If you don't care or don't take it seriously, then don't participate. Certainly do not tell those who do care, who do take this seriously to "relax". Rather, go find a discussion you do care about.
Things that I dedicate most of my free time and nearly all of my disposable income to, are usually taken pretty seriously.
Just because you "don't care" or don't take it seriously, do not assume everyone else feels the same way.
It's only simple to those who bury their head in the sand, believing the nonsense about energy. Energy completely ignores bullet diameter and bullet construction. It completely ignores how the bullet and target interact once they meet. It completely ignores the size of a cast bullet's meplat or the rapidity of a jacketed bullet's expansion at a given velocity. All these and more are important factors affecting the way a target reacts to a given load. Any time one factor is altered, the results are altered. Yes, we can use elementary school logic and say, "this works so I use it" and if that's good enough for you, then perhaps this is not the discussion for you. Personally, I would like to find a better way to compare the terminal performance of two distinctly different loads. That being big & slow/small & fast. Because kinetic energy ain't it. Like I said, energy is a simple and incomplete answer to a complicated question.
