In Reply to: How about this... posted by Presto on March 14, 2006 at 11:41:14:
Hi.Are you talking to the wrong guy?
Where in my posts ever endorsed such subjective findings of the CDs
in questions. Do I want to bother?Please read my post below on subjectivity before you open your mouth.
Who's problem is this? yours or mine?
Who is turning "belief to science"? It's YOU who believe such find is invalid. How are you so sure? Were you there in the same audition to disprove the findings? Obviously, not. So your argument is also invalid as you merely comment from your disbelief. And you fail to provide scientific proof that the findings were invalid.
This is the problem of so many who are misguided by so called pseudo-science. Science is a process or a tool to understand systematically the nature - human aural conception, in this case. Many fail to accept the fact science todate fails to prove or reject anything we hear due to our lack of relevant knowledge.
why don't we wait until one day we know more about the science of audio perception before we start to challenge subjectivity with science.
While one can't come up with adequate scientific understanding of our hearing to approve AND disapprove it, please leave those who make such sonic claims alone.
One still remains innocent until convicted after trial. This applies to sonics as well.
c-J
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- What about it? - cheap-Jack 12:39:44 03/14/06 (46)
- Yes my post was in the wrong spot but... - Presto 13:27:58 03/14/06 (45)
- Please qualify your "scientific method".. - cheap-Jack 13:37:49 03/14/06 (44)
- Re: Please qualify your "scientific method".. - Presto 14:17:37 03/14/06 (43)
- Good argument ! (long) - cheap-Jack 09:20:15 03/15/06 (42)
- Re: Good rebuttle. lol - Presto 17:28:22 03/15/06 (38)
- Try to read between the lines, my friend. - cheap-Jack 07:50:19 03/16/06 (37)
- What I would do is simple. - Presto 14:10:09 03/16/06 (36)
- Trust them or not, we hear with our ears. - cheap-Jack 09:09:33 03/17/06 (33)
- When they learn how to shine some ray through wine and tell us exactly how it tastes... - clarkjohnsen 09:17:14 03/17/06 (32)
- Re: When they learn how to shine some ray through wine and tell us exactly how it tastes... - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 10:45:19 03/17/06 (31)
- "We can tell flawed from [good or great]." There you have it, folks. - clarkjohnsen 08:27:53 03/18/06 (30)
- Re: "We can tell flawed from [good or great]." There you have it, folks. - kerr 04:49:18 03/20/06 (1)
- Yes. Thank you! nt - clarkjohnsen 09:27:30 03/20/06 (0)
- Re: a correction - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 00:28:40 03/19/06 (15)
- I too have hung out with wine, beer and coffee people. Never once... - clarkjohnsen 11:32:19 03/19/06 (14)
- Re: I too have hung out with wine, beer and coffee people. Never once... - john curl 16:40:18 03/19/06 (7)
- Re: I too have hung out with wine, beer and coffee people. Never once... - Inmate51 08:01:24 04/12/06 (0)
- What's your evidence, John? - real_jj 17:28:30 03/24/06 (0)
- Take a look below and discover how MKJ has weaseled out of his former, undefendable position. Very amusing. nt - clarkjohnsen 07:59:12 03/21/06 (3)
- Now that's just enough! - real_jj 17:31:34 03/24/06 (2)
- He narrowed his claims down to "research" from the broad ones he made earlier. Because he had to! - clarkjohnsen 09:06:36 03/25/06 (1)
- No, Clark, and that is really, really enough - real_jj 10:34:50 03/25/06 (0)
- Re: I too have hung out with wine, beer and coffee people. Never once... - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 01:10:11 03/20/06 (0)
- Re: I too have hung out with wine, beer and coffee people. Never once... - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 13:30:32 03/19/06 (5)
- This has nothing to do with Larry being an amateur. Nor were my claims false. - clarkjohnsen 09:34:41 03/20/06 (4)
- Re: One point of clarification - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 18:57:32 03/20/06 (0)
- Re: Your claims are false - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 18:17:04 03/20/06 (2)
- Oh, so now it's "wine research". You've narrowed the field of contention dramatically... - clarkjohnsen 07:56:51 03/21/06 (1)
- bullcrap - real_jj 17:34:10 03/24/06 (0)
- Martians regularly visit my apartment... - andy_c 20:24:43 03/18/06 (1)
- Re: Martians regularly visit my apartment... - kerr 04:55:02 03/20/06 (0)
- Well, Clark I agree to a point. - Presto 12:32:27 03/18/06 (9)
- Re: Well, Clark I agree to a point. - theaudiohobby 16:20:17 03/18/06 (8)
- Chris Sommovigo said it elegantly, for us who listen. - clarkjohnsen 10:37:24 03/19/06 (7)
- Irrelevant.... - real_jj 14:01:57 03/31/06 (3)
- "I would prefer it if you would be more logical in the future." And *I* would prefer it if... - clarkjohnsen 10:15:20 04/01/06 (2)
- Just accept the truth, Clark - real_jj 20:25:41 04/05/06 (1)
- Still making a spectator sport of yourself we see. - clarkjohnsen 08:00:02 04/06/06 (0)
- Re: He's full of it - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 11:30:42 03/19/06 (2)
- Notice you didn't mention Paul Prudhomme, nor did you take Chris's point. nt - clarkjohnsen 11:35:15 03/19/06 (1)
- Re: Notice you didn't mention Paul Prudhomme, nor did you take Chris's point. nt - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 13:32:21 03/19/06 (0)
- Re: A better method - Mahatma Kane Jeeves 00:16:19 03/17/06 (1)
- HEAR HEAR! EXACTLY!!! lol Nicely Put. (nt) - Presto 12:33:29 03/18/06 (0)
- Re: Good argument ! (long) - theaudiohobby 11:22:09 03/15/06 (2)
- Why change subject ? Nitpicking or what? - cheap-Jack 11:57:44 03/15/06 (1)
- Re: Why change subject ? Nitpicking or what? - theaudiohobby 16:45:11 03/16/06 (0)