domingjm wrote:
JasoninHalifax wrote:
domingjm wrote:
The59Swim wrote:
domingjm wrote:
Okay. For perspective, I'm a scientist by profession, and we just don't say things that we can't immediately demonstrate with measurable and repeatable data. We all have opinions, but masquerading them as fact is a habit that everyone should recognize as dangerous. Your 1/1,000% is flagrantly lacking any rigid support whatsoever. With the current US political administration, I'm getting really sensitive about people making shit up because it's their "feeling". So I apologize for beating a dead horse here in this thread, but providing a rigid number without any support is as bad as it gets.
I'm sorry my triathlon forum post doesn't meet the rigors of peer review /sort of pink
I'll walk back my 1/1000th of a percent comment to "virtually all" that I stated before and start designing the appropriate study parameters and statistical analysis.
I'd still stand by the point that virtually none (haven't checked with every single one) of the elite swimmers and olympians we see in swimming don't practice with a watch.
I get that you like your watch for swimming and have found it useful for pool swims, but I and most swimmers don't. It's a funny conversation that inevitably comes up during tri practices - someone always asks why I take my watch off before practice.
It ultimately boils down to the watch not offering enough benefit to offset the inconvenience.
Are you really okay, in any context, stating something as fact, when you actually have no evidence to suggest that you're correct? You're telling people things that they may believe and that will influence their decisions. That's not okay in any medium. If I could make any wish come true (outside of winning the lottery), it would be for people to appreciate that concept.
Edit: And for what it's worth, I'm sure you're right that many proficient swimmers don't use, and see no value in, a swim tracker.
Most of us can recognize hyperbole and don’t take it as literally true.
You may have missed that, but he wasn't being hyperbolic with his approximation. Furthermore, based upon the current political disaster in the US, it seems pretty clear that close to 50% of the population literally does not know how to distinguish truth from falsehood. Granted, that will depend upon the influence of the individual that's making the statement.
Are you blind to the irony of your own cognitive dissonance here? Where is the scientific study for your ridiculous "50% of the population literally does not know how to distinguish truth from falsehood" claim?