![]() ![]() |
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: Re: Arny Krueger found no such distortions! posted by Steve Eddy on February 17, 2002 at 11:02:02:
Steve, you are an insolent fool. You have NOT shown anything! Either seriously attempt to duplicate my results, or find another sandbox to play in.
Follow Ups:
Steve, you are an insolent fool. You have NOT shown anything!Of course I've shown something. I've shown that there is an anomaly in your test results which strongly suggests that the distortion products in your measurements are not likely the distortion products of the cable , which is your claim.
Either seriously attempt to duplicate my results, or find another sandbox to play in.
Why would I want to attempt to duplicate your results? It's not the results that are in question and I'm willing to accept your results at their face value. What's in question is whether your results support your claim. Seeing as your results do not unambiguously support your claim and in fact call it into serious doubt, there's no point in trying to duplicate them.
I mean, if I duplicate them and get the same result as you, your claim is still in the same doubt as it is now. If I duplicate them and get a different result (i.e. no distortion products), your claim is still in doubt. So what's the point of duplicating your results at this time?
Now, if your results did unambiguously support your claim, then that would be another matter and at that point it would be time to move on to the next step of independent third parties duplicating your tests and either verifying or falsifying the results and thereby the validity of your claim.
But at the moment we're still at the peer review stage. And a cursory review has brought to light an anomaly in your results which seriously calls into question whether the distortion products in the results are in fact those of the cables, which if they're not, contradicts your claim.
So at this point, the onus is on you to either offer a cogent argument why this anomaly does not call into question the validity of your claim or to produce test results which unambiguously support your claim.
This is how it's done in real world science and engineering disciplines. If you don't wish to go through these same processes, then I suggest not making any claims publically where they may be subject to peer review.
se
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: