<a href=showthread.php?s=&postid=15302837#post15302837 target=_blank>Originally posted</a> by ah30k
Bean and the fatman have gone at it many times before. This back-and-forth was ridiculous. It was about the math. Kind of like arguing about gravity! One was clearly wrong and one was clearly right but no one else independently did the math to see who was right.
The person who was right must be sooooo ****ed they got banned for standing up for science!
Not entirely true. Some of us HAVE done the math, many times over. Some of us can look at the math, and how it is being applied and make an informed determination of what is fact and what is fiction. Many cannot do this, and therefore the challenge is to separate what is correct and what is incorrect.
The laws of physics cannot be changed, altered or skewed to make yourself "more right" or "more correct". When up against someone that knows the laws and the math, and how to apply them--The B*** S*** will be called rather quickly. It is not so much an argument about the math, rather about the quality of the information.
None of us really likes to argue, in a drawn out fashion. But you get more than two people in a room, and some one is going to disagree. Arguing opinion is one thing, and we all know about opinion, but arguing facts is quite another-- As you pointed out, "arguing about ytivarg."
This was Bean's calling, along with others. Not to be troublemakers, but rather to insure the quality of the information, separate the fact from the myth. The very thing that will make RC work best: Quality information--especially for those just entering the hobby.
From my perspective, Bean's input is needed, and will be missed. (though I don't like the line by line disassembly debate, sometimes it is the only way)
Regards,
Jim