Lynne wrote: > May I suggest that before any of the > readers of this list do that, they also > read this opinion from the Association for Gravstone > Studies: > http://www.gravestonestudies.org/preservation.htm And may I suggest that before you do that, you take a chemistry class (preferably one involving chromatography) and a geology class (particularly one involving chemical weathering). That way, when you read the "shaving cream causes damage to tombstones, and here is why...", you can recognize it as the nonsensical pseudoscientific gobblygook that it is. Thank you for letting me present my plea for the approach of listening to chemists and geologists on the issue, and ignoring those who think that because they have picked up trash and pulled weeds in a cemetery for decades, that they therefore have some expertise in a field wherein they have no training whatsoever. Brock Way __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

Perhaps people will also consider that while shaving cream may not be abrasive (I am not addressing the other issues brought up at the Web site), dragging something across the surface of the stone to wipe off the excess can be. Lynne ----- Original Message ----- From: "Brock Way" <brockway_32m@yahoo.com> To: <NJHUNTER-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 2:04 PM Subject: [NJHUNTER] shaving cream on tombstones > Lynne wrote: > >> May I suggest that before any of the >> readers of this list do that, they also >> read this opinion from the Association for Gravstone >> Studies: > >> http://www.gravestonestudies.org/preservation.htm > > > And may I suggest that before you do that, you take a > chemistry class (preferably one involving > chromatography) and a geology class (particularly one > involving chemical weathering). That way, when you > read the "shaving cream causes damage to tombstones, > and here is why...", you can recognize it as the > nonsensical pseudoscientific gobblygook that it is. > > Thank you for letting me present my plea for the > approach of listening to chemists and geologists on > the issue, and ignoring those who think that because > they have picked up trash and pulled weeds in a > cemetery for decades, that they therefore have some > expertise in a field wherein they have no training > whatsoever. > > > Brock Way

As a geologist (and a genealogist), may I add a few comments: Rock weathering is dependent upon many processes, natural and man-made. In general, weathering will depend not only on the type of rock, but also on the direction of grain (or cut). Weathering is affected by natural events, such as amount of rainfall, climate, frost action, sunlight, the overgrowth of vegetative matter, etc. Add to that, smog, acid rain, and auto exhaust, and you've got a chemical stew that can erode any rock in time. Some New England brownstones have lasted over 200 years and are very legible, while some engraved marbles cannot be discerned after 100 years. Some components in granite can weather in as little as 50 years, while some quartz rich slates are very durable in the same time frame. Most importantly,when one studies geology, man's time becomes a negligible aspect; there is nothing anyone can do to make man's achievements last more than a few lifetimes, (the pyramids excepted) and certainly it all becomes academic after tens or hundreds of millions of years! It seems rather silly to me to be concerned with the effect of a one-time application of a mild soap, such as shaving cream, especially when it is rinsed off afterwards. No matter what we do to preserve our human efforts, it all is futile when placed in relation to geologic time. This is not a despondant, nihilistic view, just a realistic one! Larry Rush -- Internal Virus Database is out-of-date. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.6.3 - Release Date: 12/21/04