License covers to reflect red light cameras?

Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
:

> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving:
>
wrote in
roups.com:
>>
>>> LOL
>>>
>>> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving
>>>
>>>>Photoblocker is a $30 spray that does the same and is more difficult to
>>>>detect than a lic.plate cover.
>>>
>>
>>"Scott en Aztlan" said this;
>>>
>>> Pam is a $3 spray that does the same exact things.
>>
>>I dispute it.
>
> You're going on record as being in support of this Snake Oil?
>

I haven't tried it. Have you? Do you have data that shows it's ineffective?

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
:

> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>>Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
m:
>>
>>> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving:
>>>
>>>>Photoblocker is a $30 spray that is more difficult to
>>>>detect than a lic.plate cover.
>>>
>>> Pam is a $3 spray that does the same exact things.
>>
>>PAM is only spray-on canola oil and lecithin.
>
> Are you attempting to dispute my claim that a layer of Pam sprayed
> onto your license plate is more difficult to detect than a license
> plate cover?

Ah,now you're weaselling,first you said "Pam does the exact same things" as
Photoblocker,now you change to "more difficult to detect"
>
>>(and would attract and hold dirt,too) Sheesh!
>
> That is a good thing - dirt will block the photograph if there is a
> thick enough layer of it on your plate.
>
>>The Photoblocker is a clear lacquer with reflective material in
>>it,probably very fine mica flakes like metallic paints have. And
>>considerably more durable than PAM!
>
> Photoblocker is a SCAM. It is Snake Oil, pure and simple. If you want
> to use a spray-on placebo, you might as well save yourself some money
> and spray some Pam on your license plate.


You are entitled to your opinion.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Scott en Aztlán wrote:

> Tell you what: let's do a double-blind scientifically valid study. You
> go ahead and buy a can of PhotoBlocker and a can of Pam, spray each
> onto a couploe of license plates, and drive those cars through a
> photo-enforced red light camera. Post back here with your results.

In order for it to be a double-blind study, someone else will have to do
the spraying and not tell Jim which car had its license plate sprayed
with which substance.

Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
:

> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>>Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
m:
>>
>>> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving:
>>>
>>>>Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
m:
>>>>
>>>>> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Photoblocker is a $30 spray that is more difficult to
>>>>>>detect than a lic.plate cover.
>>>>>
>>>>> Pam is a $3 spray that does the same exact things.
>>>>
>>>>PAM is only spray-on canola oil and lecithin.
>>>
>>> Are you attempting to dispute my claim that a layer of Pam sprayed
>>> onto your license plate is more difficult to detect than a license
>>> plate cover?
>>
>>Ah,now you're weaselling,first you said "Pam does the exact same things"
>
> Tell you what: let's do a double-blind scientifically valid study. You
> go ahead and buy a can of PhotoBlocker and a can of Pam, spray each
> onto a couploe of license plates, and drive those cars through a
> photo-enforced red light camera. Post back here with your results.
>
> My theory is that both will have equal effectiveness at preventing you
> from being ticketed.

Ah,the admission that you only have a THEORY,not factual knowledge.
Thus,only unfounded opinion.
>
>>You are entitled to your opinion.
>
> And you are free to waste $30 on a can of placebo.

So,you admit that you have NO actual data or personal experience that
Photoblocker does NOT work as advertised? (you haven't posted any cites)

Question;if PB is not effective at obscuring the plate from RLCs,then why
do so many states prohibit it's use?
According to it's advertising,it does not impede ordinary viewing,just
flash-pictures.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
:

> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>>> Tell you what: let's do a double-blind scientifically valid study. You
>>> go ahead and buy a can of PhotoBlocker and a can of Pam, spray each
>>> onto a couploe of license plates, and drive those cars through a
>>> photo-enforced red light camera. Post back here with your results.
>>>
>>> My theory is that both will have equal effectiveness at preventing you
>>> from being ticketed.
>>
>>Ah,the admission that you only have a THEORY,not factual knowledge.
>>Thus,only unfounded opinion.
>
> My opinion is every bit as founded as yours is.

Hardly.
I've seen product reviews that say it works.
You have nothing but your opinion.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
:

> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving:
>
>>>>Thus,only unfounded opinion.
>>>
>>> My opinion is every bit as founded as yours is.
>>
>>Hardly.
>>I've seen product reviews that say it works.
>
> Cite.
>
> Note that "reviews" by the manufcturer or any of its retailers don't
> count.

How about product tests by TV news stations,Network news programs?
and I note the police of many states must believe it works,or why would
legislators bother to enact laws against using it?

It appears there's a lot more evidence that it works than not.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On 12 Aug 2006 17:12:37 GMT, Jim Yanik > wrote:

>Scott en Aztlán > wrote in
:
>
>> Jim Yanik > said in rec.autos.driving:
>>
>>>>>Thus,only unfounded opinion.
>>>>
>>>> My opinion is every bit as founded as yours is.
>>>
>>>Hardly.
>>>I've seen product reviews that say it works.
>>
>> Cite.
>>
>> Note that "reviews" by the manufcturer or any of its retailers don't
>> count.
>
>How about product tests by TV news stations,Network news programs?
>and I note the police of many states must believe it works,or why would
>legislators bother to enact laws against using it?

Such laws are to prevent people from making heir plates unreadable in
general, and do not address photoblocker or any orther product
specifically.
So, these laws do not address their effectiveness, but their legality.
Trying to say that they are an endorsement of their effectiveness is
just wrong.
>
>It appears there's a lot more evidence that it works than not.
--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"

the opject is nto to cover your plate but rather to not reun the red -
however it happens so we made a device that will stop you from doing
this:
http://www.navalert.com
warns you before you run the red .