old upright stone for my > great grandfather > who lies in AR. Through researching the possibilities of restoring his > old stone I ran across > this link you shared. It sure opened my eyes and could benefit all > genealogist or > anyone concerned about the deterioration of the old stones. > > Thanks again for sharing, > Mary Clegg, CA. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "E.D. Seevers" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 12:51 PM > Subject: RE: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS > > >>I don't know how familiar you are with tombstone rubbings, but you might >> want to read this article before you do. Many older stones are very >> fragile >> and rubbings can deteriorate them further. There is a great deal of >> information out there on caring for old tombstones and a lot of >> misinformation is available. The best practice is to just be careful and >> remember that future generations may want to view these valuable >> resources >> also. >> >> http://www.savinggraves.com/education/bookshelf/rubbings.htm >> >> The information under this heading is particularly useful... A NOTE ABOUT >> SHAVING CREAM, FLOUR OR CHALK. I've found that 3D moldings of the stone >> work very well and aluminum foil is great. It can be purchased cheaply >> at >> discount stores. >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf >> Of >> [email protected] >> Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2006 1:53 PM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: [MO-CEM] I HAVE OVER 110 CEMETERY PHOTOS >> >> This is a Message Board Post that is gatewayed to this mailing list. >> >> Classification: Query >> >> Message Board URL: >> >> http://boards.ancestry.com/mbexec/msg/an/AN.2ADE/700 >> >> Message Board Post: >> >> Hi, >> >> I have photographed an unknown (sign is missing) very old cemetery >> located >> in Sikeston, Scott, Missouri and would be happy to share what information >> I >> have. Here are some of the legible surnames (many infants, children and >> entire families: >> >> ?-CORK >> ALDRICH >> BECK >> BLAIR (17 ky Cav) >> BOND >> BOND-RICE >> BRADLEY >> BRATCHER >> BREWINGTON >> BUCHANAN >> CHAPPELL >> COLE >> COLLARD >> COUCH >> COX >> CUNNINGHAM >> DANIEL >> DELOIN >> DRY >> EDWARDS >> EVANS >> GIVENS >> GRIMES >> GRISBY >> GUES >> HERBERT >> HOLDEN >> HOLMES >> HOLT >> JOHN, W.A. >> JOHNSON >> KING >> LAY >> MCELREATH >> MOTT >> NELSON >> NIX >> NOYES >> PERDUE >> PORTER >> RAINBOLT >> SCOTT >> SPENCER >> STORGEON >> STORGIN >> THOMAS >> TUBBS >> WALKER-BLAIR >> WARD >> WATSON >> WILLIAMS >> >> I have taken over 110 pictures and plan to return to see if I can uncover >> some of the stones that need rubbing to read. However, all photos I now >> have are legible. >> >> If you would to ask about a particular surname, please feel free to email >> me. If, in fact, it is one (or more) that you are interested in, I will >> only charge $1.00 per photo along with a transcription of the stone. >> This >> is only to help me cover processing; certainly not to "get rich". I plan >> on >> archiving entire cemeteries in the surrounding 100 mile radius of where I >> live and placing them on CD ROM for genealogical benefit for all of us to >> share. >> >> You may use PayPal to my email address: [email protected] >> >> Thanks so much! >> >> >> >> >> ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== >> NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, >> political >> announcements, current events, items for sale, personal messages, flames, >> etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be grounds for >> removal. >> Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen Burnett >> [email protected] >> >> ============================== >> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the >> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: >> http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx >> >> >> ==== MO-CEMETERIES Mailing List ==== >> NOTICE: Posting of virus warnings, test messages, chain letters, >> political announcements, current events, items for sale, personal >> messages, flames, etc. (in other words - spam) is NOT ALLOWED and will be >> grounds for removal. Consideration for exceptions, contact Kathleen >> Burnett [email protected] >> >> ============================== >> Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the >> last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: >> http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx >> >> >