Another very long description of a new method, by Demorep. And, as usual, no hint of why that method is supposed to be better. I'm not going to take the time to figure out what that message means to say, about its proposed method, and to determine in what way it screws up. It's for the proponent of a method to say why it's better, and no one else has a responsibility to evaluate it unless specific claims are made for it, in regards to properties. Same with Don's modified Coombs. I haven't checked it out yet, and I might not get to it. But if Don wants to make a specific claim about its properties, then I'll ;check out the validity of the claim. Mike --
