I deleted my sarcastic response to you upthread, but it could probably be interpreted that their testing methodology might not be accurately summed up as a "you

I deleted my sarcastic response to you upthread, but it could probably be interpreted that their testing methodology might not be accurately summed up as a "you failed science 101" level of embarrassment mistake as you so aptly put it, and that they in fact did a reasonable job creating typefaces that represented the fonts used on highways which were objectively compared in their control environments. Also, they ran 2 tests and they somehow used, or read research by someone who had run, a computer simulation of font degradation to anticipate how it would age. So, I am not sure this is nobel prize worthy, but a bit disingenuous to claim they they are complete morons. edit: while I don't laud the amazing efficiency of our peer reviewed science system, you might also find these included works helpful, these ones seem relavent. I must admit, not being even remotely interested in traffic fonts or the testing of them, I have not read them. Peer reviewed research papers by Donald Meeker as author or co-author have been published by: Transportation Research Record, National Academy of Sciences (2 author, 3 co-author) Ergonomics in Design, the Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (co-author) Transportation Engineering, the Journal of American Society of Civil Engineers (author)