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
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- OK, let's get back to basic logic here - Jaundiced Ear 08:22:18 04/18/15 (2)
- RE: OK, let's get back to basic logic here - Ryelands 09:20:01 04/18/15 (1)
- RE: OK, let's get back to basic logic here - Mercman 11:19:07 04/18/15 (0)