|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
|
|
Propeller Head Plaza Technical and scientific discussion of amps, cables and other topics. |
|
In Reply to: the one you quoted posted by Analog Scott on July 21, 2010 at 13:45:35:
"I am not responsible for your failures."
Indeed you are not. Like I said I pretty much agree with your comments but at best it's only one side of a multi-faceted story.
Without your POV as well as the other facets of the story the comments are hardly worthy of interest much less excitement.
Maybe this is somekind of epiphany for you but believe me people have chosen what facts to use to defend their position as long as there has been rational thought.
"I don't say that *all* objectivists are guilty of cherry picking. "
Yes I noted your careful use of the term "many" in your OP.
All I can say is this is just the typical vomit posing as critical thinking on an audio website.
Due to your overly broad generalization by the misuse of the term "objectivist" your bias preceeds any rational comment you could have made. You're not fooling anyone except those who want to be fooled.
puke.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups Full ThreadTopic - a tale of bias. The irony of the common held beliefs of many objectivists - Analog Scott 13:30:55 07/19/10 (133)
- Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - Jay Buridan 09:00:26 07/29/10 (5)
- Thank you - Don Till 16:10:29 08/05/10 (0)
- RE: Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - Pat D 19:17:51 08/01/10 (0)
- RE: Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - Tony Lauck 13:59:13 07/29/10 (0)
- RE: Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - rick_m 13:15:29 07/29/10 (0)
- RE: Objectivism isn't worthy of serious attention - Tony Lauck 09:50:51 07/29/10 (0)
- Ever hear of the argumentem ad hominem fallacy? - Pat D 14:59:47 07/21/10 (18)
- Funny that I predicted you would jump in and try to take this on some bizarre tangent. - Analog Scott 02:29:44 07/22/10 (14)
- You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - Pat D 05:11:28 07/22/10 (13)
- "What points are you *trying* to make?" - Analog Scott 12:49:19 07/22/10 (0)
- RE: You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - kerr 06:43:21 07/22/10 (11)
- actually there is a lot to be learned from 'each side." - Analog Scott 10:38:09 07/22/10 (1)
- Nice post - thanks. Well said (nt) - kerr 04:40:25 07/23/10 (0)
- RE: You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - Pat D 08:43:20 07/22/10 (7)
- RE: You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - Analog Scott 12:55:51 07/22/10 (6)
- RE: You're predictable: never deal with arguments. - Pat D 16:37:42 07/22/10 (5)
- *spits out a fine cup of coffee* - robert young 08:00:40 07/24/10 (4)
- That's priceless - E-Stat 08:07:58 07/24/10 (3)
- I keep wondering how many times I have to link this . . . - Pat D 11:40:24 07/24/10 (2)
- You have no idea why I'm laughing at you, do you? - robert young 13:05:32 07/24/10 (1)
- He doesn't get it, does he? -nt - E-Stat 16:10:08 07/24/10 (0)
- This is one of those cases when the process itself IS the goal - and... - carcass93 08:31:19 07/22/10 (0)
- Where's your meta-analysis? Better than that here is the meta-analyst - Don Till 20:37:05 07/21/10 (2)
- Is that a picture of Analog Scott? (nt) - Pat D 05:43:49 07/22/10 (1)
- Is your question what passes as humor? - carcass93 11:18:14 07/22/10 (0)
- And your position is what? - Don Till 12:54:09 07/21/10 (3)
- the one you quoted - Analog Scott 13:45:35 07/21/10 (2)
- RE: the one you quoted - Don Till 16:03:10 07/21/10 (1)
- "All I can say is this is just the typical vomit posing as critical thinking on an audio website." - Analog Scott 02:39:35 07/22/10 (0)
- Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Enophile 14:24:23 07/20/10 (91)
- What "good", together with "bad", objectivists fail to understand,... - carcass93 14:28:54 07/21/10 (0)
- I guess you didn't follow the links to the two threads I cited - Analog Scott 01:25:39 07/21/10 (74)
- Don't you believe in replication? - Pat D 05:43:59 07/21/10 (73)
- I don't believe in cherry picking - Analog Scott 10:02:59 07/21/10 (7)
- RE: I don't believe in cherry picking - Pat D 15:13:20 07/21/10 (5)
- try to stay on topic Pat - Analog Scott 12:47:59 07/22/10 (4)
- You OP was confused and offered no supporting evidence. - Pat D 19:05:46 07/22/10 (3)
- No really, try to stay on topic - Analog Scott 03:05:51 07/23/10 (2)
- You don't even seem to know what your original post was about! - Pat D 06:46:38 07/23/10 (1)
- yeah right Pat. Even as pure obfusecation that is pretty weak. - Analog Scott 09:03:24 07/23/10 (0)
- RE: I don't believe in cherry picking - Tony Lauck 12:35:12 07/21/10 (0)
- Zactly. - Enophile 08:16:58 07/21/10 (5)
- RE: Zactly. - josh358 18:55:35 07/22/10 (0)
- And that has what to do with anything I have said? - Analog Scott 10:05:52 07/21/10 (2)
- "And that has what to do with anything I have said?" Yup, just chatting about the dichotomy. - Enophile 10:54:08 07/21/10 (1)
- RE: "And that has what to do with anything I have said?" Yup, just chatting about the dichotomy. - Analog Scott 11:23:50 07/21/10 (0)
- RE: Zactly. - kerr 09:04:18 07/21/10 (0)
- RE: Why should anyone accept some anomalous result without replication? - rick_m 07:17:26 07/21/10 (58)
- Do people try their hardest to get the righmost post under "classic view"? - kurt s 07:12:31 08/12/10 (1)
- RE: Do people try their hardest to get the righmost post under "classic view"? - rick_m 08:22:02 08/12/10 (0)
- RE: Why should anyone accept some anomalous result without replication? - Pat D 08:17:33 07/21/10 (55)
- So Pat, why haven't you brought up this point with the other example i cited? - Analog Scott 11:02:32 07/22/10 (54)
- Have I cited that article? - Pat D 16:15:05 07/22/10 (53)
- No, I cited it. You chose to ignore it. More cherry picking - Analog Scott 03:07:48 07/23/10 (52)
- How could you cite it since you don't even seem to know what it was? - Pat D 06:18:51 07/23/10 (51)
- You never have been one to let the facts get in the way of your beliefs. two simple facts - Analog Scott 09:12:53 07/23/10 (50)
- LOL! Prove the 1985 article exists! (nt) - Pat D 11:14:27 07/23/10 (49)
- Seriously? do you want me to prove Russia exists too since you haven't seen it in person? - Analog Scott 11:25:04 07/23/10 (48)
- Who wrote the alleged 1985 article? What is its title? - Pat D 19:12:49 07/23/10 (47)
- actually I misremembered. it was a 1987 article - Analog Scott 16:58:45 07/24/10 (1)
- RE: actually I misremembered. it was a 1987 article - Pat D 19:52:59 07/24/10 (0)
- Its great fun to stay away from this sandbox for a while... - robert young 07:55:34 07/24/10 (44)
- AS wants to argue about an article he doesnt have. - Pat D 10:38:22 07/24/10 (43)
- You are wasting your debating skills... - robert young 11:18:47 07/24/10 (42)
- RE: You are wasting your debating skills... - Pat D 16:09:26 07/24/10 (41)
- I predicted 20 posts of pure obfuscation from you on this thread - Analog Scott 17:03:52 07/24/10 (30)
- Have you found those FR differences you mentioned that exceed known audible thresholds yet? - Pat D 18:15:23 07/24/10 (29)
- I am truly very sorry if you believe - E-Stat 18:33:00 07/26/10 (28)
- Irrelevant remarks. - Pat D 19:20:11 07/26/10 (27)
- Absolutely - E-Stat 05:59:31 07/27/10 (26)
- RE: Absolutely - Pat D 09:03:08 07/27/10 (25)
- Simple - E-Stat 09:28:28 07/27/10 (24)
- You are totally confused. - Pat D 20:04:52 07/28/10 (23)
- Apparently, you are unaware of how dated your source is - E-Stat 07:30:13 07/29/10 (22)
- It's not my source but one Analog Scott was using to make some point or other. - Pat D 12:18:16 07/29/10 (21)
- I caught Analog Scott out on two things. - Analog Scott 07:30:08 07/30/10 (16)
- RE: I caught Analog Scott out on two things. - Pat D 18:39:14 07/31/10 (15)
- Gotta hand it to ya Pat. you never have been one to let facts get in your way - Analog Scott 19:54:14 07/31/10 (14)
- When you have to hurl personal accusations to prove your point, youve already lost the argument. - Pat D 20:29:55 08/03/10 (13)
- Let me know when that happens. - Analog Scott 17:15:39 08/04/10 (11)
- Well, you may have points, but no real arguments for them. - Pat D 17:37:08 08/05/10 (10)
- You have no arguments that I have no argument - Analog Scott 13:42:52 08/06/10 (9)
- I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - kerr 08:31:19 08/08/10 (8)
- RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - Analog Scott 17:48:03 08/08/10 (4)
- RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - kerr 06:27:37 08/09/10 (3)
- RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - Analog Scott 02:43:37 08/11/10 (2)
- RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - kerr 05:39:56 08/11/10 (1)
- Now I have the rightmost post in "classic view". nt - kurt s 07:19:31 08/12/10 (0)
- RE: I wonder if he will post an argument to your argument that he has no argument against your argument. - Tony Lauck 09:51:28 08/08/10 (2)
- I got to the part about... - kerr 06:28:49 08/09/10 (1)
- RE: I got to the part about... - Tony Lauck 10:48:47 08/09/10 (0)
- I missed the connection between the title of your post and the content. nt - Tony Lauck 09:27:39 08/04/10 (0)
- Congratulations - E-Stat 12:51:44 07/29/10 (3)
- "Yeah, your wording was an absolute hoot." - robert young 17:59:46 07/29/10 (2)
- RE: "Yeah, your wording was an absolute hoot." - Tony Lauck 18:55:49 07/29/10 (1)
- RE: "Yeah, your wording was an absolute hoot." - robert young 00:40:31 07/30/10 (0)
- And what's more.... - robert young 16:58:42 07/24/10 (9)
- RE: And what's more.... - Pat D 18:32:39 07/24/10 (8)
- I'm still laughing... - robert young 20:44:50 07/24/10 (7)
- LOL - Pat D 05:27:05 07/25/10 (6)
- No, not THAT world, Pat. - carcass93 08:15:30 07/25/10 (2)
- Yeah, illusions can be fun. - Pat D 09:23:26 07/25/10 (1)
- I suppose - kerr 04:38:48 07/26/10 (0)
- An adult using LOL and GMAB.... - robert young 07:40:17 07/25/10 (2)
- Hmmm . . . I learned most of such acronym here at AA. (nt) - Pat D 09:24:50 07/25/10 (1)
- Oh, GMAB! - kerr 04:40:30 07/26/10 (0)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Donald North 15:14:09 07/20/10 (14)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 23:47:20 07/22/10 (13)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Donald North 18:31:28 07/23/10 (12)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 19:14:59 07/23/10 (11)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - josh358 05:53:07 07/24/10 (10)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 16:14:46 07/24/10 (9)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - josh358 17:14:07 07/24/10 (8)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 18:40:25 07/24/10 (7)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - josh358 20:10:08 07/24/10 (0)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Tony Lauck 19:11:48 07/24/10 (5)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Donald North 11:54:27 07/25/10 (0)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Pat D 05:30:32 07/25/10 (3)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Tony Lauck 07:53:44 07/25/10 (2)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - morricab 13:37:01 07/25/10 (1)
- RE: Protocols aside, all the 'good' objectivists want.... - Tony Lauck 17:51:10 07/25/10 (0)
- Highly Suspicious of Meta-Analysis - Tony Lauck 09:41:05 07/20/10 (2)
- RE: Highly Suspicious of Meta-Analysis - Analog Scott 10:34:57 07/20/10 (1)
- RE: Highly Suspicious of Meta-Analysis - Tony Lauck 12:47:53 07/20/10 (0)
- So IOW, objectivists are biased because they believe in bias? - Presto 21:28:17 07/19/10 (8)
- Not what I am saying at all but... - Analog Scott 09:49:09 07/20/10 (7)
- RE: Not what I am saying at all but... - thetubeguy1954 15:04:41 07/21/10 (6)
- Did any of the objetivists even understand the point you wre trying to make A.S.? - Analog Scott 02:37:05 07/22/10 (0)
- You will never convince a skeptic with evidence - Tony Lauck 17:49:12 07/21/10 (4)
- You just define skeptic that way. - Pat D 08:26:09 07/22/10 (3)
- RE: You just define skeptic that way. - josh358 19:36:24 07/22/10 (0)
- RE: You just define skeptic that way. - Tony Lauck 10:22:19 07/22/10 (1)
- RE: You just define skeptic that way. - Pat D 19:19:22 07/22/10 (0)
Follow Ups
- RE: the one you quoted - Don Till 16:03:10 07/21/10 (1)
- "All I can say is this is just the typical vomit posing as critical thinking on an audio website." - Analog Scott 02:39:35 07/22/10 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
