[bob]

On Apr 1, 12:02=A0pm, Audio Empire wrote:

Your opinions are not necessarily facts, and I've seen no DIRECT proof th=
at
these null results from DBTs actually PROVE anything. Sure they satisfy t=
hose
who believe that DBT is the final arbiter of component differences, but t=
hat,
in itself, is a form of circular reasoning. A self-fulfilling prophecy as=
it
were.

If DBTs don't prove anything, why are they accepted by peer-reviewed
psychoacoustics journals?

Could it be that the real scientists have a different standard for
what constitutes proof than you do? And whose standard should we
trust, in that case?

bob