A challenge to the "measurement" camp

Not sure why he insists that gravity is the warping of space is anything but a theory

If you're not sure you must not be a very good reader because he already said why. When a guy with 23k irrelevant posts bothers to actually answer straight up you should give credit where credits due.

This "anything but a theory" actually solved a problem in astronomy, where the orbit of Mercury was known to be off by some infinitesimally tiny amount. This "anything but a theory" came along and showed that Mercury was close enough to the Sun for its gravitational effect on space and time to perfectly account for the discrepancy in the orbit of the planet. I was going to insert a link here but its way past time you started doing your own work and not just scamming off of those who actually know stuff. (Was thinking of another word but stuff is more your reading level.) 

Gravitational lenses offer another demonstration of this "anything but a theory". Galaxies are very massive, and so this "anything but a theory" predicts they curve space and time around them. If this really is the case then the light from other much more distant galaxies will be bent around them. Sure enough, there are many such examples of distant galaxies that appear in the wrong location, or sometimes even appear as double images, because of the way the light from them is bent as it travels near the galaxy in between. 

This one I will provide a link, since its a funny smiley face, much like the one on my face right now, as I contemplate just how utterly, thoroughly outclassed you are here. And always. And not just by me. https://www.thoughtco.com/introduction-to-gravitational-lensing-4153504
Move along. Please.

I think you put yourself in a bind. (To the djones or robert or atavid ...)

Here  these two positions you have to take:

1. Plots are flat.
If the plots are flat, then by definition you can’t tell the difference among the cables because they are all flat. Then your conclusion has to be all cables sound the same because they all measure the same - FLAT.
But of course cables don’t sound the same so this a flaw position.

2. Plots are not flat:
Then you why don’t you enlighten us how you would interpret these plots - with all the dips and bumps at different frequencies. Here is the second FLAW because nobody knows how, and certainly you don’t know either.

That’s the point but some people are too thick in the head to understand.

3. You don’t understand what these plots illustrate nor the concept of bulk LRC.

Personally I have not put myself into a bind since I have no made any challenges, and have only voiced basic support for the concept in the video that using cables for "tone controls" is rather silly ... $1000’s to replace pennies of components, maybe a few dollars in low volume ... makes total sense to me.

@geoffkait
Some time ago I watched a compelling documentary where after showing the differences in time from outer space, and different points on Earth.
Then the discussion went into gravitational time dilation.

Gravity slows the passage of time similar to how the passage of time is changed under special relativity, general relativity predicts that massive objects will also dilate time. The more massive the object, the more noticeable the effect.

The newer idea is that by moving through space towards a significantly large mass, that time slows approaching the large mass, I don’t know the mathematical formula, but they showed it in the documentary. The way I understood it, it was as if falling from where time moved more rapidly to where time slowed down.

 You don’t understand what these plots illustrate nor the concept of bulk LRC

Nice deflection from your own flaw and contradiction.  So what is it?  Are these plots flat or not? 

Again, enlighten us how you interpret the plots.  You don't think you have a clue what you're talking about other than copy the wikipage.