I agree.

There's a big difference between being destructive and being able to qualitatively test the performance characteristics of a mechanism. Cliff's tests are bona fide because he understands the material and can relate metallurgical and physical properties to performance expectations. The boneheads offer nothing but anecdotal evidence that anyone can break something if they try hard enough.

This is not to say I agree completely with all that Cliff expounds, as some of his conclusions are subjective even still. However, his tests allow others to evaluate performance criteria objectively and reach their own conclusions, which is quite lacking in the boneheads' methods.