In article
<4f6f77da-4a12-42be-92ce-57332cd71cc0@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Lloyd
wrote:
> On Jan 8, 3:25 pm, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Brent P) wrote:
>> In article
<487e5cfb-3f51-4e98-bd9d-a34236ca1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Lloyd
wrote:
>> > On Jan 7, 10:44 am, tetraethylleadREMOVET...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Brent P)
>> > wrote:
>> >> In article <9s2dnSYCC7PC2R_anZ2dnUVZ_v6rn...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Steve
wrote:
>> >> > Lloyd wrote:
>>
>> >> >>>Of course, but the magazine goobers don't know a good vehicle
from their
>> >> >>>own backside.
>>
>> >> >> Oh give it a rest. When the leading auto enthusiast magazine and
the
>> >> >> leading consumer magazine both pan Chrysler products, consider
they're
>> >> >> right and you are blind.
>>
>> >> > When my direct experience on repeated occasions validates my
opinion, I
>> >> > don't believe I'm blind.
>>
>> >> >> Yada, yada, yada. Grow up. Your blind, chauvanistic
cheerleading for
>> >> >> Chrysler is tiring and childish.
>>
>> >> > And your quasi-religious faith in what professional WRITERS (not
>> >> > scientists or engineers) repeatedly churn out is abhorrent to me.
Even
>> >> > they are now being forced by sheer numbers of dissatisfied
customers to
>> >> > point out that Toyota screws up just as much as anyone else, but
they do
>> >> > so grudgingly.
>>
>> >> This brings back usenet memories.... Parker still wor****ps Consumer
>> >> re****ts and to a lesser extent the car mags... at the same time on
other
>> >> subjects will bash people for not citing scientific journals. Of
course
>> >> he won't pick up an engineering journal or even read the short
verisons
>> >> in SAE's magazine.
>>
>> > I must have missed where they ranked cars for reliability, fun to
>> > drive, etc. If you can tell me which issue that's in...
>>
>> You wouldn't even accept engineering journals on ABS and stability
system
>> design prefering consumer re****ts and car and driver.
>>
>> But hey, you could use a similiar argument you just made for getting
>> 'science' from the NYTimes, popular science, and national review. The
>> scientific journals lacking the consumer, everyman, type things. But
you
>> bash people for that, you deserve it back when you get your ideas of
ABS
>> system design from consumer re****ts.
>
> No, because I'm not talking about how to engineer a car, but whether
> it's reliable, whether it handles well, etc. Those you get from the
> people testing them and the owners re****ting on them.
1) you neglect the term 'brings back memories'
2) where do you thing good handling and reliability come from?
> Science you get from scientists.
But you won't get your engineering from engineers.
> I'm sorry if our educational system has left you unable to see the
> distinction.
That's the old Lloyd I remember.... So, have you learned that correlation
is not causation yet? lol...
|
