With all due respect, you clearly said GB multiple times, which isn't clearly GHz at all. Really your entire response is showing what I initially stated, that you don't have a solid understanding of the science.

:D You take one mistake I did and go for the beyond proportion scheme? :D Wow, you don't take criticism well, do you? :D

Those papers did not confirm your original claim. So you were confusing several points in your statement about graphene oxide -> "It is important to note that Graphene Oxide becomes a SUPERCONDUCTOR when it reaches EM levels of just several GB."

Care to explain, and not just insult me?

No, you clearly said Graphene Oxide, it wasn't about what I meant. And the paper you provided on GO didn't confirm your initial statement either.

So, now you focus too much on the graphene oxide, and refuse anything about graphene... Interesting state of denial. Not unexpected, just I've never seen one so specific.

You clearly want to find faults in my statements, so you ONLY look for such. Well, enjoy. GOD knows I gave you an honest shot and tried my best.

So you're very unclear on the science you are stating, and you keep changing your story. These arguments you are making are getting long winded and are almost all not properly citing what specifically you needed to cite. So I'm done. But I appreciate your time.

Of course, run away from information. :D It was either that or you could've learnt something that is not copy-pasted opinion of a doctor that made a great impression on you. :D

I wish you could be done. I fear you will spam more of my posts with your nonsense again... Isn't it interesting how you continue to avoid all other topics I've mentioned and stay on a specific case that, in your own mind, is not well understood by you? :D I now know your username is simply ironic. :D Enjoy the rest of what you reap, hypocrite. Your denial of facts doesn't concern me anymore. :D Blocked.