Originally Posted by
wjclint
I think you are confusing observations with conclusions. Note that in my post I make no conclusions that are bike related but instead make observations. You state that BDop is making observations, and as to his observations I have no qualms. However, he also states several conclusions and those conclusions are reached through faulty reasoning (which of course doesn't mean they are wrong). Some of those conclusions are characterized as speculation but that doesn't change the fact that they are conclusions.
Opinions are freely given, freely discarded. No need to make a fuss.
As to your argument, an appeal to authority is still a fallacy even if the authority is correct or you like the authority. Calling it "experience" doesn't change the fact that it is an appeal to authority. People with experience are no more immune from confirmation bias and cognitive dissonance than the rest of us and often those with authority are more influenced by those psychological urges. Those with the most experience often form hypotheses, but the fact that they have experience does not mean they get to skip over testing an analysis and go right to conclusion and call it science.
Now, now, don't philosophy 101 me. We are just BS'ing here on the internet. BDop has experience that I and, I suspect, you, do not have. He makes some observations that are a little more interesting than your average internet conversation.
Yes I have an unbranded frame and have posted pictures of it. ...
Look at that, I guessed right. Nobody is questioning your choice of purchase (except maybe you). We all make our own decisions. Just because someone doesn't think your decision was wise
for them doesn't make the decision any less proper
for you.
... at some level the most basic reasoning should be expected. If an assertion is made the person making the assertion has the burden of proof and persuasion which is not met with "cuz I said so based on stuff I've experienced."
Don't confuse holding your thumb up to a picture and extrapolating observations with an "analysis" of any sort. BDop is stating his observations based on what he sees, you are stating your observations based on what you see. Both are appeals to authority, which is natural being that this is the internet and not a refereed journal.
The idea that the OP's picture and description of the accident support any conclusion about the build quality of the frame is ridiculous.
Naturally. Nobody is actually suggesting otherwise. But this is not a black and white thing. We know that bikes aren't meant to absorb crash loads. Some of us know that some bikes we've ridden have survived crashes worse than that with no frame failure. Everything is an extrapolation (including your own observations and conclusions), and extrapolations can sometimes be wildly off, but just because we don't know everything doesn't mean we know nothing.
Look, you are having doubts about your generic, unmarked, Chinese frame you have in your possession. Obviously. Otherwise you wouldn't be this defensive about a topic you didn't actually start. Every time you buy something, there is a risk it doesn't work out. It might fail. You might not like it. It might be of lower quality than expected. There are systems in place which manufacturers use to reinforce customer confidence. The name branding is part of it (read: product history). The warrantee is part of it too. When you buy unlabeled, unbranded, unwarranteed stuff on the internet, you naturally get it cheaper, but you live with a little more uncertainty. Don't take it out on others who are just trying to have a conversation.