Quote:
| I don't get your point. What evidence in the context of UFOs? There's no proof that ETs have visited earth, but also no proof for the opposite. |
The "evidence" we have in favor of UFOs, as I said, is that we know two things: intelligent, space-faring life exists on a planet in at least one star system in this universe (that's us), and there are hundreds of billions of trillions of stars.
The scientific method is what tells you it's reasonable to remain open to the possibility of their existence AND that it's unlikely they have visited earth.
Quote:
| My own ears are proof enough for me. |
Enough said. If you're willing to turn a deaf ear to the things that have been shown to explain what you're reporting, and instead want to believe something else entirely unsupported by valid evidence, so be it. It's just tough for others to rely on your "proof" is all.
Quote:
| The most useful evidence in music reproduction is what a majority of experienced listeners hears. They're all aware of placebo effects, but they keep on believing what they hear. |
*Sigh* Jazz, "experienced listeners" will report a difference where none exists (listening to the same equipment) exactly as aften, on average, as they'll report no difference when the equipment changes (well, things like cables and rainbow stickers anyway), and exactly as often as they'll guess right.
So if you're trying to decide what sounds best to you, you're right- what you hear is useful "evidence".
In deciding, however, whether one strand of copper sounds different, let alone better, than another, your ears are notoriously unreliable, and this is
precisely why DBTs have been a staple of valid testing for things like this for years and years. It's not something that was pulled out of someone's arse as a prank.
Quote:
| You're implying that you know exactly what measurings are responsible for what sonic impression. But you aren't even able to respond to my amplifier example. Fact is that «we» know very little about the subtle sonic differences caused by electronics and cables -- they seem to be out of reach of science so far. |
You've coupled a 'strawman' argument with a 'red herring' here.
I've never said anything about which sonic differences are caused by which measurements, and I'm not discussing a complex array of ciruitry like a typical amplifier.
I can tell you, though, that if an identical signal is fed into a pair of phones over two different wires, you're not going to be able to tell a difference between the two wires (or amplifiers). You may think you hear a difference based on some very well documented phenomena, but you'll fail an ABX test on it.
Quote:
| Fact is that «we» know very little about the subtle sonic differences caused by electronics and cables -- they seem to be out of reach of science so far. |
On what are you basing that? As I've stated, there is nothing yet reported that we don't understand to a degree of accuracy far beyond what's necessary for a stupid 20KHz signal.
