AudioBanter.com - View Single Post - science vs. pseudo-science

wrote in message ...
Snip, see below:

But to get back on topic, how does it follow that high end audio is on the
verge of such a thing as was implied by the other poster? In here we have
Mirabel proudly holding forth that the scientists here are the quacks brazenly
through the holes in his own arguments. It's the subjectivists that are citing
old tossed theories, (Raedecker's advocation of chochlear amplifiers comes
to mind) Most don't bother to even check out the important authors that have
been cited here. (Moore, Yost, Fletcher, etc) These seminal texts have been
informally cited many times, yet they complain that they haven't, which just
shows willful ignorance and/or lack of interest. Yet they argue that they
have some magical gift of listening which deternimes some products are 'better'
than others and this should just be accepted as 'authority'. (usually citing
magazine writers and editors better known for manipulating internal politics
rather than any real contribution of knowledge)

JJ quit contributing pretty much because it's like talking tp a brick wall.

No, it doesn't follow. In fact, it's pretty much the opposite.

Mr. Jjnunes, delivery time.
I hear that I "proudly" call the "scientists here" quacks.
I hear- not for the first time- that long-dead and/or otherwise
occupied
scientists: Moore, Yost, Fletcher etc. said decisive word about a test
for comparing music reproduction characteristics of audio components.
You even say that the relevant quotes appeared in RAHE. And that,
presumably,
those worthies support your point of view- whatever it is.

Please be so kind and:
1)Name the "scientists here" that I called "quacks". Names of the
"scientists" and dates for my name-calling, please
2) state clearly what your point of view is. One knows already what it
is not.
3) Quote just one or two of your scientists-models. Or at least give
references customary in scientific debates Name, Title , Year, Page.
You've been asked this before and either clammed up or said something
to the effect (Note- to whom it may concern- figure of speech
follows!) that you won't
throw your pearls bero swine.
It sort of wastes everyone else's time, doesn't it?
You won't mind if on a future similar occasion I'll just requote
this.?
Ludovic Mirabel