Re: Most Ridiculous Accuracy Claim You have Seen
I think you have misunderstood my intent. The claim you used for an example is obviously bullshit, and I did not need you to tell me that. But, since you mention such "qualifiers" as whether a person is "claiming performance far exceeding that demonstrated by the worlds top competitors," I would point out that competition is not the only venue where highly accurate shooting takes place.
Let me make this simpler. For example, let's say that the smallest group fired at 300 yards with a .308 that you have ever seen or heard of is .75," or .25 moa. If you then heard of a group fired at 300 yards with a .308, fired by someone who you never heard of, who was too far away from you for you to go see, that was, let's say, .33," or .11 moa, would you automatically assume that that group was bullshit? How about .3," or .06 moa, at 500 yards? What I am asking here is, when a claim merely exceeds your "comfort zone," and you have no way to verify it, do you assume that it is bullshit?
Too much of what passes for knowledge in our society is merely opinion, and at least some of that is opinion based on nothing more than the opiner's prejudices. I suggest that, in the absence of either personal experience, or one or more obvious disqualifying factors (such as in your example), you might not (in some cases, unlike your example) be able to legitimately determine if a given claim was true or not. If, because of that, you decide that it is bullshit, your conclusion is not necessarily accurate. Your claim of bullshit might, in fact, itself be bullshit.