[denverpete]

I tried to stay out of this - I really did. But I'm so very tired of "makes sense" type of arguements taking the place of real analysis, engineering, and science.

Typcially, these types of logical fallacies fall into Cum Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc (With this, therefore because of this) - correlation implies causation. Essentially, somebody takes lots of short drives and gets the RMS problem - therefore, the short drives caused the RMS problems.

Where's the science or analysis in the arguement that short hop drives cause RMS? Because a sales manager "who formerly worked at Porsche headquarters and seems to have a lot of technical/engineering knowledge" says so? Please. Because some Dr. X takes short drives and then has an RMS problem? Annecdotal. But, throw in a little pseudo science and it sure sounds plausible huh? The problem is that any two items can be correlated but simple correlation doesn't mean causation.