No shit, I know what they're trying to imply. The point is, without knowing what the wreck was like we have no clue if it actually says a damn thing about their cars' crashworthiness. That's why its stupid, you shouldn't make assumptions on something like this (and based on the "crash scene" at the start, it didn't look like there was anything too terrible about a wreck there, you basically see some broken glass and then this mangled Subaru on the back of a truck), you should know how safe it actually is, which is why most will show their test videos where you can actually see. How a wreck looks often means nothing about what results from it. There's been wrecks that looked like barely anything happened that resulted in fatalities and I've seen cars that look like they were first compacted then torn piece by piece where the person walked away from it.
I can't even fathom how stupid you have to be to take my comment seriously other than you apparently were in a car wreck and weren't in a Subaru and thus suffered some serious brain damage.
Yes but again that's meaningless without knowing what the wreck was actually like. I'm pretty sure there are some Chinese cars that look like that from about 15mph collisions. Should they parade their mangled heap going "they lived"?