LOL... Nicely said. And that too on a Colemak forum.
I guess deciding on which of the layouts  would be better in the long run is kinda relative. I'm just guessing it depends on the user.
Most who have moved over to Colemak have mentioned its advantages, but none have mentioned any potential faults.  A few Dvorak users remain who claim more comfort than with Colemak. I would have to agree with that.
But since I need to use shortcuts, Colemak remains my layout of choice, that is until I find a way to make the shortcuts easier on Windows, using Dvorak.

You are trying to persuade people into thinking that Dvorak is better than Colemak, and you do so without giving reasoning of why that is so! I am tired from reading Dvorak vs Colemak! Both are good none is any better, to be worth so much frustration over deciding what to use.

Also, I said that there really is no point seeking a perfect layout because:
1. The fraction by which it is better than Colemak and Dvorak would be neglect-able.
2. After time it wouldn't be perfect any more so:
3. If we to integrate it into all of society that will mean that we will have to make everyone change layouts every hundred of years.

Additionally, I could probably argue that Qwerty is somehow better than colemak and dvorak since it is the layout that the fastest speeds have been clocked with.

Let me say this... QWERTY is king amongst the layouts... But not because its better, but because most people are content until they're forced to change. That I'd say is what this thread is about. Its about one person wanting to try out that age old saying, "prevention is better than cure."
You know what... I'd agree.. arguing over which layout is better isn't going worth it, 'cuz there is nothing completely perfect to compare it too.
Dvorak and Colemak score so well.
I chose an alternative layout not because I type a whole lot. I used to be in data entry and believe me, if there was ever a time that I could've used Dvorak or Colemak, it was then. But now, my current job doesn't have me in front of a computer all the time. I chose a different layout to QWERTY because I like life hacks. Better ways to do things intrigue me. If there is a better way to do a job, you find me choosing that, even if its something experimental.

You are wrong though. The fastest speeds are on Dvorak; not QWERTY.

True :) . The fastest typist currently is considered Sean Wrona, and he also uses qwerty.

Conclusion: The speed of the typists isn't a reliable measurement of how effective a certain layout is. So you can't say anything like: Dvorak is the best since some of the fastest typists have used it.

"Better" is very lightly used. I think "better" is different for different people and I'm sure for some "better" layout is one that they can type faster on. Now whether or not the top typing speed is affected by the layout is a whole different question, on which btw I think yes, they are related.

What pafkata said. Lots of lightheadedness going on here it seems, as has been too common on the forums lately methinks.

As for the comfort question: For me Colemak feels more comfortable than Dvorak did so that "truth" up there is like so many other "truths". I can't say whether it's the layout itself or my typing habits, or a combination of these. So I try to not make tall claims. The hard facts are easier to deal with, such as the fact that Dvorak has more hand alteration and Colemak more rolls - and it seems people have individual experiences concerning which of these work best for them. For me, both are comfortable.

The speed claims are just plain stupid. We have QWERTY, Dvorak and Colemak typists scoring high speeds these days. There have been few Dvorak typists and fewer Colemak typists and no Colemak typists have had the benefit of training their layout from childhood like for instance Sean Wrona has on QWERTY. So judging by the existing data I'd say it proves that neither layout is inherently very slow - and not a lot more. Sean types very alternatively compared to the textbook QWERTYist, so textbook QWERTY could still be slow - I don't know.