As to all the discussion about MMO
- Thread starter jamesintexas
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Trajan
More like not usefull for anyone who wishes to make an informative decision.
Trajan- I think you mean "informed decision", no?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
[...]
If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet.
It's as simple as that.
d00df00d- if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that "data" will not necessarily change your statement: "If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet" as experiments can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in some way or another. Moreover, I think you might be taking all of this a little too personally, as who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations. You are obviously not one of those people, and your posts recommending a certain level of testing in order to "convince" you come across just as "whiny" as those posts you criticize- again, perhaps he's not trying to convince *you*.
d00df00d and Trajan- please describe, in detail, the MMO data you'd like to see from the laymen on this forum who do not have fleets of vehicles or expensive test equipment. Please be specific in the description of your experiment and the data to be collected. Then, please explain how you might criticize the design of the experiment and the data you've described.
Now, if what you are requesting is beyond the means or capability of a layman on this forum, then perhaps what they can and do choose to post about is merely their observations, for whatever they're worth to people. Whether that is convincing to *you* may not matter to *them* or to *anyone else*. They may be posting for those who do find value in their observations, and they are probably well aware that their observations would not pass objective scrutiny.
Is this difficult to comprehend?
More like not usefull for anyone who wishes to make an informative decision.
Trajan- I think you mean "informed decision", no?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
[...]
If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet.
It's as simple as that.
d00df00d- if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that "data" will not necessarily change your statement: "If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet" as experiments can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in some way or another. Moreover, I think you might be taking all of this a little too personally, as who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations. You are obviously not one of those people, and your posts recommending a certain level of testing in order to "convince" you come across just as "whiny" as those posts you criticize- again, perhaps he's not trying to convince *you*.
d00df00d and Trajan- please describe, in detail, the MMO data you'd like to see from the laymen on this forum who do not have fleets of vehicles or expensive test equipment. Please be specific in the description of your experiment and the data to be collected. Then, please explain how you might criticize the design of the experiment and the data you've described.
Now, if what you are requesting is beyond the means or capability of a layman on this forum, then perhaps what they can and do choose to post about is merely their observations, for whatever they're worth to people. Whether that is convincing to *you* may not matter to *them* or to *anyone else*. They may be posting for those who do find value in their observations, and they are probably well aware that their observations would not pass objective scrutiny.
Is this difficult to comprehend?
Hi, moving2. Been a while, hasn't it?
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d- if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that "data" will not necessarily change your statement: "If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet" as experiments can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in some way or another.
Could you say this another way? I'm not sure I understand your meaning.
The remark that you quoted from me simply states that credibility and truth are not the same thing. I said that because, when I and others said that certain claims about MMO were not credible, demarpaint and others responded as though we were calling them liars or somehow knew that the claims were untrue. Obviously that's not the case.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Moreover, I think you might be taking all of this a little too personally, as who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations.
This isn't about demarpaint or MMO, really. It's about the quality of claims made on this website and the insufficiently critical reception they get. It's also about the fact that skeptics are treated as dogmatic doubters.
There are a few people who preemptively make defensive remarks in threads like this, along the lines of "look out for those sciencey skeptic MMO haters! They'll pick apart anything you say!" I have taken issue with that representation in other threads, and I did the same in this one.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d and Trajan- please describe, in detail, the MMO data you'd like to see from the laymen on this forum who do not have fleets of vehicles or expensive test equipment. Please be specific in the description of your experiment and the data to be collected. Then, please explain how you might criticize the design of the experiment and the data you've described.
Already done.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/2348912/
One point of criticism of that proposed test comes from greenjp a few posts down.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Now, if what you are requesting is beyond the means or capability of a layman on this forum, then perhaps what they can and do choose to post about is merely their observations, for whatever they're worth to people. Whether that is convincing to *you* may not matter to *them* or to *anyone else*. They may be posting for those who do find value in their observations, and they are probably well aware that their observations would not pass objective scrutiny.
Is this difficult to comprehend?
If that's the case, why are they so defensive? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm honestly curious.
I've made objectivity-free posts before, as I'm sure we all have. When criticized about them, I tend either to refuse to defend my position or to back off. I never complain that my opinion is being suppressed or that I am surrounded by haters. Maybe that's just me.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d- if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that "data" will not necessarily change your statement: "If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet" as experiments can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in some way or another.
Could you say this another way? I'm not sure I understand your meaning.
The remark that you quoted from me simply states that credibility and truth are not the same thing. I said that because, when I and others said that certain claims about MMO were not credible, demarpaint and others responded as though we were calling them liars or somehow knew that the claims were untrue. Obviously that's not the case.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Moreover, I think you might be taking all of this a little too personally, as who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations.
This isn't about demarpaint or MMO, really. It's about the quality of claims made on this website and the insufficiently critical reception they get. It's also about the fact that skeptics are treated as dogmatic doubters.
There are a few people who preemptively make defensive remarks in threads like this, along the lines of "look out for those sciencey skeptic MMO haters! They'll pick apart anything you say!" I have taken issue with that representation in other threads, and I did the same in this one.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d and Trajan- please describe, in detail, the MMO data you'd like to see from the laymen on this forum who do not have fleets of vehicles or expensive test equipment. Please be specific in the description of your experiment and the data to be collected. Then, please explain how you might criticize the design of the experiment and the data you've described.
Already done.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/2348912/
One point of criticism of that proposed test comes from greenjp a few posts down.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Now, if what you are requesting is beyond the means or capability of a layman on this forum, then perhaps what they can and do choose to post about is merely their observations, for whatever they're worth to people. Whether that is convincing to *you* may not matter to *them* or to *anyone else*. They may be posting for those who do find value in their observations, and they are probably well aware that their observations would not pass objective scrutiny.
Is this difficult to comprehend?
If that's the case, why are they so defensive? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm honestly curious.
I've made objectivity-free posts before, as I'm sure we all have. When criticized about them, I tend either to refuse to defend my position or to back off. I never complain that my opinion is being suppressed or that I am surrounded by haters. Maybe that's just me.
Okay, please list some (or better yet all) of the claims made that you believe are "not credible".
So much on this forum is nonfactual. People have preferences for brand C over brand A,B, and D even though they have zero data to back up their preference. People choose a certain oil and think it runs well because the engine just "sounds right"; in other words most likely zero data. People go by feel and seat of the pants judgments based on pretty much zero data. If you don't like that sort of thing, then bitog is going to be very frustrating.
So much on this forum is nonfactual. People have preferences for brand C over brand A,B, and D even though they have zero data to back up their preference. People choose a certain oil and think it runs well because the engine just "sounds right"; in other words most likely zero data. People go by feel and seat of the pants judgments based on pretty much zero data. If you don't like that sort of thing, then bitog is going to be very frustrating.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d- if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that "data" will not necessarily change your statement: "If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet" as experiments can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in some way or another.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Could you say this another way? I'm not sure I understand your meaning.
Sure! Let me try again with another statement of yours:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
The "means" you speak of depends on who you ask. For you, the means seem to be certain types of data collected during a certain type of experiment. However, if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that data and experiments (like the one you've described) will not necessarily change your statement: "If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it." as experiments and data can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in one way or another. This isn't to say that scientific rigor is not important, just that following *your* guidelines will make it convincing to *you* and possibly others, and reading the OPs observations might make it convincing to other people and not you and others who agree with you.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Moreover, I think you might be taking all of this a little too personally, as who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
This isn't about demarpaint or MMO, really. It's about the quality of claims made on this website and the insufficiently critical reception they get. It's also about the fact that skeptics are treated as dogmatic doubters.
There are a few people who preemptively make defensive remarks in threads like this, along the lines of "look out for those sciencey skeptic MMO haters! They'll pick apart anything you say!" I have taken issue with that representation in other threads, and I did the same in this one.
[…]
If that's the case, why are they so defensive? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm honestly curious.
It looks to me like it has to do with two extremes, with each side feeling as though the other doesn't acknowledge their POV. dermarpaint believes his observations may be of value to some of the forum members, and they are. You believe that a certain type of experiment with a certain type of data would be of value to some of the forum members, and I'm sure it would be. The two are not mutually exclusive.
As for why they are so defensive, it probably has to do with statements from you such as these:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
As I and others have repeatedly said, there are a few steps you have to take to test a claim before you can expect other people to believe it.
[…]
Of course personal experience counts. It counts for the person in question. When it comes to convincing others, it takes more than say-so.
[…]
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
In your statements above, you seem to be speaking for the entire forum when you refer to "other / others", as if your specifically defined experiment/method/data request would validate the OP's claims for the rest of the forum, and his original post will not. As if the experiment and data you describe would make it "valid" as an absolute, and his observations alone make it "invalid" as an absolute. The fact of the matter is that you do not speak for the rest of the forum. In the future, you may want to consider rewording statements like the three I've quoted from you above. I would hazard a guess that this is where the OP's frustration comes in. Again, who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations. You are obviously not one of those people.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d and Trajan- please describe, in detail, the MMO data you'd like to see from the laymen on this forum who do not have fleets of vehicles or expensive test equipment. Please be specific in the description of your experiment and the data to be collected. Then, please explain how you might criticize the design of the experiment and the data you've described.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Already done.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/2348912/
One point of criticism of that proposed test comes from greenjp a few posts down.
d00df00d- nice to see you've taken the time to do this, and again this test would be convincing to you, but I have no doubt there exist people with enough interest to criticize and dismiss it completely (again, in their eyes and possibly the eyes of others). Also, I asked how *you* might criticize the design of your experiment and the data you've described. Surely you can come up with more than simply pointing to another member's single criticism? BTW, this is the 3rd time you've avoided directly responding to a question of mine in this way. Yes, I'm keeping count.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Now, if what you are requesting is beyond the means or capability of a layman on this forum, then perhaps what they can and do choose to post about is merely their observations, for whatever they're worth to people. Whether that is convincing to *you* may not matter to *them* or to *anyone else*. They may be posting for those who do find value in their observations, and they are probably well aware that their observations would not pass objective scrutiny.
Is this difficult to comprehend?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I've made objectivity-free posts before, as I'm sure we all have. When criticized about them, I tend either to refuse to defend my position or to back off. I never complain that my opinion is being suppressed or that I am surrounded by haters. Maybe that's just me.
I understand your point, but maybe if you see how you're coming across to some people (attempting to nullify the value of the OP's observations while appearing to speak for the forum in describing what would be valid or invalid in convincing people as absolutes), then perhaps you might acknowledge that the reason the OP is being so defensive may be because you are being so offensive.
d00df00d- if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that "data" will not necessarily change your statement: "If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet" as experiments can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in some way or another.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Could you say this another way? I'm not sure I understand your meaning.
Sure! Let me try again with another statement of yours:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
The "means" you speak of depends on who you ask. For you, the means seem to be certain types of data collected during a certain type of experiment. However, if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that data and experiments (like the one you've described) will not necessarily change your statement: "If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it." as experiments and data can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in one way or another. This isn't to say that scientific rigor is not important, just that following *your* guidelines will make it convincing to *you* and possibly others, and reading the OPs observations might make it convincing to other people and not you and others who agree with you.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Moreover, I think you might be taking all of this a little too personally, as who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
This isn't about demarpaint or MMO, really. It's about the quality of claims made on this website and the insufficiently critical reception they get. It's also about the fact that skeptics are treated as dogmatic doubters.
There are a few people who preemptively make defensive remarks in threads like this, along the lines of "look out for those sciencey skeptic MMO haters! They'll pick apart anything you say!" I have taken issue with that representation in other threads, and I did the same in this one.
[…]
If that's the case, why are they so defensive? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm honestly curious.
It looks to me like it has to do with two extremes, with each side feeling as though the other doesn't acknowledge their POV. dermarpaint believes his observations may be of value to some of the forum members, and they are. You believe that a certain type of experiment with a certain type of data would be of value to some of the forum members, and I'm sure it would be. The two are not mutually exclusive.
As for why they are so defensive, it probably has to do with statements from you such as these:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
As I and others have repeatedly said, there are a few steps you have to take to test a claim before you can expect other people to believe it.
[…]
Of course personal experience counts. It counts for the person in question. When it comes to convincing others, it takes more than say-so.
[…]
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
In your statements above, you seem to be speaking for the entire forum when you refer to "other / others", as if your specifically defined experiment/method/data request would validate the OP's claims for the rest of the forum, and his original post will not. As if the experiment and data you describe would make it "valid" as an absolute, and his observations alone make it "invalid" as an absolute. The fact of the matter is that you do not speak for the rest of the forum. In the future, you may want to consider rewording statements like the three I've quoted from you above. I would hazard a guess that this is where the OP's frustration comes in. Again, who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations. You are obviously not one of those people.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d and Trajan- please describe, in detail, the MMO data you'd like to see from the laymen on this forum who do not have fleets of vehicles or expensive test equipment. Please be specific in the description of your experiment and the data to be collected. Then, please explain how you might criticize the design of the experiment and the data you've described.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Already done.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/2348912/
One point of criticism of that proposed test comes from greenjp a few posts down.
d00df00d- nice to see you've taken the time to do this, and again this test would be convincing to you, but I have no doubt there exist people with enough interest to criticize and dismiss it completely (again, in their eyes and possibly the eyes of others). Also, I asked how *you* might criticize the design of your experiment and the data you've described. Surely you can come up with more than simply pointing to another member's single criticism? BTW, this is the 3rd time you've avoided directly responding to a question of mine in this way. Yes, I'm keeping count.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Now, if what you are requesting is beyond the means or capability of a layman on this forum, then perhaps what they can and do choose to post about is merely their observations, for whatever they're worth to people. Whether that is convincing to *you* may not matter to *them* or to *anyone else*. They may be posting for those who do find value in their observations, and they are probably well aware that their observations would not pass objective scrutiny.
Is this difficult to comprehend?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I've made objectivity-free posts before, as I'm sure we all have. When criticized about them, I tend either to refuse to defend my position or to back off. I never complain that my opinion is being suppressed or that I am surrounded by haters. Maybe that's just me.
I understand your point, but maybe if you see how you're coming across to some people (attempting to nullify the value of the OP's observations while appearing to speak for the forum in describing what would be valid or invalid in convincing people as absolutes), then perhaps you might acknowledge that the reason the OP is being so defensive may be because you are being so offensive.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d- if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that "data" will not necessarily change your statement: "If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet" as experiments can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in some way or another.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Could you say this another way? I'm not sure I understand your meaning.
Sure! Let me try again with another statement of yours:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
The "means" you speak of depends on who you ask. For you, the means seem to be certain types of data collected during a certain type of experiment. However, if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that data and experiments (like the one you've described) will not necessarily change your statement: "If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it." as experiments and data can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in one way or another. This isn't to say that scientific rigor is not important, just that following *your* guidelines will make it convincing to *you* and possibly others, and reading the OPs observations might make it convincing to other people and not you and others who agree with you.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Moreover, I think you might be taking all of this a little too personally, as who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
This isn't about demarpaint or MMO, really. It's about the quality of claims made on this website and the insufficiently critical reception they get. It's also about the fact that skeptics are treated as dogmatic doubters.
There are a few people who preemptively make defensive remarks in threads like this, along the lines of "look out for those sciencey skeptic MMO haters! They'll pick apart anything you say!" I have taken issue with that representation in other threads, and I did the same in this one.
[…]
If that's the case, why are they so defensive? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm honestly curious.
It looks to me like it has to do with two extremes, with each side feeling as though the other doesn't acknowledge their POV. dermarpaint believes his observations may be of value to some of the forum members, and they are. You believe that a certain type of experiment with a certain type of data would be of value to some of the forum members, and I'm sure it would be. The two are not mutually exclusive.
As for why they are so defensive, it probably has to do with statements from you such as these:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
As I and others have repeatedly said, there are a few steps you have to take to test a claim before you can expect other people to believe it.
[…]
Of course personal experience counts. It counts for the person in question. When it comes to convincing others, it takes more than say-so.
[…]
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
In your statements above, you seem to be speaking for the entire forum when you refer to "other / others", as if your specifically defined experiment/method/data request would validate the OP's claims for the rest of the forum, and his original post will not. As if the experiment and data you describe would make it "valid" as an absolute, and his observations alone make it "invalid" as an absolute. The fact of the matter is that you do not speak for the rest of the forum. In the future, you may want to consider rewording statements like the three I've quoted from you above. I would hazard a guess that this is where the OP's frustration comes in. Again, who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations. You are obviously not one of those people.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d and Trajan- please describe, in detail, the MMO data you'd like to see from the laymen on this forum who do not have fleets of vehicles or expensive test equipment. Please be specific in the description of your experiment and the data to be collected. Then, please explain how you might criticize the design of the experiment and the data you've described.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Already done.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/2348912/
One point of criticism of that proposed test comes from greenjp a few posts down.
d00df00d- nice to see you've taken the time to do this, and again this test would be convincing to you, but I have no doubt there exist people with enough interest to criticize and dismiss it completely (again, in their eyes and possibly the eyes of others). Also, I asked how *you* might criticize the design of your experiment and the data you've described. Surely you can come up with more than simply pointing to another member's single criticism? BTW, this is the 3rd time you've avoided directly responding to a question of mine in this way. Yes, I'm keeping count.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Now, if what you are requesting is beyond the means or capability of a layman on this forum, then perhaps what they can and do choose to post about is merely their observations, for whatever they're worth to people. Whether that is convincing to *you* may not matter to *them* or to *anyone else*. They may be posting for those who do find value in their observations, and they are probably well aware that their observations would not pass objective scrutiny.
Is this difficult to comprehend?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I've made objectivity-free posts before, as I'm sure we all have. When criticized about them, I tend either to refuse to defend my position or to back off. I never complain that my opinion is being suppressed or that I am surrounded by haters. Maybe that's just me.
I understand your point, but maybe if you see how you're coming across to some people (attempting to nullify the value of the OP's observations while appearing to speak for the forum in describing what would be valid or invalid in convincing people as absolutes), then perhaps you might acknowledge that the reason the OP is being so defensive may be because you are being so offensive.
Very well said. You also understand my POV in all of this, and where I was coming from! Nice! Honestly I don't care what people use, really. I enjoy sharing information about products that worked, or products that are hyped that I bought to try, that either succeeded of failed. A lot can be learned and shared here, I try and keep an open mind. Sometimes testimony from respected members is all there is to go by! I tried Kreen and RL Fuel Injector Cleaner as a result of this board, glad I did. I also tossed some money to the wind, based on hype, it happens.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d- if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that "data" will not necessarily change your statement: "If someone doesn't believe something, that doesn't mean it doesn't exist or didn't happen. It just means the person hasn't been convinced yet" as experiments can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in some way or another.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Could you say this another way? I'm not sure I understand your meaning.
Sure! Let me try again with another statement of yours:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
The "means" you speak of depends on who you ask. For you, the means seem to be certain types of data collected during a certain type of experiment. However, if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper, you would know that data and experiments (like the one you've described) will not necessarily change your statement: "If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it." as experiments and data can usually be effectively criticized or picked apart in one way or another. This isn't to say that scientific rigor is not important, just that following *your* guidelines will make it convincing to *you* and possibly others, and reading the OPs observations might make it convincing to other people and not you and others who agree with you.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Moreover, I think you might be taking all of this a little too personally, as who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
This isn't about demarpaint or MMO, really. It's about the quality of claims made on this website and the insufficiently critical reception they get. It's also about the fact that skeptics are treated as dogmatic doubters.
There are a few people who preemptively make defensive remarks in threads like this, along the lines of "look out for those sciencey skeptic MMO haters! They'll pick apart anything you say!" I have taken issue with that representation in other threads, and I did the same in this one.
[…]
If that's the case, why are they so defensive? That's not a rhetorical question; I'm honestly curious.
It looks to me like it has to do with two extremes, with each side feeling as though the other doesn't acknowledge their POV. dermarpaint believes his observations may be of value to some of the forum members, and they are. You believe that a certain type of experiment with a certain type of data would be of value to some of the forum members, and I'm sure it would be. The two are not mutually exclusive.
As for why they are so defensive, it probably has to do with statements from you such as these:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
As I and others have repeatedly said, there are a few steps you have to take to test a claim before you can expect other people to believe it.
[…]
Of course personal experience counts. It counts for the person in question. When it comes to convincing others, it takes more than say-so.
[…]
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
In your statements above, you seem to be speaking for the entire forum when you refer to "other / others", as if your specifically defined experiment/method/data request would validate the OP's claims for the rest of the forum, and his original post will not. As if the experiment and data you describe would make it "valid" as an absolute, and his observations alone make it "invalid" as an absolute. The fact of the matter is that you do not speak for the rest of the forum. In the future, you may want to consider rewording statements like the three I've quoted from you above. I would hazard a guess that this is where the OP's frustration comes in. Again, who says dermarpaint or anyone else is trying to convince *you*? They may simply be posting their observations for the benefit of those who find value in those observations. You are obviously not one of those people.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d and Trajan- please describe, in detail, the MMO data you'd like to see from the laymen on this forum who do not have fleets of vehicles or expensive test equipment. Please be specific in the description of your experiment and the data to be collected. Then, please explain how you might criticize the design of the experiment and the data you've described.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Already done.
https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/2348912/
One point of criticism of that proposed test comes from greenjp a few posts down.
d00df00d- nice to see you've taken the time to do this, and again this test would be convincing to you, but I have no doubt there exist people with enough interest to criticize and dismiss it completely (again, in their eyes and possibly the eyes of others). Also, I asked how *you* might criticize the design of your experiment and the data you've described. Surely you can come up with more than simply pointing to another member's single criticism? BTW, this is the 3rd time you've avoided directly responding to a question of mine in this way. Yes, I'm keeping count.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Now, if what you are requesting is beyond the means or capability of a layman on this forum, then perhaps what they can and do choose to post about is merely their observations, for whatever they're worth to people. Whether that is convincing to *you* may not matter to *them* or to *anyone else*. They may be posting for those who do find value in their observations, and they are probably well aware that their observations would not pass objective scrutiny.
Is this difficult to comprehend?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I've made objectivity-free posts before, as I'm sure we all have. When criticized about them, I tend either to refuse to defend my position or to back off. I never complain that my opinion is being suppressed or that I am surrounded by haters. Maybe that's just me.
I understand your point, but maybe if you see how you're coming across to some people (attempting to nullify the value of the OP's observations while appearing to speak for the forum in describing what would be valid or invalid in convincing people as absolutes), then perhaps you might acknowledge that the reason the OP is being so defensive may be because you are being so offensive.
Very well said. You also understand my POV in all of this, and where I was coming from! Nice! Honestly I don't care what people use, really. I enjoy sharing information about products that worked, or products that are hyped that I bought to try, that either succeeded of failed. A lot can be learned and shared here, I try and keep an open mind. Sometimes testimony from respected members is all there is to go by! I tried Kreen and RL Fuel Injector Cleaner as a result of this board, glad I did. I also tossed some money to the wind, based on hype, it happens.
Originally Posted By: moving2
The "means" you speak of depends on who you ask.
Is it not possible to say some people have better standards of evidence than others?
Originally Posted By: moving2
For you, the means seem to be certain types of data collected during a certain type of experiment.
I'm not sure, but I suspect you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Let me try again to make it explicit.
Here's what convinces me: Open, honest, repeatable, verifiable testing and analysis. Statements like "hey, look, I got 2 more MPG" do not fall into that category without a lot more elaboration.
If you call that "certain types of data collected during a certain type of experiment," I suspect we have a fundamental disagreement on the terms of this discussion.
Originally Posted By: moving2
However, if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper
Don't you think it's a bit hypocritical to criticize me for being offensive when you keep patronizing me like this?
Originally Posted By: moving2
This isn't to say that scientific rigor is not important, just that following *your* guidelines will make it convincing to *you* and possibly others, and reading the OPs observations might make it convincing to other people and not you and others who agree with you.
I'm quite flattered that you think of me as the guy who invented the idea that one should back up what one says. However, I assure you, it was not my idea.
I'm also still puzzled as to why you keep repeating this "different strokes for different folks" idea. On the one hand, you have people who accept posts that make claims with absolutely zero evidence or verifiability; on the other, you have people who are unconvinced by such things and ask for evidence. Are you seriously proposing that both camps are on equal footing here, or are you just stating a fact about how rare basic intellectual rigor is?
Originally Posted By: moving2
It looks to me like it has to do with two extremes, with each side feeling as though the other doesn't acknowledge their POV. dermarpaint believes his observations may be of value to some of the forum members, and they are. You believe that a certain type of experiment with a certain type of data would be of value to some of the forum members, and I'm sure it would be. The two are not mutually exclusive.
I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that the general tone of discussions on this board affects the kinds of people who participate and the kinds of discussions that are had. I don't know how long you've been reading BITOG, but there used to be people here who actually had the means (knowledge, experience, time, tools, etc.) to do some very interesting investigations into the quality and performance of various products. Those people have largely left or simply reduced their participation, partly because almost no one here seems to be able to tell any difference in validity between real data from real testing and "OMG I got 2 MPG."
Moreover, there are tons of people who come here from other sites expecting to find relief from the endless cycle of hearsay and butt dyno testimony that dominates other boards. There is so much possibility here and it is squandered.
As long as I'm a member here, I have an interest in resisting the kinds of discussions that I feel bring down the quality of the forum.
Originally Posted By: moving2
As for why they are so defensive, it probably has to do with statements from you such as these:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
As I and others have repeatedly said, there are a few steps you have to take to test a claim before you can expect other people to believe it.
[…]
Of course personal experience counts. It counts for the person in question. When it comes to convincing others, it takes more than say-so.
[…]
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
In your statements above, you seem to be speaking for the entire forum when you refer to "other / others", as if your specifically defined experiment/method/data request would validate the OP's claims for the rest of the forum, and his original post will not.
You're reading too much into it. Those statements were meant to be taken at face value.
If you make a claim without evidence to back it up, it's gravy if people believe you, but you don't have a right to expect others to do so. I see nothing controversial about that.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d- nice to see you've taken the time to do this, and again this test would be convincing to you, but I have no doubt there exist people with enough interest to criticize and dismiss it completely (again, in their eyes and possibly the eyes of others).
Good! Let them talk. Maybe there will be something useful in their criticisms and we can come up with a better idea.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Also, I asked how *you* might criticize the design of your experiment and the data you've described. Surely you can come up with more than simply pointing to another member's single criticism?
Sorry, but I have nothing to offer besides what greenjp already posted. His idea trades practicality and possibly some real-world applicability for a better chance at statistical significance; I consider that a value judgment on his part, which I don't share, but obviously I do see his point.
Why do you ask? Are you seeing something I've missed?
Originally Posted By: moving2
I understand your point, but maybe if you see how you're coming across to some people (attempting to nullify the value of the OP's observations while appearing to speak for the forum in describing what would be valid or invalid in convincing people as absolutes), then perhaps you might acknowledge that the reason the OP is being so defensive may be because you are being so offensive.
Fair point. How else could my point be made?
The "means" you speak of depends on who you ask.
Is it not possible to say some people have better standards of evidence than others?
Originally Posted By: moving2
For you, the means seem to be certain types of data collected during a certain type of experiment.
I'm not sure, but I suspect you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Let me try again to make it explicit.
Here's what convinces me: Open, honest, repeatable, verifiable testing and analysis. Statements like "hey, look, I got 2 more MPG" do not fall into that category without a lot more elaboration.
If you call that "certain types of data collected during a certain type of experiment," I suspect we have a fundamental disagreement on the terms of this discussion.
Originally Posted By: moving2
However, if you've ever attended a technical conference or read a journal paper
Don't you think it's a bit hypocritical to criticize me for being offensive when you keep patronizing me like this?
Originally Posted By: moving2
This isn't to say that scientific rigor is not important, just that following *your* guidelines will make it convincing to *you* and possibly others, and reading the OPs observations might make it convincing to other people and not you and others who agree with you.
I'm quite flattered that you think of me as the guy who invented the idea that one should back up what one says. However, I assure you, it was not my idea.
I'm also still puzzled as to why you keep repeating this "different strokes for different folks" idea. On the one hand, you have people who accept posts that make claims with absolutely zero evidence or verifiability; on the other, you have people who are unconvinced by such things and ask for evidence. Are you seriously proposing that both camps are on equal footing here, or are you just stating a fact about how rare basic intellectual rigor is?
Originally Posted By: moving2
It looks to me like it has to do with two extremes, with each side feeling as though the other doesn't acknowledge their POV. dermarpaint believes his observations may be of value to some of the forum members, and they are. You believe that a certain type of experiment with a certain type of data would be of value to some of the forum members, and I'm sure it would be. The two are not mutually exclusive.
I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that the general tone of discussions on this board affects the kinds of people who participate and the kinds of discussions that are had. I don't know how long you've been reading BITOG, but there used to be people here who actually had the means (knowledge, experience, time, tools, etc.) to do some very interesting investigations into the quality and performance of various products. Those people have largely left or simply reduced their participation, partly because almost no one here seems to be able to tell any difference in validity between real data from real testing and "OMG I got 2 MPG."
Moreover, there are tons of people who come here from other sites expecting to find relief from the endless cycle of hearsay and butt dyno testimony that dominates other boards. There is so much possibility here and it is squandered.
As long as I'm a member here, I have an interest in resisting the kinds of discussions that I feel bring down the quality of the forum.
Originally Posted By: moving2
As for why they are so defensive, it probably has to do with statements from you such as these:
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
As I and others have repeatedly said, there are a few steps you have to take to test a claim before you can expect other people to believe it.
[…]
Of course personal experience counts. It counts for the person in question. When it comes to convincing others, it takes more than say-so.
[…]
If we don't have the means to prove a point, we don't have the right to expect others to believe it.
In your statements above, you seem to be speaking for the entire forum when you refer to "other / others", as if your specifically defined experiment/method/data request would validate the OP's claims for the rest of the forum, and his original post will not.
You're reading too much into it. Those statements were meant to be taken at face value.
If you make a claim without evidence to back it up, it's gravy if people believe you, but you don't have a right to expect others to do so. I see nothing controversial about that.
Originally Posted By: moving2
d00df00d- nice to see you've taken the time to do this, and again this test would be convincing to you, but I have no doubt there exist people with enough interest to criticize and dismiss it completely (again, in their eyes and possibly the eyes of others).
Good! Let them talk. Maybe there will be something useful in their criticisms and we can come up with a better idea.
Originally Posted By: moving2
Also, I asked how *you* might criticize the design of your experiment and the data you've described. Surely you can come up with more than simply pointing to another member's single criticism?
Sorry, but I have nothing to offer besides what greenjp already posted. His idea trades practicality and possibly some real-world applicability for a better chance at statistical significance; I consider that a value judgment on his part, which I don't share, but obviously I do see his point.
Why do you ask? Are you seeing something I've missed?
Originally Posted By: moving2
I understand your point, but maybe if you see how you're coming across to some people (attempting to nullify the value of the OP's observations while appearing to speak for the forum in describing what would be valid or invalid in convincing people as absolutes), then perhaps you might acknowledge that the reason the OP is being so defensive may be because you are being so offensive.
Fair point. How else could my point be made?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I also tossed some money to the wind, based on hype, it happens.
And the way to prevent it from happening is...?
Truth is there is no way. The only way to test a product is to try it. Unless it is given to me free, or I rip it off, the only other option is to buy it. Had I not tried Kreen, Bitotech Engine Protectant, Lubro Moly, and #132 based on testimony [some people consider that hype] from this board I would have missed out. A few friends would have lost out too. An open mind, and thinking out of the box paid off for me.
Also the success stories of the products came from many people with no financial ties to any companies.
Unless you go to college on a free ride an education costs $$. Getting an education buying the couple of products that flopped based on hype was peanuts. Now I know for myself. Come to think of it there really was only one product that I bought based on real hype. No point in mentioning it here again, I won't cast stones into a still pond.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
I also tossed some money to the wind, based on hype, it happens.
And the way to prevent it from happening is...?
Truth is there is no way. The only way to test a product is to try it. Unless it is given to me free, or I rip it off, the only other option is to buy it. Had I not tried Kreen, Bitotech Engine Protectant, Lubro Moly, and #132 based on testimony [some people consider that hype] from this board I would have missed out. A few friends would have lost out too. An open mind, and thinking out of the box paid off for me.
Unless you go to college on a free ride an education costs $$. Getting an education buying the couple of products that flopped based on hype was peanuts. Now I know for myself. Come to think of it there really was only one product that I bought based on real hype. No point in mentioning it here again, I won't cast stones into a still pond.
Originally Posted By: Trajan
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Sometimes testimony from respected members is all there is to go by!
And is such "testimony" above questioning? One would hope not.
You missed my point again, sorry.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Sometimes testimony from respected members is all there is to go by!
And is such "testimony" above questioning? One would hope not.
You missed my point again, sorry.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Truth is there is no way.
I realize now that I probably worded that too strongly. You're right that there's no way to prevent getting ripped off once in a blue moon.
The point I'm trying to make is that looking for evidence, verifiability, etc. is the best way to reduce the chances of getting ripped off. It doesn't matter whether you have one testimonial, or a hundred, or ten thousand; if there isn't a shred of evidence behind any of it, it could be 100% true, or 100% hype, or anywhere in between, and you have no way to tell. On the flip side, if someone brings evidence to the table that is verifiable, repeatable, and from a trustworthy independent source, that has weight to it.
You have brought up the example of biased testing and faked results. Valid point. Also pretty easy to spot if you know what to look for. Again, the answer is to question and be skeptical. If someone brings evidence that you don't like, say something! Try to poke holes in it! Feel free to disregard it if you'd like.
Here's another way to think about it.
Right now, on BITOG, it's one person's testimonial against another's. Think about it: a product doesn't actually have to work to be popular here. It just needs a lot of people talking about it. And in the end, as you said, the only way to know is to try it yourself, so really we're back to square one.
Now, imagine what would happen if we all demanded hard evidence to back up performance claims. People and companies would have to prove that their products worked before those products could gain recognition. And if a product did become popular, it would be for the right reasons, and people could trust that a bit more.
Do you disagree?
Truth is there is no way.
I realize now that I probably worded that too strongly. You're right that there's no way to prevent getting ripped off once in a blue moon.
The point I'm trying to make is that looking for evidence, verifiability, etc. is the best way to reduce the chances of getting ripped off. It doesn't matter whether you have one testimonial, or a hundred, or ten thousand; if there isn't a shred of evidence behind any of it, it could be 100% true, or 100% hype, or anywhere in between, and you have no way to tell. On the flip side, if someone brings evidence to the table that is verifiable, repeatable, and from a trustworthy independent source, that has weight to it.
You have brought up the example of biased testing and faked results. Valid point. Also pretty easy to spot if you know what to look for. Again, the answer is to question and be skeptical. If someone brings evidence that you don't like, say something! Try to poke holes in it! Feel free to disregard it if you'd like.
Here's another way to think about it.
Right now, on BITOG, it's one person's testimonial against another's. Think about it: a product doesn't actually have to work to be popular here. It just needs a lot of people talking about it. And in the end, as you said, the only way to know is to try it yourself, so really we're back to square one.
Now, imagine what would happen if we all demanded hard evidence to back up performance claims. People and companies would have to prove that their products worked before those products could gain recognition. And if a product did become popular, it would be for the right reasons, and people could trust that a bit more.
Do you disagree?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Now, imagine what would happen if we all demanded hard evidence to back up performance claims. People and companies would have to prove that their products worked before those products could gain recognition. And if a product did become popular, it would be for the right reasons, and people could trust that a bit more.
Do you disagree?
I agree! I quoted the above because, it can only happen in the perfect world, at least IMO. The problem is the world is far from perfect, so sometimes we have to take a chance if we "believe" a product might have value based on testimony. It is obvious most companies don't want to spend the money to back the claims, and even if they did the evidence can easily be picked apart by skeptics. Then we're right back where we started from. LOL
Now, imagine what would happen if we all demanded hard evidence to back up performance claims. People and companies would have to prove that their products worked before those products could gain recognition. And if a product did become popular, it would be for the right reasons, and people could trust that a bit more.
Do you disagree?
I agree! I quoted the above because, it can only happen in the perfect world, at least IMO. The problem is the world is far from perfect, so sometimes we have to take a chance if we "believe" a product might have value based on testimony. It is obvious most companies don't want to spend the money to back the claims, and even if they did the evidence can easily be picked apart by skeptics. Then we're right back where we started from. LOL
Guys what are you arguing about? Some products will work for you some not. Depends on you engine,what makes it different from other engines, it's condition, mileage,how it is used, how chemical is used, even gas. It may work in Toyota, but may not work in Bimmer, and what would work in Bimmer may work even better in Honda and have no effect on Ford. Due different weak and strong spots in engine construction, different oil pressure,flow and temps among with human factors. BITOG shares personal experience and ideas. That's why people usually state which oil used, how many miles on odo and how is car driven.And support it with pictures or records if they can. So if you have exact same car, with exact same problem-- it might work out good for you, even if conditions don't match 100%. I (and I believe most members) don't have point to lie about results. I don't really wan't my friends, relatives or you guys to get ripped off with some B.S. and that's why, I test it on myself first, then recommend it, and try to provide most detailed report I can. It is up to you to believe it or not. I'm not going to waste my time to prove you anything.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: zyxelenator
Guys what are you arguing about? Some products will work for you some not. Depends on you engine,what makes it different from other engines, it's condition, mileage,how it is used, how chemical is used, even gas. It may work in Toyota, but may not work in Bimmer, and what would work in Bimmer may work even better in Honda and have no effect on Ford. Due different weak and strong spots in engine construction, different oil pressure,flow and temps among with human factors. BITOG shares personal experience and ideas. That's why people usually state which oil used, how many miles on odo and how is car driven.And support it with pictures or records if they can. So if you have exact same car, with exact same problem-- it might work out good for you, even if conditions don't match 100%. I (and I believe most members) don't have point to lie about results. I don't really wan't my friends, relatives or you guys to get ripped off with some B.S. and that's why, I test it on myself first, then recommend it, and try to provide most detailed report I can. It is up to you to believe it or not. I'm not going to waste my time to prove you anything.
That's what I'm trying to say. There isn't always science and data to back everything up, and even if there is it can be flawed, tweaked, or bias. Sometimes you have to take a shot and see for yourself, rip an engine apart and fix it, or live with the problem.
Guys what are you arguing about? Some products will work for you some not. Depends on you engine,what makes it different from other engines, it's condition, mileage,how it is used, how chemical is used, even gas. It may work in Toyota, but may not work in Bimmer, and what would work in Bimmer may work even better in Honda and have no effect on Ford. Due different weak and strong spots in engine construction, different oil pressure,flow and temps among with human factors. BITOG shares personal experience and ideas. That's why people usually state which oil used, how many miles on odo and how is car driven.And support it with pictures or records if they can. So if you have exact same car, with exact same problem-- it might work out good for you, even if conditions don't match 100%. I (and I believe most members) don't have point to lie about results. I don't really wan't my friends, relatives or you guys to get ripped off with some B.S. and that's why, I test it on myself first, then recommend it, and try to provide most detailed report I can. It is up to you to believe it or not. I'm not going to waste my time to prove you anything.
That's what I'm trying to say. There isn't always science and data to back everything up, and even if there is it can be flawed, tweaked, or bias. Sometimes you have to take a shot and see for yourself, rip an engine apart and fix it, or live with the problem.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Now, imagine what would happen if we all demanded hard evidence to back up performance claims. People and companies would have to prove that their products worked before those products could gain recognition. And if a product did become popular, it would be for the right reasons, and people could trust that a bit more.
Do you disagree?
I agree!
And would this not be a better situation than what we have now?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Now, imagine what would happen if we all demanded hard evidence to back up performance claims. People and companies would have to prove that their products worked before those products could gain recognition. And if a product did become popular, it would be for the right reasons, and people could trust that a bit more.
Do you disagree?
I agree!
And would this not be a better situation than what we have now?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Now, imagine what would happen if we all demanded hard evidence to back up performance claims. People and companies would have to prove that their products worked before those products could gain recognition. And if a product did become popular, it would be for the right reasons, and people could trust that a bit more.
Do you disagree?
I agree!
And would this not be a better situation than what we have now?
Sure, with this added in: There isn't always science and data to back everything up, and even if there is it can be flawed, tweaked, or bias. Sometimes you have to take a shot and see for yourself, rip an engine apart and fix it, or live with the problem. Just because there isn't always data supporting it doesn't mean a product won't work.
Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Now, imagine what would happen if we all demanded hard evidence to back up performance claims. People and companies would have to prove that their products worked before those products could gain recognition. And if a product did become popular, it would be for the right reasons, and people could trust that a bit more.
Do you disagree?
I agree!
And would this not be a better situation than what we have now?
Sure, with this added in: There isn't always science and data to back everything up, and even if there is it can be flawed, tweaked, or bias. Sometimes you have to take a shot and see for yourself, rip an engine apart and fix it, or live with the problem. Just because there isn't always data supporting it doesn't mean a product won't work.
^I think those that want such if truly motivated to find out, should take steps in order to do so.
If one is 'brave enough' to use a 'yet supported or disproved by by data' product, why would a different person questioning the claims not be at least partially responsible for gathering evidence if in doubt him/her self?
If one is 'brave enough' to use a 'yet supported or disproved by by data' product, why would a different person questioning the claims not be at least partially responsible for gathering evidence if in doubt him/her self?
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Alright. So, why is it a problem when claims get picked apart and people demand evidence here?
You tell me. You're one of the few who picks apart claims, and makes the demands. I demand nothing here.
Alright. So, why is it a problem when claims get picked apart and people demand evidence here?
You tell me. You're one of the few who picks apart claims, and makes the demands. I demand nothing here.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
