@rodman99999
Conversation will prove impossible if you refuse to try to understand what is being written instead of leaping to some caricature you have in your mind. If someone just doesn’t automatically believe what you believe or doesn’t simply accept your claims as verified....in your mind they are a dogmatist. That is about as dysfunctional a scenario for conversation as possible. Asking about the evidence for a claim, or how it could be tested, isn’t dogmatism. It’s the opposite: it’s trying to base beliefs on evidence, not simply on someone’s say-so.
So you trip over yourself with wild statements like:
One glaring bit of evidence, when judging whether another is, "dogmatic", is the refusal to even admit possibilities, when in disagreement with their dogma, regardless of how apposite those possibilities might be.
Again...I had said your hypothesis was INTERESTING. I did not discount it as impossible. And I repeated again:
I quite carefully did not claim your conjecture was wrong or implausible.
And yet instead of seeing this as a reasonable query about evidence and methods, in your mind you have this wild caricature that I have dogmatically "refused" to "even admit possibilities" like the one you raised.
Could you please make actual contact with what I’ve been writing, please?
It is very strange that when you simply float an interesting technical hypothesis - and it was interesting! - and someone asks about the evidence for it and how you’d go about testing it...that you leap to the OTHER person as being "dogmatic" and ’refusing’ to consider possibilities.
It seems to have gone unnoticed by you that even from my first post I admitted the possibility that the OP was hearing something objectively changing in the cables. And I admitted your conjecture was interesting, and did not claim it to be wrong. Yet I haven't seen YOU concede anything I've said as being possible - e.g. that it could also be due to perpetual bias etc. Instead YOU have simply claimed I'm just wrong about this, any alternative possibilities are "in my head" only, it's all been established so you aren't even considering my point of view.And then YOU go about implying that I am the recalcitrant dogmatist? Amazing.