quote:Originally posted by silverfox:
I believe the issue of falsely labelling certain oils with "synthetic" may very well be one of many causal factors in sludge reports.
The real causes of the Toyota specific issue are still unknown, and there has been a tremendous amount of speculation about it over the years.
I disagree with Charlene Blake's narrow focussed assessment of the sludge problem.
She blames Toyota exclusively, where in fact the issue is a complex one with any number of possibilities.
Her frequent appearances on the net are characterized by generalities and politicized rhetoric which appear to be thinly veiled attempts to raise alarm by innuendo and inference.
When pressed for facts and verification, she craftily avoids these challenges, and when she does respond, it's always with more alarmist rhetoric.
The absence of factual and verifiable evidence in any of her remarks is conspicuous; it certainly doesn't point to credibility.
While I hesitate to use the term 'lies' in describing much of the rhetoric she liberally dispenses, I must say it seems she does take some pretty wild liberties with the truth!!
Having read her long winded responses (how many does she need to make a point???)there is absolutely no doubt she is LYING through her teeth! (
I originally hesitated to use that word, but what she has written cannot be considered anything but LIES!!
"Millions of sludge affected Toyotas??"
There's an exaggeration which goes far beyond imagination--it falls into a wildly delusional category for sure.
It's just not true--so far from the truth as to be unbelievable.
Why anyone would go so far beyond reality raises serious questions as to someone's sanity!!
Next, she infers there are "Many low mileage Toyotas that were sludged"!!
Another outragious embellishment--not quite a lie but surely an irresponsible distortion of fact. (A lie, but by another definition perhaps??)
The only low mileage sludged engines came about as a result of neglected oil changes--and that's a documented fact!!
I'll wager this contention is based solely on a few posts or emails she may have received--but no real documented and verified proff from anyone!
One can easily show how distorted and embellished the rest of her laims are, but why bother?
When someone predicates a response with outright
lies, the rest of what is said becomes tainted.
Charlene Blake has proven every one of my earlier contentions with such blatent and illogical LIES!!