New vs Vintage
On Apr 2, 12:25=A0pm, bob wrote:
On Apr 1, 12:02=A0pm, Audio Empire wrote:
Your opinions are not necessarily facts, and I've seen no DIRECT proof =
that
these null results from DBTs actually PROVE anything. Sure they satisfy=
those
who believe that DBT is the final arbiter of component differences, but=
that,
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?
You are right. We should trust the scientists and the peer review
process for giving us the highest standards for proof. One should also
note that one paper. one reported set of tests etc does not
constitute a meaningful *body* of evidence.
|