why do we let experts become "experts"

Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nicodemus38

Member
Joined
May 11, 2009
Messages
583
heres a question that ive had new disturbance on.

why do we let some people set themselves up on soapboxes and spout forth words and make ourselves take it as "truth"?

for example ive put up with years of being told that the 30-30 in a 16-18 inch barreled rifle is completely worthless for deer hunting, that its at best a 100 yard gun provided the hunter only takes head shots.

yet im told that a contender or encore with a 13" barrel and the same ammunition is an excellent deer killer out to 200 yards no problem.

im told in magazines that a handgun has to generate at least 500 pounds of bullet energy at 50 yards to be considered safe for hunting, yet these wise pundits will tell me its humane to take 100 yard shots with a 16" barreled 44-40 that only generates 650 pounds at the MUZZLE.

if i can learn the path to becoming a pundit on hunting, id love toknow because i have actual fact i could publish and make money on.
 
Always question authority, no matter what the authority claims domain over, regardless of credentials. This includes self-described experts in any field. If the authority figure in question really is an expert, he or she will have no problem explaining their conclusions and how they arrived at them, in detail.
 
We don't let anybody become experts they usually climb up on that soapbox all by themselves.
 
I doubt it is the same "experts" making contradictory statements. If someone has experience in the subject matter and backs up their viewpoint with solid reasoning then you can make up your own mind (based on what experience you have, your personal situation, environment and preferences and the relative merits presented for each argument).

"A handgun is best for home defense."

"A shotgun is best for home defense."

"A carbine is best for home defense."

"A dog is best for home defense."

"An alarm is best for home defense."

-All valid statements from a particular perspective and a particular set of circumstances.
 
Magazines, along with most other experts make their money through advertising, the 30-30 long ago ran out its advertising budget. There is no money in pushing the old timers(excepting the 1911) but there is a lot of revenue in controversy.

The .44 mag handgun for hunting being better than the 30-30 always drove my Dad up the wall, I listened to him rant on the "idiot experts" for close to 50 years. A for worthless caliber it sure has dropped a heck of a lot of deer meat in the pot.
 
Let people? I don't live in a country where I have to rely on people letting me do anything.

Whether you make a choice to listen to them is on you. People are allowed to say whatever they want. You are free to listen to whatever you want. The responsibility always lies on you to take in what you think is wisdom and use it wisely.

Your choices are never anyone else's fault. If you think someone's advice is foolish, ignore them. But following it and blaming your actions on their words is cowardice of the first order.
 
If you poll enough experts , you can always find one who agrees with your way of thinking.
When experts debate , it stands to reason that someone is full of hogwarsh.
 
Sometimes it is seemingly conflicting information, one needs to take specific information into account.

For example... The Encore could be shooting hand-loaded bullets more suited for long range, good BCs. The lever action would be expected to be shooting the standard round nose bullet.

When it comes to the 30-30, many experts will parrot what they've heard over and over, my favorite is... The 30-30 lever action is a brush gun; not because it is more easily maneuvered in thick brush, but because "the bullet doesn't deflect off of brush." :p
 
People don't get to an aspired position by having others "let" them get there. It takes hard work and dedication to acheive a position of trusted authority. Just because you dont' agree, doesn't mean they are wrong. A better question might be, If your opinion is so much more valid and respected, why hasn't someone let you have their position. Broad generalizations make for a weak argument.
 
why do we let some people set themselves up on soapboxes and spout forth words and make ourselves take it as "truth"?
Click to expand...

I think you may be painting with too broad a brush. Who are these "experts" and who is "ourselves?"

There are many folks who get paid to write or speak on technical issues. In the gun community those issues are usually things like terminal ballistics, shooting techniques, self-defense strategy and tactics, firearms/military history, reloading techniques/internal ballistics, and so forth. Let's define "expert" as folks who get paid to publish information on those subjects.

How do we, "ourselves," become convinced to believe those people? Lots of ways. For one, their statements are published in a periodical, TV show, book, website, etc. that lends them credibility. Some source that we know and trust (more or less). This gives them both an air of credibility which may or may not be realistic -- AND gives us the confidence that said publication has considered their own legal and credibility liability for the information presented. No magazine wants to be sued (whether they'd lose or win the suit) because folks blew up their guns with a reloading recipe they'd published. They also don't want to risk becoming poorly thought of as publishing unrealistic, faulty, inappropriate training, info, or advice. So the editorial staff of any publication printing some "expert's" words is going to keep pretty tight reins on what they allow.

Now, each of us owes it to ourselves to be the most vigilant, skeptical consumer of information that we can be. Simply making it into print does not an "expert" create.

What are the "expert's" actual credentials? How applicable are those credentials to the subject at hand? (A US Marine with 3 tours of duty has a lot of credibility on small unit tactics, maintaining US military weapons, and probably on the terminal effects of 5.56 NATO FMJ ammo --- but maybe not so much on safely reloading the .17-50BMG Ackley Improved cartridge). Most publications will tell you in a sidebar or coda what gives the author special authority on the subject. If not, you can always research him and see for yourself.

The final test, of course, is how the "expert's" information AND credibility on the subject, stack up against your own experiences, observations, etc. That's a tricky one. At some point, all of use were complete newbies. As a complete newbie it is probably fitting that we accept as (something approaching) fact the information provided by more experienced folks. It is probably fitting that a neophyte accept the credibility of published sources at face value.

(Of course -- as we see here weekly -- a newbie ends up internalizing and having to process out of his beliefs a certain percentage of utter crap. No real way around that.)

But through building our own experiences over the course of years/decades, we can develop a bank of observations against which to compare and contrast the claims of "experts." When you have 10,000 hours of study on a subject -- or 50,000 shots fired on a particular platform -- or have butchered 100 game animals killed with a particular cartridge/bullet -- or practiced force-on-force exercises in hundreds of scenarios against different opponents -- ETC -- you tend to lessen your reliance upon the advice of published "experts."

Careful, you may end up becoming one yourself! ;)
 
Last edited:
When I was about twelve, my best friend's father (ex-Navy, powderman at a quarry, then working at a chemical plant) gave me a break down on "expert": "ex" means has been and "spurt" is a big drip. So an expert is a has been big drip.* I have followed that for fifty years not only when presented with opinions of experts, but when I have been tempted to think of myself as an expert on anything.

Authority should be questioned; if it can't give good answers, it isn't legitimate authority.

Added: it's kinda like the adage there's those that do in the field and those that teach at university.
 
Last edited:
Some people I consider experts may not consider themselves experts. Take RC Model for instance. If I have a real reloading problem, and I do not understand the myriad solutions given on here I ask RC the question directly. He is an expert... IMO

There are certain physicians I consult with on medical questions. They are not my medical director, and in some cases not even emergency medicine experts... but TO ME... they have shown themselves to be experts.

Rarely will I turn to a self proclaimed expert on something.
 
I dont know so much about "experts" but I will go with wisdom from those with experience like Old Fuff or RC who have yrs of knowledge and should write a book between them 2 they gotta have a descent novel! C'mon guys we know you wanna!
 
In a recent Rifle magazine, John Barsnes has an article for Pump Guns. http://www.riflemagazine.com/magazine/PDF/ri253partial.pdf

I consider gunwriters to be shills for the industry and in print they are always apologists for the garbage that is shoveled out to the market. In his article he makes the statement that “rifle purists object” to the crappy triggers put on pump guns.

So here is some “media expert” making a derisive statement about shooters who want a creep free trigger on a $600.00 rifle.

I was glad to read in his article that you really don't need a creep free trigger to shoot well. However , I have never met a Nationally ranked individual who did not expect and did not have an excellent, creep free trigger on their target rifle. The USMC Rifle Team shooters I have been squadded with always preached “sight alignment and trigger pull”. I guess these guys are “purists” and don't know nothing about real shooting.

But since these “purists” are not in print the “media expert” is taken more seriously than people who are real experts.

The worst are Celebrities. People assume a Celebrity is an expert on politics, investment advice, cosmetics, just because they are Celebrities. Most Celebrities are just pretty faces with the capacity to memorize a movie scrip.
 
There is another doted upon expert accepted into this community as an exspurt. He is an exspurt but in his sphere of influenece. He loves the old west, shoots blackpowder, and writes books about them.
Then he jumped on cowboy shooters and derided their way of shooting. He shot cowboy for couple of years and never won anything. Usually came in about last.
Then there was/is the expert that got caught up in canned hunts a few years back. Who would have thunk it? He filmed canned hunts and sold them for fair chase?
Then, nother expert who was especially high on the adoration pedestal of rifle hunters railed against black guns.
In each case, they were "experts, then they stepped into another sandbox.
 
experts were probably dreamed up by lawyers.was watching one of the UFO shows on A&E or History channel and they had an "expert on interstellar life forms".where do you go to school for that, LSD University....jwr
 
(I should have read ALL the other posts as this was already stated about experts,)
I read somewhere long ago that ex - perts are EX=has been and perts, close to sperts=drips. So Experts are has been drips, works for me!

After 50 years of shooting some of the info published by the gun mags, on TV, and now on the internet is pure BS! There are gunsmiths who won't work on some gun brands because they think they are junk. Some only consider one or two brands worthy to be carry guns, yea right. There are training experts that tell you their way of shooting is the only way to do it, yea right. Take everything with a large grain of salt, it's only their opinion. As someone else pointed out they put themselves on the expert pedestal!
 
Last edited:
Good question. Right here in this very forum there is a thread talking about R. Lee Ermey and his endorsement of both the Glock pistol and the .45acp round. Everyone, R. Lee Ermey included, is entitled to their opinion, but what qualifies him as an expert?
 
True experts are few and far between. I can think of only a couple people I would really consider experts in the Firearms world and many of them know a lot about some things and not so much about others.
I have become very careful who I listen to. Otherwise the signal to noise ratio gets so high that you can't tell what works and what doesn't.

The biggest factor to me is someone who not only knows a lot but is willing to admit what they don't know and is willing to change as they gain knowlege.

How many gun rag "experts" do we have that are still saying the same things they said in the 70 and 80s?
 
I'm an expert on experts and my expert opinion is no expert worth his expertise would post on an internet forum.
 
Subject matter experts are "experts" because of training, experience, or both, however, expertise is relative.

To a 15 year old kid learning to drive, the father is an "expert" driver based on his initial training and years of experience driving the family sedan. However, when compared to Tony Stewart, or any other professional motor sports driver, the father is not an "expert", but simply a licensed driver.

While there may indeed be a base line level of knowledge and experience that would warrant a title of "expert", even experts have experts they turn to for knowledge.

Edit: I would argue that there are MANY experts here on this very forum in a wide variety of firearms related subjects. From reloading, to repair and trouble shooting, I have garnered a lot of knowledge right here on THR.
 
saw an interesting expert training scenario a month back when the outdoorsman channel was free preview on the dish system. it was a really nice expose on howto clear a room when someone is hiding behind a partition wall in your house.
lots of nice styles of holding the gun, old fbi way was put back on the map as most valid as it is. However the "highly skilled and ex spec ops' guy who shoed the demonstration with his buddy and a dummy gun gave wonderful advice to us viewers.
"do this drill until it becomes natural habit. to get the best training, do this with your training partner first with a dummy gun, then an empty real gun, and then with a loaded gun"

the thing is there are no real credentials. Most of the gunwriters ive seen are either ex military trying to make a buck, or professional target shooters with a degree in journalism.
 
Hello friends and neighbors // I'm currently reading Cooper on Handguns by the publishers of Guns and Ammo.

Even though it was written in 1974 the expertise still makes it a great read.

Few writers gain this much experience or spend so much of their lives building/shareing their knowledge. Still, it is one mans opinion and must be taken as such.

Without knowing the writers background you are taking you're chances.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top