So far, every one seems to be stuck on the " grouping" issue no matter how many times and ways I have explained; I am not referring to how one can get different types of arrows to group together, I have been asking question regarding the claim that has redirected the original subject in this thread.
A few have " pork barreled" a claim that when a shaft is mounted with a fieldpoint, SPINE IS NO CONCERN, and one can perfectly tune and underspined shaft regardless the shaft remains underspined.
Also, if you cannot argue different theories, especially if you are the person who made the claim, without submitting your hurt feelings and your overly smart-a$$ comments, maybe you should not play with the older boys. Maybe you should take your toys and go home. These types of issues often entail comments that " one-liners" cannot address completely and correctly.
Len: You have a history of stating or inferring that your arguments and opinions rise above all, because you say or insinuate in different ways, you are an " ….engineering type and you are a different breed that must be shown." Which is ok, that is
your style.
You claim to have to data that supports your claims/arguments, an insinuation that your data makes you right and subordinates the theories and experiences of the " common people." Regardless of all the " data" you may possess, a reliable indicator that information (findings) may still be a hypothesis and not universally accepted as an inarguable fact, is when opposite beliefs still exist.
Here a paraphrased piece of a doctrine stated by a
genius. He suggested that this rule (doctrine) is and will always remain vital to science and scientific (technological) progress.
" There is no particular reason to believe that the conclusion about what should be done, when reached by a scientist (physicist, engineer, journeyman, etc,) is any better or any more logical than the conclusion reached by a politician, or by the general public. If a scientist takes pride in the belief that only empirical methods produce knowledge and everything else is erroneous or irrelevant, then the resulting ignorance of other thought processes, disciplines and people is more likely to produce a bad decision than a good one. Knowledge, thinking, decisions, and their consequences are interrelated. Science provides one of many methods of thinking and of obtaining knowledge; it is most effective when integrated with others as well. That is; it is impractical to think only one way."