Hello everyone, I'm back...
This whole post especially the last 1/4 reminds me of the great scene by Abbot and Costello "Who's on first base...."
The main protagonists are commenting on the just previous comments, and on it goes.
The question still remains, do Blue fuses make the significant change that some audiophiles say they do irrespective of the equipment used (has anyone used them for equipment that is not HiFi?), OR, do they not make a discernible change to some systems?
As there is no PROOF either way as per...
a fact or piece of information that shows that something exists or is true:
[ + that ] Do they have any proof that it was Hampson who stole the goods?
I have a suspicion that he's having an affair, though I don't have any concrete (= definite) proof.
If anyone needs proof of Andrew Davies' genius as a writer, this novel is it.
"How old are you?" "21." "Do you have any proof on you?"
Keep your receipt as proof of purchase.
More examples [- that]
- The police have no definitive proof of her guilt.
- There's no absolute proof, but all the evidence suggests (that) he's guilty.
- I'm glad I had the forethought to make a copy of the letter, as proof of what had been promised.
- incontrovertible proof
- Do you have any kind of proof of purchase?
Is something right because people think the [thing] is right? Is something wrong because people think the [thing] is wrong?
This post has indicated that people will accept the opinion of a large group of posters, and there are those that will not accept that way of opinion and want facts, evidence (as per experiment results) or unequivocable proof.
Two opinions. Ok. So what?