That is not true in all situations and only a fool ever thinks it is. And a lot of scientific evidence has been proven wrong over time. Yet the scientists of that time believed it was 100% correct and could not be wrong. Just because players remove certain variables and try to have a controlled test does not mean they actually do know the true answer. Only the developers of the game really know the truth and they are not ever going to really say which is true.
Scientific testing is not fool proof by any means. It does not always give the correct answer just because x,y,z was controlled and the variable a,b,c where changed giving result d each time.
How many was can someone get the number one? Infinite, meaning there is no one true answer and this applies to any scientific test where the final answer is not known but only being guess at by the information being obtained through the tests.
Science once believed nothing can move faster than light.. and though it had been proven as such and irrefutable. Yet they were proven wrong. So all the scientific testing of that time that said other wise was wrong. Proving that it is not an infallible measure or means to find an answer and thus yes all information gained by that means is circumspect.
So even if 1000000 players did the same test it would not make it the true answer just because all got the same results.
How does how many ways you can get the number one have anything to do with proving that ballistic vests don't stop AP rounds? You leave out the key fact that scientific advancement is limited by the technology at the time. We have all the technology we need to find in game weapon statistics. It's foolish to say that a test that is duplicated 1,000,000 times in a Call of Duty game and yields the same result is not true. It is a closed environment that is controlled by coding.
You keep insisting that everyone else is wrong without providing any evidence. You made up a reason why AP rounds kill vest users quickly and you were wrong about it. Now you've resorted to ranting about scientific testing. Maybe 100 years from now someone will get back on CoD Ghosts and prove me wrong.
It is not foolish for even 10,000,000 would not mean the true answer was found. None of the tests are absolute no matter how much any player tries to claim they are no matter if it is a closed environment or not. the answer is being assumed as found, so when stated and then said was proven by x number of tests most fools believe it and do not question it because they are taught to believe that it has to be true because x number of tests said so. When that does not make it true at all.
Short of seeing the game code itself no-one can claim they know the truth about how the game works at all entirely on any level. Anyone that does including me is a fool to believe so.
We are all just making guesses based upon our experience with the game and other games and with what ever types of tests we try to try and prove it to our-self and others. When really we do not know.
No-one but the developers truly know. and that goes for everything anywhere. Without seeing the inner workings no-one can truly claim anything about anything.
Once again you offer nothing but more ranting on how you can never be 100% sure about anything. Life isn't about being 100% certain. It is about how close you can get to 100% and repeated tests with isolated variables get you as close as humanly possible. If you have an alternative to how vests work that hasn't been dis-proven, then let it be known. Until then, all evidence supports what I wrote earlier.
You can not call something true unless it is 100% even 1% off and it is not true which is why lite detectors are not allowed in courts because they are only 99% accurate. All evidence does not support what you wrote. Just because a few say it does not make it true, no matter who they are unless they are a developer and truly know the true answer.
It's truly pathetic that your best argument is that it isn't 100% certain. You're mad because you were proven wrong and offer no alternative to repeatable tests with isolated variables that yield the same result every time. I guess you would also say that I can't figure out which sniper rifles can kill in one shot to the chest. I could test it, but it would be impossible to know for sure right? If you believe that, then you might have a problem.
No I am not mad because I was proven wrong for that has not been done by any of the vid at all. You are the one that is mad because I say nothing can ever be 100% accurate when tested by the players no matter what is done because the players truly never know the true results in the end no matter how much they try and claim they do.
LOL.. that is a feeble argument at best..knowing which sniper call kill in one to the chest..several can and when added with muzzle break even more can, add in silencer and that changes and less can. No testing is needed to figure that out at all. So moot argument. Plus that sort of testing does not give any information on if the bv is ignored or not. Nor does it prove any testing on the bv is trully correct either. Just because some information can be gained by those kinds of tests and can be accurate to a degree does not mean all information from those kinds of tests is always accurate and true and never wrong. Only a fool believes that it is always accurate.
A true scientists understands the fact that no matter how many tests are done by what ever means of control of the environment and variables that the answer is not ever truly known that only one possible answer has been found and not the only answer. Scientific testing is by no means perfect and never was, nor ever will be.
You were proven wrong. There is no situation where what you said about the ballistic vest works. What I said has been proven time and time again. You still haven't come up with any evidence to disprove what I'm saying. It's funny that you're only answer is nothing is 100% certain. Nothing in life is 100% certain. That is why we conduct tests to get as close to 100% as possible. You're theory has a 0% possibility and has been dis-proven. You're last several posts have just been you're ridiculous argument. Get some evidence.
How is testing sniper damage a moot point? I already gave you all of the ballistic vest information and an intelligent human being could put the test results together to find out how they work. I used a simpler example of a sniper rifle's damage so that you could understand it. If you can find the one shot kill sniper rifles, then you can find how ballistic vests work. It just requires a few more tests.
Sorry but wrong, no where did any of the videos actually prove me wrong no matter how you want to claim they did. It is not my burden to have to prove anything I say and yet you think it is, Yet all the proof you think you have really proves nothing in the end. for only the developers do know the answer no matter what test any play tries to do ever.
I need not any evidence, only you who think that the tests done are correct and cannot be wrong needs the evidence.
Finding one shot SR is not the same as finding out how the bv works at all. One test does not work for all, one way of gathering information does not mean all information gathered in that way is always correct. Only an idiot ever believes that.
You come in this thread and tell people that they are wrong. Yes, you do need evidence if you are going to do that. The burden of proof is on you if you chose to tell someone that they are wrong. I have posted a ton of facts about ballistic vests. Put them together and you will see that there is no way your theory works. If you still can't understand it, then you can ask me to list it all out again so that you can.