4ager,
You do realize you're "conversing" with someone who wasn't smart enough to NOT keep going to work for an employer long after that employer's checks started bouncing (as in many months of that),
Sometimes it helps to know the whole story. I didn't need the money and was extremely entertained by the actions. I didn't leave until I discovered there was no workman's compensation. Since I was regularly working with industrial knives, I quit that day.
and someone who believes that you can defy physics and magically flatten the trajectory of a bullet by installing extra super high rings under the scope, right?
You really stretch the truth. I did a three hour test comparing 1.68" high rings with 2.2" high rings. I sighted in the rifle at 200 yards with both and fired ten shots at 100 yards and 300 yards with the different rings. The rifle fired ten shots into .450" at 100 yards so it was easy to see how high or how low in relation to the point of aim the groups were. Both at the 100 and 300 yard targets the impact of the higher rings was closer to the point of aim. Even JBM will confirm this info for those who are inclined to be informed instead of wallowing in ignorance.
A couple years later Barnes Bullets ran the same test and made the same discovery. Science is observable, testable, repeatable and verifiable. On the other hand attackers and evolutionists need no facts.
I wasn't finished when it posted.
