scientific double blinded cable test

Why should those who claim cables sound different and cables and fuses are directional have to prove anything, much less submit to a test?

Agreed. You don't have to. Unless of course you wish to take me up on my challenge and have an opportunity to win some gold.

I actually don’t think you or any Uber skeptic remains open minded to an alternative, unless of course it helps YOUR case.

True. Forgive me for not wanting to give my gold away.

Now I don't know but I've been told
It's hard to run with the weight of gold
Other hand I heard it said
It's just as hard with the weight of lead

Of course, the other Strawman argument you make is that a person making claims has to prove them.

Nope!

The person does not have to, but should. In the absence of proof, expect the naysayers to scream "balderdash" (or offer challenges, incentives and so forth so as to entice the person making the claim)

There is abundant research on this that conflicts with your claim that quick switching isn't required for a proper audio test. It's a puzzle that you choose to avoid existing research while promoting your < twenty five g>  challenge, which increasingly appears bogus.

You can choose to think of this as the beginning of new research, or not. You can also choose to think of this as an improper audio test, or not. Your prerogative. Don't (or do) participate in my challenge. Your choice. Sorry, I'm not giving away the gold.

The story teller makes no choice, soon you will not hear his voice

If you're sincere about double blind testing, I suggest you look at the existing body of evidence about how double blind testing for audio is properly conducted. Then subject yourself to the rigors of such a test before insisting others do the same.

I'm sincere that it's *impossible* to *reliably* hear an audible difference when ordinary speaker wire is reversed.

I disagree with cleeds about the onus of proof. I do think it is good practice that those who offer an extraordinary claim that breaks with traditional science provide proof.

Thank you, @willemj

It just seems so logical to me that it is weird that there is so much angst about it.

If the game is lost, then we're all the same
No one left to place or take the blame

What stuns me is that the most vocal advocate here for blind testing doesn't know how to conduct such a test and exempts himself from the requirement .

This isn't about proper etiquette. It's about what truth is proof against all lies.

Because you are making this offer the burden is on you to provide the specific terms of the offer and the means under which this test will be conducted and those means should be reviewed in public here by the forum members to insure that there is no fraud on your part after all you have promised <twenty five g> at stake!

@clearthink

You did mention (privately) that you and I should refrain on posting any dollar amount, on account of forum moderation (i.e. our posts are likely to be removed).

Realistically, I’ve already posted more than enough in this thread.

You, and everyone else subscribed to the thread and who have been reading it since its inception, are very much aware of the parameters (general framework as outlined in the example procedure) and you and all others are very much aware how to contact me - privately - if you have a genuine interest about pursuing my challenge and demonstrating that you can do the impossible.

I’m done with this thread.

Nothing to tell now; let the words be yours, I’m done with mine.

$25K USD is fine however you have issued a public challenge so all negotiations must be in public so that we can settle this matter for once and for all!

@clearthink

If you read and understood my post, the "proposition" aspect was/is public. I went on to write "If interested, and if the amount is worthwhile we can have our attorney's draw up the contracts, establish an escrow account and so on". I don't think it's a stretch or unreasonable that you and I take this offline and discuss our agreement in further detail.

I have examined some of your prior posts throughout the forum. You question everybody and treat all others as though they're wrong. Your mannerism is such that you clearly have an ax to grind. Frankly, I don't really care. Be couth. I don't appreciate your aggressive tone. If you would like to do business, the first step in that process is to speak with one another. I'm glad to do this - today - via skype.

@clearthink

Here is a copy/duplication of my 03-10-2018 6:55pm post herein. Not "clear" to me (pun intended) why you couldn't find it.
-------------------

@geoffkait

Your point about not linking to old posts because you may have more current data to offer is a fair reply. Thanks.

To your point about knowing that wire is directional, I'm using Belden 5T00UP speaker wire. Would you say that wire is directional? And, if you answer yes, would you say you could *hear* a difference if connected one direction or another?

If you answer yes to both, I have a business proposition - directly related to this thread - for you (or anyone who answers yes to both questions for that matter). Broadly, the proposition involves either a blind or double blind test where it is my position that you *cannot* reliably hear a difference, and it would be your position that you could reliably hear a difference.

If interested, and if the amount is worthwhile (low five figures?) we can have our attorney's draw up the contracts, establish an escrow account and so on.

gdhal this discussion regarding your $25,000 offer is to be conducted here under the protective umbrella of the forums participants and moderators...

clearthink, I thought we already discussed the matter and were to proceed to the next step.  My attorney will create the necessary protective umbrella for me, and presumably your attorney will create a protective umbrella for you.

As of 11PM EST, my skype phone hasn't rang, nor have I received a PM. I'm shutting skype down for now. 

@clearthink

Yes, I’m in the U.S. (Long Island specifically) and I am referring to U.S. dollars. $25K is acceptable, but my preference would be half that. Keep in mind you and I would incur attorneys fees as well, so I’d like to budget some funds for that. While I’m sure we could agree to terms, I’m not open to traveling abroad. Would you travel to my location?

Also, there is a lot of minutiae you and I would need to agree upon before we really go further. If you’re not in the U.S., we can skype first, etc. Tell you what, send a me a PM. I’ll respond with my skype ID and shall be available later today. Let’s get acquainted, shall we?

Parameters such as, but not limited to, wire brand and type used for test, number of attempts in total, number of attempts that must be passed (i.e. determined correctly by you), whom would witness, etc. need to be agreed to. Admittedly, the devil is in the details, and the contractual arrangements alone could take a while before you and I agree (assuming we do) to the terms.

I’ll await your PM.

EDIT:

By the way clearthink, for the record, when we refer to blind testing, we are speaking with reference to information in this article  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blinded_experiment

Why should those who claim cables sound different and cables and fuses are directional have to prove anything, much less submit to a test?

Agreed. You don’t have to. Unless of course you wish to take me up on my challenge and have an opportunity to win some gold.

I actually don’t think you or any Uber skeptic remains open minded to an alternative, unless of course it helps YOUR case.

True. Forgive me for not wanting to give my gold away.

Now I don’t know but I’ve been told
It’s hard to run with the weight of gold
Other hand I heard it said
It’s just as hard with the weight of lead

Of course, the other Strawman argument you make is that a person making claims has to prove them.

Nope!

The person does not have to, but should. In the absence of proof, expect the naysayers to scream "balderdash" (or offer challenges, incentives and so forth so as to entice the person making the claim)

There is abundant research on this that conflicts with your claim that quick switching isn’t required for a proper audio test. It’s a puzzle that you choose to avoid existing research while promoting your $25,000 challenge, which increasingly appears bogus.

You can choose to think of this as the beginning of new research, or not. You can also choose to think of this as an improper audio test, or not. Your prerogative. Don’t (or do) participate in my challenge. Your choice. Sorry, I’m not giving away the gold.

The story teller makes no choice, soon you will not hear his voice

If you’re sincere about double blind testing, I suggest you look at the existing body of evidence about how double blind testing for audio is properly conducted. Then subject yourself to the rigors of such a test before insisting others do the same.

I’m sincere that it’s *impossible* to *reliably* hear an audible difference when ordinary speaker wire is reversed.

I disagree with cleeds about the onus of proof. I do think it is good practice that those who offer an extraordinary claim that breaks with traditional science provide proof.

Thank you, @willemj

It just seems so logical to me that it is weird that there is so much angst about it.

If the game is lost, then we’re all the same
No one left to place or take the blame

What stuns me is that the most vocal advocate here for blind testing doesn’t know how to conduct such a test and exempts himself from the requirement .

This isn’t about proper etiquette. It’s about what truth is proof against all lies.

Why should those who claim cables sound different and cables and fuses are directional have to prove anything, much less submit to a test?

Agreed. You don't have to. Unless of course you wish to take me up on my challenge and have an opportunity to win some gold.

I actually don’t think you or any Uber skeptic remains open minded to an alternative, unless of course it helps YOUR case.

True. Forgive me for not wanting to give my gold away.

Now I don't know but I've been told
It's hard to run with the weight of gold
Other hand I heard it said
It's just as hard with the weight of lead

Of course, the other Strawman argument you make is that a person making claims has to prove them.

Nope!

The person does not have to, but should. In the absence of proof, expect the naysayers to scream "balderdash" (or offer challenges, incentives and so forth so as to entice the person making the claim)

There is abundant research on this that conflicts with your claim that quick switching isn't required for a proper audio test. It's a puzzle that you choose to avoid existing research while promoting your $25,000 challenge, which increasingly appears bogus.

You can choose to think of this as the beginning of new research, or not. You can also choose to think of this as an improper audio test, or not. Your prerogative. Don't (or do) participate in my challenge. Your choice. Sorry, I'm not giving away the gold.

The story teller makes no choice, soon you will not hear his voice

If you're sincere about double blind testing, I suggest you look at the existing body of evidence about how double blind testing for audio is properly conducted. Then subject yourself to the rigors of such a test before insisting others do the same.

I'm sincere that it's *impossible* to *reliably* hear an audible difference when ordinary speaker wire is reversed.

I disagree with cleeds about the onus of proof. I do think it is good practice that those who offer an extraordinary claim that breaks with traditional science provide proof.

Thank you, @willemj

It just seems so logical to me that it is weird that there is so much angst about it.

If the game is lost, then we're all the same
No one left to place or take the blame

What stuns me is that the most vocal advocate here for blind testing doesn't know how to conduct such a test and exempts himself from the requirement .

This isn't about proper etiquette. It's about what truth is proof against all lies.