Need to stop and think about uncertainty and propagation of error. Need to think about what using a Compunurse type thermistor means to uncertainty (they are usually +/-3C). Crunch some numbers:
http://www.globalspec.com/cornerstone/ref/PartII.html
Considering even a 0.5C uncertainty in the water inlet and the "CPU temp". I am being generous in that error, BTW. Now throw a flow rate error of 10% into the mix. That's also generous. Now look at the variance in Bill's data. He (and I) aren't using sophisticated equipment because we just like spending money on testing blocks; it is required for confidence in the results!
It doesn't matter if your data points are separated when the error bars are much bigger than the spread in performance. Especially when the differences in block mounting are sometimes as large as the difference in block performance and when a 10% deviation in flow rate can skew the rankings completely.
Remember the presidential elections? That was an example of declaring a winner when the numbers were within the margin of error.
The errors of the equipment you are going to use are large, the standard deviation among successive tests is large due to random effects, and the actual differences between blocks is extremely small. Even without a technical background, you can see this is "a bad thing".
If you enjoy playing around with waterblocks, then by all means continue. I am sure a lot of people will appreciate your results.
But disparaging people who are doing quantitative testing rather than semi-quantitative roundups doesn't make anyone look good.