.
No, I said they cannot indicate bodyfat and water precisely, because Human Beings don't show a precise number of separations for a given amount of bodyfat. Since a bodybuilder can actually have lower bodyfat and water than another and less separations, your hypothesis is flawed. Sorry. Low fat and water levels correlate with separations, but the correlation is not absolute. This is what you fail to grasp. You can say that Coleman looks more conditioned than Dorian because he has a more spearations, but can you say that he actually has a lower bodyfat? No, no, no!!!!!!
Because 3% is the lowest a Human can go, and Dorian always made the point of being as shredded as he could possibly get. He wouldn't compromise and would go as low as possible. Besides, several bodybuilding writers have said, especifically, that Dorian was at 3% bodyfat for his contests
I don't. But you can't say that Ronnie was lower in fat and water either just because he was more separated. Again, unless you can demonstrate that all Humans show the exact same amount of separations for a given bodyfat level, then what's your point? You have no game. 
SUCKMYMUSCLE
conditioning equals seperations, cuts and striations and hardness. the judges grade conditioning based on these observable characteristics. this is a most definite YES. how do you get in condition? low bf and water levels. this is a definite YES. now lets use logic here. if you can judge conditioning based on the criteria, you are actually measuring by the criteria bf and water levels. if you judge conditioning you are making an assumption on water and bf levels. because they constitute conditioning.
this is not hard to follow. you cant judge conditioning apart from the constituents. thats impossible. conditioning comes from low bf and water. the criteria indicate conditioning. thus they indicate water and bf levels. if they dont there is some other factor.
i never said sep was absolute. ive maintained that you can judge who has lower bf and water based on the criteria. and you can, if you couldnt bodybuilding is subjective and useless. also, if you cannot infer bf and water levels thus determining who is better CONDITIONED based on perfect linear correlation, hardness now flies out the window along with the criteria.
basically if you can infer water and bf you cant infer conditioning this is basic logic. so if you cant use the criteria to tell who is conditionined because of variability then you cant make statements like "dorian was dryer" because without scientific tests we dont know, but we know that is false you can tell dorian is dry, why? based on the criteria.
if you can tell who is conditioned without infering lower bf and water please show me how to do so. one example will do just like the one example of the negative correlation.
the 3% thing is conjecture and an assumption. you might want to beleive dorian took it to the limit, but perhaps he couldnt, and others could. this is not an argument, and means nothing in this debate. your guessing. ronnie took it to the limit hence he made it to 2.95% bf beating dorian. same wacky logic and proof.
" I don't. But you can't say that Ronnie was lower in fat and water either just because he was more separated. Again, unless you can demonstrate that all Humans show the exact same amount of separations for a given bodyfat level, then what's your point? You have no game."
agian your not following you cant imply conditioning without refering to the constituents. the whole is not greater then the sum, unless you live on some other planet. low bf and water are the parts which create conditioning the whole. which then create observable objective criteria. based on cuts, sep and striations which imply conditioning ronnie is more conditioned.
if you say you cant use sep, cuts etc to measure conditioning you tell me how. and why do bodybuilders get more cut sep as they lose both bf and water. hmmmm... that would imply they correlate and thus you can measure them.
anyway you stuck between a rock and a hard place. you have to argue that either sep are not a criteria-wrong.
or that somehow infering conditioing doesnt imply your making assumptions of water and bf.
