04-04-2011, 01:37 PM
One of the reasons this forum does so well is that enough folks take the scientific approach to informing their opinions. We can "prove" something by a test, but absent a record of how the test was designed, one cannot form a valid opinion.
Lest folks think I'm confusing "opinions" with "facts," we need to remember that very few experiments are adequately definitive even when specified to the degree that LR1955 suggests. I will admit, however, following his advice will remove just about all of the unknowns that folks can control.
After that subjective or objective judgment is applied, and the opinion is formed. The facts are "how many rounds were needed to pierce the wall, given that the shots were defined using specified criteria." The opinion is formed when the observer concludes that one cartridge does "better" than another based on a specified number of experiments --- the variability of these tests means that the observer can still draw a conclusion that is opposite of what a lot more experiments would indicate!
Lest folks think I'm confusing "opinions" with "facts," we need to remember that very few experiments are adequately definitive even when specified to the degree that LR1955 suggests. I will admit, however, following his advice will remove just about all of the unknowns that folks can control.
After that subjective or objective judgment is applied, and the opinion is formed. The facts are "how many rounds were needed to pierce the wall, given that the shots were defined using specified criteria." The opinion is formed when the observer concludes that one cartridge does "better" than another based on a specified number of experiments --- the variability of these tests means that the observer can still draw a conclusion that is opposite of what a lot more experiments would indicate!