|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.146.1.159
In Reply to: RE: And assuming your post is sincere, posted by Jaundiced Ear on April 18, 2015 at 04:13:06
I'm defending the null hypothesis: that is, my position is that these silly propositions, be they programs that are supposed to modify my PC or physical doohickeys that "transduce" nothing, actually do nothing. If I was making affirmative claims, in other words saying these things actually do something substantive, then it would be incumbent upon me to cite data to support my position.
So far as I can tell, those people who are making affirmative claims can only cite anecdotal evidence to support their positions. No one has demonstrated that these things, be they software or gadgetry, actually do anything at all, much less that they "improve" the sound of a stereo.
Demonstrate that your proposition has an effect, any effect, and I'll be willing to listen to what you have to say. And no, anecdotal claims are not a demonstration of anything besides the possible gullibility of the claimant. However, I'm guessing even this feeble standard of proof will be derided by the true believers who in effect have nothing else to fall back upon but their own subjective experience.
Folks, science doesn't happen only inside your heads. It's patent and available to all. It is tangible and reproducible. It has no need for childish claims.
JE
Follow Ups:
OK, let's get back to basic logic here
Er, that's what I was trying to do in light of your contradictory argument. You respond by changing the subject.
Folks, science doesn't happen only inside your heads. It's patent and available to all. It is tangible and reproducible. It has no need for childish claims
With respect, you can patronise as much as you like but your knowledge of psychology is almost as barren as your grasp of logic. You wouldn't know a "null hypothesis" if it ran you over - the null hypothesis that "these things" do nothing substantive would be advanced by someone setting out to design an experiment to prove that they did. That's why, so help me, it's called a null hypothesis. Outwith the experimental context, the term is all but meaningless (see above).
I've had enough of this childish prattle. I'm out of here.
D
Yes Dave, I've also had enough. Mr. Science demands proof that JPlay works, but won't share with us his JPlay settings, computer with OS, and system.
Edits: 04/18/15
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: