Originally Posted by ewoden
Still picking facts you like....
Ha ha the difficulty with electronic exchange or perhaps a quote betraying a desire to seem scholarly and incontrovertible. Obviously I can't tell without knowing the poster personally not base concludion on this exchange to this point so I'll assume the former and chalk it up to poor communication on my part :-)
To recap:I intitially responded to a point by another saying composting boat waste off the boat would take years. I pointed to a document referenced elsewhere that showed pathogenic performance at 30 to 80 C. I concluded a container in the sun would be compatable with such consitions (as an aside I know I can maintain said temps in the sun from solar heating design efforts). Again I was referring to a table showing performance at temps between 30 and 80 C. The poster quoted above chose to interpret said table as establishing limits from 50 to 120 days. That was incorrect and I pointed that out and indicated a worst case in the table of less that 120 days...again it is a table at 30 to 80 C. Politely I pointed this out I might add. Quote above is countered by an ad hominem
attack alledging some bias on my part and adding in conditions outside the referenced table parameters and outside the intitial point of the post response.
I never said anything about a cold boat anywhere in the string and nowhere reference data for conditions below 30C and did not insintuate that referenced shoulddata apply to other conditions. Therefore I believe it inappropriate for one to assume my string of exchange had done so or that I misapplied or biased any facts in the discussion.
So having said my piece and defended my honor, I'll now lay down the pen and let the quoted poster conclude they have in some way put me in my place; chastised me appropriately for my obvious lack of intellectual rigor; and perhaps provide further opportunity for the development of a data set for me to test my hypothesis about the quoted poster's motivation. Peace.