Hoosier State derails outside Chicago 6/8

mattfels wrote:The only "loyalty" I insist on is to the facts. Here are some: Both LI Loco and Rhinecliff have been caught making stuff up to "prove" a point that isn't worth proving. And yeah, they're really angry . . . that they got caught. But whose fault is that?

No cafe? Fair enough. But three days a week, there's a train that has one. The Hoosier State doesn't exist in a vacuum. It runs only 4 days a week. Calling the train "worthless," as Rhinecliff does, is just--oh, what's the word?--"emo." Reflective of a mean-spirited personal agenda, perhaps, but not the facts.

I haven't made up anything. If I've mistated factual information, point it out and show me information from a reliable source that counters what I have stated. I'll acknowledge my error and move on. But don't accuse me of making things up. That's Texas politics, George W. Bush style.

Bush lied. GIs died.

LI Loco, in full denial mode, wrote:I haven't made up anything.

Wrong. Wishful thinking.

LI Loco wrote:If I've mistated factual information,

If? We've been through this at least twice already. For the third time, here it is. Read the original claim:

LI Loco, on June 15, wrote:[The Hoosier State] is rarely on time, even with the ample schedule.

This, of course, is false. Conclusively proven by Amtrak's latest monthly performance report, which reports the Hoosier State into its endpoints over 60% over time in April, and over 58% on time through the fiscal year.

Repeating falsehoods (or as we call them west of the Hudson, lies) will not make them true. Denial will not make unpleasant things go away. If you have to make things up (and then deny you did it) to "prove" a point, you don't have a point worth proving.

Not to mention that thanks to the stipulations of past loans, expansion is not even permitted, so even if [Gunn] wanted to have more daily trains between Chicago and Indianapolis, he's not allowed to do it of his own volition

Actually, I don't think this is quite right. The restriction prevents Amtrak from planning new service, i.e. new routes. Additional frequencies on an existing route are not the same as new service. The increase in daily frequency on the Springfield line happened in spring of 2003, after the 2002 loan restrictions. Extension of the Cardinal to NYC happened in the fall of 2003.

If Amtrak wants to expand Hoosier State service to several times a day, or make the Cardinal (or Sunset, for that matter) daily, they can legally do it. The only thing holding them back is lack of money (or lack of equipment, which is caused by lack of money). Amtrak needs more money from the State of Indiana and/or Congress.

Hoosier State rarely on time - true or false?

Mr. Fels' has cited one source of information, which shows the train on time more than half the time. Not great, perhaps, but better than "rarely." Conclusion: statement is false.

But look at recent days. Eight of the last eight end point arrivals have been late. Admittedly a small data set, but it's the most recent available. Conclusion: statement is true.

The real answer? An emphatic "it depends." It depends on what data you are looking at. Maybe those in disagreement on the subject could just agree to disagree, and tone down the rhetoric.

Sadly--and who would have thought it?--the denial is getting thicker.

Let me get this straight: The owner of C&O 15 asserts that a teeny-weeny sample is equivalent to SEVEN FULL MONTHS of timekeeping records? And therefore cancels them out? Oh, come now. The records I cite cover the first 7 months of the train being discussed. I am reminded of an expression attributed to the eternal Groucho, "Who ya gonna believe, me or your own eyes?" I trust my own eyes. I can read a table.

Note further that no time reference appears in the original, false, claim: "is rarely on time." "It depends"? Only on what your definition of is is.

If you have to ignore 99% of the available data to "prove" your point, you don't have a point worth proving. "Is rarely on time"? Conclusively, unambiguously false.

The owner of C&O 15 asserts that a teeny-weeny sample is equivalent to SEVEN FULL MONTHS of timekeeping records?

Actually, no. They are not equivalent, and I never said they were. Mr. Fels, your source of information includes far more data points, as I freely admit.

I am not trying to prove a point. Someone (not me) claimed the Hoosier State is rarely on time. I didn't know if this was right or wrong, so I set out to check, using the data source that came to mind: the train status feature on Amtrak's website. Based on the data that are available there, it seems reasonable for someone (not me) to have claimed the train is "rarely on time." I have pointed out every time I have cited this "train status" data that the sample size is small.

It is a small data set. It is also the most up-to-date information available. If the trend of the last few days keeps up (will it? who knows.) then next month's and next year's official monthly performance reports will be worse.

C&O 15 wrote:They are not equivalent, and I never said they were.

Wrong. In fact, the owner of C&O 15 was most "emphatic" about it. Read this quote again.

C&O 15 wrote:The real answer? An emphatic "it depends." It depends on what data you are looking at.

In other words, the owner of C&O 15 is claiming--emphatically so--that one data set is as good as the other. That's what "it depends" means: Choose either one, doesn't matter.

Remember, LI Loco didn't make any mention of time reference. He simply wrote "is rarely on time." Period.

So let's review: Through the first 7 months of the Hoosier State's existence, the train was on time 60% of the time. There is no truth in what LI Loco claims. The only way to justify the "it depends" claim is either

• to read something into the original assertion that wasn't there
• or to throw out 99% of the publicly available OTP data

I think I'll go insane!

Talk about pickin' the fly poop out of the pepper!

The owner of mattfels is a master of antagonistic points of expression.

Need confirmation? Check out the mattfels owner's posts.

Wow.

Poor Mr. Li Loco. To be sure, "rarely on time" becomes inaccurate when one uses enough data points. But I mean really. For a short haul service carded on such a relaxed schedule, the train's timekeeping is disgraceful by any measure. Mr. Fels' energy would be better directed at defending attacks at other Amtrak services. The Hoosier State is a dog.

Just to be clear, I'm not calling for the route to be cut. To the contrary, I would like to see a daily Cardinal. But short of that, Amtrak needs to run its short haul trains with a little more dignity. Runs of 4 hours or more need food service. Checked baggage between endpoints is critical to compliment the Cardinal's service without confusion and dissatisfaction. (Passengers don't buy the notion of checked baggage being offered only certain days of the week, especially when the day falls on a day other than the day of the passenger's travel. Nor are Amtrak's own employees able to keep up with the exception-laiden system and explain it effectively.)

Almost everywhere one looks, Amtrak's off-NEC services have deteriorated substantially over the last decade. The Hoosier State is no exception. The apologists explain everything away by pointing to the lack of funding, but I don't buy it. I like Amtrak a lot, but I really think it can do better with the limited resources that it has. Mr. Gunn is not really impressing me anymore.

If it takes "antagonistic expression" to separate truths from untruths, whose fault is that?

I appreciate the concern over my "energy." I say that if one cares about informed discussion, there's no better use of one's energy than to feed it. That means, among other things, identifying lies and insisting on facts.

To assert that the Hoosier State "is rarely on time" is a lie. Defending a lie is a waste of not only energy but credibility as well.

This claim of LI Loco's is a dog. A mad dog. Let go now before it bites again.

And as for this:

The apologists explain everything away by pointing to the lack of funding, but I don't buy it.

I have no idea what the correspondent means by "apologists" or "everything" but as anyone who participates in the money economy will attest, lack of funding does make it more difficult to buy necessities. Denial doesn't change that.

As the recently-departed, apparant candidate for sainthood Ronald Reagan said once:

"Now, there you go again."

Separating facts from lies is a full-time job in the current political environment. I'm just glad we have the owner of mattfels around to help us out.

I really mean that, too!

Denial doesn't change that.

The secret is to make gray issues black and white, and black and white issues gray. It's called obfuscation -- the art of marketers and spin doctors.

In other words, the owner of C&O 15 is claiming--emphatically so--that one data set is as good as the other. That's what "it depends" means: Choose either one, doesn't matter.

No, that's not what "it depends" means. Perhaps you're thinking of the phrase "it makes no difference." The phrase "it depends" suggests that one method is better for some uses or in some circumstances, and the other method is better at other times or in other ways. If you'll read back, I think you'll see that's how I used it.

If my "it depends" post was unclear, I apologize. Let me try to clarify: Mr. Fels' data suggest the HS is not rarely on time. My own admittedly small but very recent sample suggests it is rarely on time. Which data are best to rely on? It depends.

Mr. Fels, I will readily admit that the data you cite are useful for many, many purposes. Will you not admit that the data I found are of any use whatsoever? If you will, then thank you for the concession. If you will not, then I guess I'm wasting my energy.

Here it is in black and white: According to 7 months of OTP data, the claim that the Hoosier State "is rarely on time" is a lie. No gray there. Who's trying to gray-out this issue? Here's a hint:

C&O 15 wrote:The phrase "it depends" suggests that one method is better for some uses or in some circumstances, and the other method is better at other times or in other ways.

In this instance, there are no "other ways." Here's the claim: "is rarely on time." No qualifiers. No time element. No spin.

If you have to ignore facts or make things up in order to "prove" your point, you don't have a point worth proving.

I think that we can all agree that the the train is late a lot, whether or not it is "rarely" on time. And, I believe Amtrak allows 30 minutes lateness before calling a train late. This is ok for long hauls, but questionable for short hauls like the Hoosier State.
On the other hand, Mr. Rhinecliff's disenchantment with Mr. Gunn is hard to understand. Does he believe that Mr. Gunn should acquire a printing press and print money? How is it a reflection on his leadership that he isn't provided enough money to pay food car attendants or cafe car builders? Is it contended that a really effective leader would inspire car attendants and car builders to donate their services and products to Amtrak?
Mr. Gunn pried more money out of Congress than I thought he could. For that he gets kudos. Unfortunately it still isn't enough to allow Amtrak to do what it needs to do.

C&O 15:

Will you not admit that the data I found are of any use whatsoever?

Hah! Good luck! The owner of mattfels never concedes anything!