What, "prof" (snort of derision) posted and my first response, to this thread:
"So we wee that tired old refrain from some audiophiles "Science has been wrong before you know!" and "science doesn't know everything!"
"It's the same refrain used by every crackpot theory in the world.
Ask yourself: When science has been corrected: how was it corrected?"
"You don't get to say "I'm justified in believing something that contradicts or isn't validated by current science...because MAYBE science is wrong and we'll discover I'm right." Literally any nonsense idea would fly under such conditions."
Referring back to my first response to this thread, in which I challenged their knowledge of the sciences (07-04-2021 3:20am), in light of the many changes, this past century, I stated:
"It's not so much that Science has been proven, "wrong", but: that it's moved on, in so many areas."
Their first deflection:
'rodman99999,
Where in the world did you pull that from?
I'd respond more, but all I see is a jumble of non-sequiturs. '
Referring to my post (07-04-2021 1:43pm), in which I mention the study of QM broadening the horizons of many branches of Science,
they provide further deflection:
Like...what?"
AND:
"What’s your actual point. Can you be clear, maybe with some actually relevant example, rather than vague waving to Quantum Mechanics, which just happens to be the de rigueur move for countless crackpot theories? (I’d be a millionaire if I had 10 cents for every new age purveyor appealing to the mystery of quantum mechanics)."
To which I replied with four precise examples, that would have satisfied any enquiring mind (the expiring mind: not so much, obviously).
Which they deflected with:
"rodman,
You are all over the place."
YES and: exactly my point (QM appears, "all over the place", and has affected virtually every branch of Science)
Their continuing theme:
"Ask yourself: When science has been corrected: how was it corrected?
That’s right, by more science. It’s a self-correcting method."
"Do you agree or not?"
"If so, the old "science has been wrong" bit is a red herring. Yes, science has been wrong, but you don’t get to promote a dubious claim that isn’t scientifically verified "because science has been wrong before."
Followed by more deflection, in that particular post.
What they can't seem to grasp, is what I stated in my first post:
"It's not so much that Science has been proven, "wrong", but: that it's moved on, in so many areas."
Then: their very clear lack of comprehension, of the point I've made* (VERY CLEARLY), twice, on this same page:
"If you tried to leap from some Discovery article citing a paper of researchers "controlling a cell’s interaction with light" to validating some audiophile’s tweak...that sounds like a profoundly incautious, unscientific leap...the type no actual responsible scientist would make. But...be my guest...show us the leap to relevance."
"So, again, try to be clear. If you are going to invoke SCIENCE, can you maintain an actual SCIENTIFIC mindset? Show me exactly what audio thing you "hear at home" that a "naysayer" may criticize, that you think is somehow validated by SCIENCE."
* I've never tried to, "validate" anything.
For the third time now:
"My position has always been: with what we've learned from the studies and advancements, related to QM and QED: there are a multitude of POSSIBILITIES; as to why we MAY hear the things we do, when listening to our own systems, in our own rooms, with our own ears, and our various add-ons."
Perhaps that, "possibilities" is greater than two syllables, is an issue?
Were they ever even a, "prof" in such a liberal art as Home Economics; it would have required much better comprehension skills.
I'm convinced: their field (if any) must have been Geology, based on their marked, petro-cephalic disposition.
Don't waste your keystrokes on such.
Happy listening and enjoy the journey!
"So we wee that tired old refrain from some audiophiles "Science has been wrong before you know!" and "science doesn't know everything!"
"It's the same refrain used by every crackpot theory in the world.
Ask yourself: When science has been corrected: how was it corrected?"
"You don't get to say "I'm justified in believing something that contradicts or isn't validated by current science...because MAYBE science is wrong and we'll discover I'm right." Literally any nonsense idea would fly under such conditions."
Referring back to my first response to this thread, in which I challenged their knowledge of the sciences (07-04-2021 3:20am), in light of the many changes, this past century, I stated:
"It's not so much that Science has been proven, "wrong", but: that it's moved on, in so many areas."
Their first deflection:
'rodman99999,
"For one NOT to be current, on what's been going on; as regards the inventions and scientific proofs, based on such a, "crackpot theory" as either QM or QED and yet refer to themselves as a, "prof", seems to me: the height of hubris."
Where in the world did you pull that from?
I'd respond more, but all I see is a jumble of non-sequiturs. '
Referring to my post (07-04-2021 1:43pm), in which I mention the study of QM broadening the horizons of many branches of Science,
they provide further deflection:
"Even understanding in the Biological Sciences has been expanded/deepened, through the studies of QM, regarding how the senses and brain function, in many areas.
Like...what?"
AND:
"What’s your actual point. Can you be clear, maybe with some actually relevant example, rather than vague waving to Quantum Mechanics, which just happens to be the de rigueur move for countless crackpot theories? (I’d be a millionaire if I had 10 cents for every new age purveyor appealing to the mystery of quantum mechanics)."
To which I replied with four precise examples, that would have satisfied any enquiring mind (the expiring mind: not so much, obviously).
Which they deflected with:
"rodman,
You are all over the place."
YES and: exactly my point (QM appears, "all over the place", and has affected virtually every branch of Science)
Their continuing theme:
"Ask yourself: When science has been corrected: how was it corrected?
That’s right, by more science. It’s a self-correcting method."
"Do you agree or not?"
"If so, the old "science has been wrong" bit is a red herring. Yes, science has been wrong, but you don’t get to promote a dubious claim that isn’t scientifically verified "because science has been wrong before."
Followed by more deflection, in that particular post.
What they can't seem to grasp, is what I stated in my first post:
"It's not so much that Science has been proven, "wrong", but: that it's moved on, in so many areas."
Then: their very clear lack of comprehension, of the point I've made* (VERY CLEARLY), twice, on this same page:
"If you tried to leap from some Discovery article citing a paper of researchers "controlling a cell’s interaction with light" to validating some audiophile’s tweak...that sounds like a profoundly incautious, unscientific leap...the type no actual responsible scientist would make. But...be my guest...show us the leap to relevance."
"So, again, try to be clear. If you are going to invoke SCIENCE, can you maintain an actual SCIENTIFIC mindset? Show me exactly what audio thing you "hear at home" that a "naysayer" may criticize, that you think is somehow validated by SCIENCE."
* I've never tried to, "validate" anything.
For the third time now:
"My position has always been: with what we've learned from the studies and advancements, related to QM and QED: there are a multitude of POSSIBILITIES; as to why we MAY hear the things we do, when listening to our own systems, in our own rooms, with our own ears, and our various add-ons."
Perhaps that, "possibilities" is greater than two syllables, is an issue?
Were they ever even a, "prof" in such a liberal art as Home Economics; it would have required much better comprehension skills.
I'm convinced: their field (if any) must have been Geology, based on their marked, petro-cephalic disposition.
Don't waste your keystrokes on such.
Happy listening and enjoy the journey!