Sorry, had better things to do. Missed out on the fun.
If I may:
Ah, a strawman argument.Quote:
"the reason you think my argument is weak is that you don't have the experience, background, and know the history the way i do. you refuse to accept this as evidence, instead you take the automotive press (who are all idiots) as your racing knowledge.
https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/6...or-a-brain.jpg
No. The reason I feel it is weak is that all races have cars that blow up. Name one that doesn't. Please.
http://gph.is/1dJPtz6
The car mentioned failed and couldn't finish. The reporter didn't make that up. His intelligence only needs to be lukewarm to figure that out. You attacked ALL auto reporter's intelligence instead of actually acknowledging the content. First, in an argument of absolutes if one person has more intelligence then you, you lost your entire argument. Second, that is text book Ad Hominem Fallacy. Why use an Ad Hom?
Can't rebut the content, then you insult the messanger.Quote:
Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is now usually understood as a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.
https://i.chzbgr.com/original/683525/hD7368538/1
Which, uh... let me use an argument you have used before on me: If you know so much more then they do, why are you not writing auto and car magazines and making their money? Gorgon's Auto Mag. GAM. You would be rich.
http://gph.is/1Z8bYn4
This has been pretty lame for a simple troll debate, especially a missed chance for Steve. This is a PERFECT opportunity for you to get me.
Remember a bit ago when I said you don't trust my experience, and you said no? This is a perfect opportunity to zing ME. Really, I left it there like a friggen steak, and you just pussy foot this vegetarian gif stuff up. You really should have said, hey, Josh, you know that you not trusting Gordon on this is like me not trusting your experience with HPA and N2 shooting different. And I would say, Touche', good point. But no... I have to bring it up. Perfect counter. But then, I did accept he had more knowledge, but I wanted to know WHY he felt that way. You didn't. You just ignored it.
I am NOT ignoring Gordon's experience nor belittling it, I am probing it for information while at the same time being skeptical because it is low information and he just piles on the fallacies, while demanding I appeal to his authority:
http://dontfallacy.me/images/memes/M...peal_To_Me.png
__________________________________________________ _____
Gordon, you should know that part of the reason has to do with the oil. Most cars don't have baffles and related in the oil pan, and a smaller reserve of oil. Oil helps in the cooling of the engine, and high G turns can pull the oil away from the pump, starving the engine of both lubrication and cooling. Hence the oil sump arrangement on most race cars, and performance cars like Corvettes. That is why you find 10-11 ltrs of oil in cars like Ferrari and the like.
Again, that is what experience looks like. Knowing the WHY. And I knew that one a long time ago big guy. See, not a total idiot here either, which your point makes only if I am. Strawman. If you talked to me like I had intelligence instead of assuming I didn't we all might have gotten somewhere in this discussion.
The production racing circuit? You basically rebuild the car between runs. That is how the Bug did good in 1999 (early GroupN racing and such). That is how stock cars did it in the 1960s. You should know that, but then, I went and read of some things those idiot reporters and those racing on the circuits said. Interesting that they knew it and you didn't.
To repeat this: I think it would be fun to race, history says it can be done. So I have no further need to argue. This is just fun for now, while I wait for you to actually bring a point that wasn't between your ears.
It just ends up making you look silly for just repeating a point you haven't backed up with more than your personal experience.