cbigam wrote ...
Woah there!

The guy in St. Andrews is very clearly talking physics, and doing
so correctly. The graphs speak for themselves. 0.1dB at 100kHz
is completely inaudible of course, and the fact that he doesn't
belabour the point doesn't make him a pathological wacko
pseudo-scientist. It just means that he assumes his audience is
smart enough to understand what he's saying.

Sorry, I didn't write clearly. I didn't mean that the "Scots Guide"
is wacko pseudo-science. I meant to say that extrapolating it
into thinking that skin effect and similar effects in wire/cable
are AUDIBLE is wacko pseudo-science.

That said, he does point this out:
"In effect, therefore, the above differential group delay is equivalent
to a sound source that seems 16 microns nearer at high audible
frequencies than at low audible frequencies."

Is it really necessary to explicitly FURTHER point out
that a group delay shift of 50nsec is inaudible?

Actually, to gullible newbies, it likely IS necessary.
They may very well have no idea how "50ns" relates to
audible frequencies.