Omega Stories: The >15,000 Gauss Bumble-Bee Aqua Terra Anti-Magnetic, A Blueprint For The Future

Spqr · Sep 2, 2024

dsio
A facelift? lol

You’re now engaging in semantic gymnastics for utterly no reason. They released a new range of Seamaster Aqua Terra models to replace the previous one.

I don’t know why you’re more committed to this than I was to my engineering thesis but Omega released a new Aqua Terra model between what you are calling the second and third. If you want to not count it, I will permit that, but I was here when the collector community discussed it on release and we didn’t consider it a “mulligan”.

It is not "semantic gymnastics". There are only three generations of the Aqua Terra. Omega state this in press releases. Journalists have documented it. Nobody needs your "permission" to accept the facts. Subjective community discussions do not overrule the facts. If you are correct in your asserions and the "logic" behind them there must now be six generations of the Aqua Terra. The Shades versions feature completely new bracelets and a fully polished cases, so, just as the polished centre links on the Bumblebee and the post-2014 Aqua Terra range seems to amount, in your view, to a new generation of the watch the Shades must also qualify as a "fifth generation" Aqua Terra using your logic. That would also mean, using your logic, that the latest black dial Aqua Terra which has another new bracelet with a comfort extension and an applied date window surround represents a sixth generation. Of course nobody is declaring the Shades to be Gen 5 and nobody is declaring the Black as Gen 6 as that would be illogical and as the PIC numbers show the Shades and the Black are just part of the current Aqua Terra line up, albeit with modifciations. To summarise, subjective discussions of watches are not declaritive of anything, they are just discussions. The manufacturer states there are three generations of the Aqua Terra, so one might expec tthem to know how many generations there are as they made them. This is the position for watch journalists, watch websites and the company. If one engages in a reductio ad absurdam, using your logic there are are now six generations of the Aqua Terra because the removal (or addition) of date window surrounds, polishing of bracelets, and one assumes cases, amounts to a "new generation". The use of new movements, such as Cal.8500G, Cal.8601, Cal.8602 or Cal.8605 etc does not result in a "new generation" either, they are merely additions to the range. Your position is untenable. Your assertions are wrong. It would seem that Mark Twain is as right as ever.

dsio · Sep 2, 2024

S Spqr
It is not "semantic gymnastics". There are only three generations of the Aqua Terra. Omega state this in press releases. Journalists have documented it. Nobody needs your "permission" to accept the facts. Subjective community discussions do not overrule the facts. If you are correct in your asserions and the "logic" behind them there must now be six generations of the Aqua Terra. The Shades versions feature completely new bracelets and a fully polished cases, so, just as the polished centre links on the Bumblebee and the post-2014 Aqua Terra range seems to amount, in your view, to a new generation of the watch the Shades must also qualify as a "fifth generation" Aqua Terra using your logic. That would also mean, using your logic, that the latest black dial Aqua Terra which has another new bracelet with a comfort extension and an applied date window surround represents a sixth generation. Of course nobody is declaring the Shades to be Gen 5 and nobody is declaring the Black as Gen 6 as that would be illogical and as the PIC numbers show the Shades and the Black are just part of the current Aqua Terra line up, albeit with modifciations. To summarise, subjective discussions of watches are not declaritive of anything, they are just discussions. The manufacturer states there are three generations of the Aqua Terra, so one might expec tthem to know how many generations there are as they made them. This is the position for watch journalists, watch websites and the company. If one engages in a reductio ad absurdam, using your logic there are are now six generations of the Aqua Terra because the removal (or addition) of date window surrounds, polishing of bracelets, and one assumes cases, amounts to a "new generation". The use of new movements, such as Cal.8500G, Cal.8601, Cal.8602 or Cal.8605 etc does not result in a "new generation" either, they are merely additions to the range. Your position is untenable. Your assertions are wrong. It would seem that Mark Twain is as right as ever.

Well, no.

An addition to the range is an addition.

A replacement for the range, noting that they did not continue to produce the models with with the matte bracelet and date window after switching to the new model without date window and with polished center-links would be something other than an addition.

It would be a subtraction of the old and an addition of the new in its place.

One might even call that a new generation 😉

Spqr · Sep 2, 2024

dsio
Well, no.

An addition to the range is an addition.

A replacement for the range, noting that they did not continue to produce the models with with the matte bracelet and date window after switching to the new model without date window and with polished center-links would be something other than an addition.

It would be a subtraction of the old and an addition of the new in its place.

One might even call that a new generation 😉

But Omega did not call it a new generation. Mark Twain had a point.

dsio · Sep 2, 2024

S Spqr
But Omega did not call it a new generation. Mark Twain had a point.

Yet they did release a new generation and once again you’ve quite conveniently neglected to address that fact. If you click over to the previous page you’ll even seen a picture of it.

If you are surprised by marketing and reality not quite being in alignment within the world of horology, it’s best you sit down before delving deeper down that particular rabbit hole.

Mark did have a few good points though so I’ll agree on that. My favourite was always “Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel”, though he had a few great ones about cats too. He was an ailurophile you know, something we both share.

Spqr · Sep 2, 2024

dsio
Yet they did release a new generation and once again you’ve quite conveniently neglected to address that fact. If you click over to the previous page you’ll even seen a picture of it.

If you are surprised by marketing and reality not quite being in alignment within the world of horology, it’s best you sit down before delving deeper down that particular rabbit hole.

Mark did have a few good points though so I’ll agree on that. My favourite was always “Never pick a fight with people who buy ink by the barrel”, though he had a few great ones about cats too. He was an ailurophile you know, something we both share.

Conveniently you have negelected to add that the picture is one you posted yourself, so, it is merely reinforcing your own opinion. As you are, in the face of the evidence to the contrary, Nelsonian in your opinion, there is little point continuing the discussion.

texasmade · Sep 2, 2024

OMG what in the actual fvck is going on?

Spqr · Sep 2, 2024

texasmade
OMG what in the actual fvck is going on?

Summary: DSIO made an error in his article. It was pointed out, together with the evidence to correct the error. He adopted a Nelsonian approach to said evidence. Now you are up to speed.

dsio · Sep 2, 2024

S Spqr
Conveniently you have negelected to add that the picture is one you posted yourself, so, it is merely reinforcing your own opinion. As you are, in the face of the evidence to the contrary, Nelsonian in your opinion, there is little point continuing the discussion.

Wait, so are you now thinking I made that image myself? It comes directly from Omega’s website, and the link to it was even included.

Spqr · Sep 2, 2024

dsio
Wait, so are you now thinking I made that image myself? It comes directly from Omega’s website, and the link to it was even included.

English comprehension is not your strong suit is it? I said it is a picture you POSTED yourself. I did not say you made it yourself. You POSTED it and are trying to rely on it as independent evidence but it is what lawyers call “self-serving evidence”. It is disingenuous. If that is your best point, along with the “we discussed it” point from one of your earlier replies you are getting just a little desperate. You have lost the argument, and it would appear the plot

dsio · Sep 2, 2024

S Spqr
English comprehension is not your strong suit is it? I said it is a picture you POSTED yourself. I did not say you made it yourself. You POSTED it and are trying to rely on it as independent evidence but it is what lawyers call “self-serving evidence”. It is disingenuous. If that is your best point, along with the “we discussed it” point from one of your earlier replies you are getting just a little desperate. You have lost the argument, and it would appear the plot

Right, and you posted your various claims and arguments too. That’s how a forum works, you post comments and images and whatnot.

I didn’t however post those same watches on Omega’s website, and the links are very much there too. I don’t think you really understand the meaning of the word disingenuous, and given that the same watches are once again posted on Omega’s own website, the nonsense about “self-serving evidence” is rather moot.

In case your back button is faulty I’ll provide the links here again.

Second generation: https://www.omegawatches.com/en-au/...m-co-axial-chronometer-41-5-mm-23110422103001

Third generation: https://www.omegawatches.com/en-au/...r-co-axial-chronometer-41-5-mm-23110422103003

Does viewing the same images from a different url alter your perspective? We’re slowing wearing through the flimsy layers of your complaint and getting down to the canvas, but we’ll make it there eventually.

Spqr · Sep 2, 2024

dsio
Right, and you posted your various claims and arguments too. That’s how a forum works, you post comments and images and whatnot.

I didn’t however post those same watches on Omega’s website, and the links are very much there too. I don’t think you really understand the meaning of the word disingenuous, and given that the same watches are once again posted on Omega’s own website, the nonsense about “self-serving evidence” is rather moot.

In case your back button is faulty I’ll provide the links here again.

Second generation: https://www.omegawatches.com/en-au/...m-co-axial-chronometer-41-5-mm-23110422103001

Third generation: https://www.omegawatches.com/en-au/...r-co-axial-chronometer-41-5-mm-23110422103003

Does viewing the same images from a different url alter your perspective? We’re slowing wearing through the flimsy layers of your complaint and getting down to the canvas, but we’ll make it there eventually.

You clearly have no understanding of evidence, authorities or facts. The material I posted comes from third parties and clearly explains that - (and I will slow it down so you can follow) There. Are. Three. Generations. Of. Aqua. Terra. You are posting images and suppositions from discussions and self-serving statements. None of your links, images or rants states that there are four generations of Aqua Terra. This is unsurprising as there are only three. Adding your own erroneous labels to Omega links is not evidence. It is you repeating your error and trying to manufacture evidence. If you follow your posted links nowhere on the website does it say “second generation” or “ third generation”. That is your addition. Creating your own “evidence” is dumb. As you are not able to articulate an argument or marshal evidence in a coherent or even honest way it is best to leave you in your echo chamber where saying it is so makes it so. Thanks for “discussion”.

Jakeys · Sep 2, 2024

S Spqr
You clearly have no understanding of evidence, authorities or facts. The material I posted comes from third parties and clearly explains that - (and I will slow it down so you can follow) There. Are. Three. Generations. Of. Aqua. Terra. You are posting images and suppositions from discussions and self-serving statements. None of your links, images or rants states that there are four generations of Aqua Terra. This is unsurprising as there are only three. Adding your own erroneous labels to Omega links is not evidence. It is you repeating your error and trying to manufacture evidence. If you follow your posted links nowhere on the website does it say “second generation” or “ third generation”. That is your addition. Creating your own “evidence” is dumb. As you are not able to articulate an argument or marshal evidence in a coherent or even honest way it is best to leave you in your echo chamber where saying it is so makes it so. Thanks for “discussion”.

Would just like to point out that you have consistently represented your opinions as facts, been insulting and patronising, and are now engaging in bad faith by declaring that only you understand the debate and the other party is too stupid to argue with you, so you can wander off with the feeling that you won somehow - transparent tactic. I don't know you, I don't know dsio, I'm quite new to this forum - but regardless of the technical substance of the debate, you come across far worse out of this.

I'm guessing you don't care how others perceive you, in which case fine, everybody can move on. But if you genuinely like to debate people, and it seems like you do, you will always get a better outcome if you can act respectfully and argue in good faith.

dsio · Sep 2, 2024

S Spqr
You clearly have no understanding of evidence, authorities or facts. The material I posted comes from third parties and clearly explains that - (and I will slow it down so you can follow) There. Are. Three. Generations. Of. Aqua. Terra. You are posting images and suppositions from discussions and self-serving statements. None of your links, images or rants states that there are four generations of Aqua Terra. This is unsurprising as there are only three. Adding your own erroneous labels to Omega links is not evidence. It is you repeating your error and trying to manufacture evidence. If you follow your posted links nowhere on the website does it say “second generation” or “ third generation”. That is your addition. Creating your own “evidence” is dumb. As you are not able to articulate an argument or marshal evidence in a coherent or even honest way it is best to leave you in your echo chamber where saying it is so makes it so. Thanks for “discussion”.

I’m not sure how linking to the different generations on Omega’s website could be anything but honest, and I also somewhat doubt you know what the phrase echo chamber means let alone how to correctly apply it.

You’ve been given ample opportunity to put your view forward, it’s just that you’ve been incapable of articulating it very well while resorting to ad-hominem attacks and ableism.

You did admit earlier it was a facelift which means you’re most of the way there. Sadly that underlying stubbornness that has led you to make every single one of your now 46 posts here, begins and ends with “someone is wrong on the internet” and relentless fixation.

It has been a fun discussion though (double quotes not required).

blubarb · Oct 1, 2024

With very little I can add to what @Jakeys has already pointed out, I can at least proffer this image of my bumble-bee. Oh, @Spqr, seeing you brought up SLC here is one of my favourite quotes of his “Never miss an opportunity to shut up.” It always makes me smile. 😀

Boojumhunter · Oct 1, 2024

dsio
Sadly that underlying stubbornness that has led you to make every single one of your now 46 posts here, begins and ends with “someone is wrong on the internet” and relentless fixation.

https://xkcd.com/386/

Omega Stories: The >15,000 Gauss Bumble-Bee Aqua Terra Anti-Magnetic, A Blueprint For The Future

Similar threads