Zerk,
Unfortunately, anybody can see what you posted on this before this point, so your latest post: "So me saying either way will work, and that the industry standard works, has offended you?" doesn't quite cut it.
The following quotes are copied and pasted from your first 5 posts on this thread:
Post 1: "Why are alignment rods in backwards?"
Post 2: "Not sure if I buy this or not. I suppose you could say both large cylinders must line flag against each other. But I am not sure how that would not be happening with the points, and easier to see. Why do you think they come with points? Sinclair's don't even have flat spots."
Post 3: "I simply asked for an article, and if there was something new to learn. As I wrote I googled this to see if I was doing it wrong. Read Brownells, NRA, and Sinclair, plus others. My guess is they are not improved reading."
Post 4: "I asked for an article, not some guys opinion on a forum. You google how to use scope alignment rods, it doesn't agree. Maybe there is some new way to do it. Maybe either is as good as the other, Maybe doing both would be best. But bringing two halves to fine point, seems pretty good. The axis of the rod and gun will align with the point. Which is the point of the whole thing."
Post 5: Agreed. I said you could use both.
My comment: NO YOU DIDN’T. In Post 4 you wrote "Maybe doing both would be best." That is far from saying "you could use both."
I usually don't get involved anymore in such sheer stubborn stupidity on the Campfire, but you're an entertaining exception. Congratulations, you may even exceed the irrational trolling of the legendary Lee24.
