Have we lost civility and respect on Audio forums?

So the testimonial of some guy who worked with Toole is a better source on how Toole did his research than Toole and the actual published papers of Toole’s research? I disagree.

I've never seen anyone so afraid to listen to something that might mitigate, inform and help to broaden one's understanding of something like you do. Barton is not testifying; he's relating a past experience that's wholly relevant to this back and forth with you. I'm not saying Barton is a "better source" than Toole. He's been right there with Toole all along. 

All this tells me you're great at reading what you want and discarding the rest that doesn't conform to your views. You borrow someone else's work, cherry pick what you need, conflate things and hide behind your manufactured position. 

Every time I point you to that recording, you come back with evasion, side stepping something so simple as listening to another perspective that would help to educate yourself. Seems to me that you're aware, or feel it with your spidey senses, that you'd suffer a great heaping of cognitive dissonance yourself if you did so, hence the projection with your last post.

I see you soldiered on with another post while I wrote this so let me just say that nowhere in what you quoted from Olive's blog did he mention quick switching with the subjects. Yes, they used it, but for convenience. If you did read up on it, the speaker switcher could swap out a speaker in about 3 seconds but how long did it actually take before listening again? Cabling would have to be disconnected and reconnected. Toss in any number of things and they could have waited for a good 5 minutes before starting back up again. 

The tests I addressed in my "claims" were done a good 30-35 years before and all the way up to the speaker swapping device they came up with. I never said Toole, Olive and Barton didn't do blind listening tests. I didn't miss a thing.

All the best,
Nonoise

Now psychanalysing your motives and explaining your obsession for double blind test by the stress resulting from your discovery that we cannot trust our ears (which fact is not even wrong but which fact is not true either because we can and must learn how to train our ears) was perhaps an error i did trying to understand you ...

Perhaps you are only a techno- cultist objectivist in a crusade against deluded subjectivist audiophiles ... you are not the first one here ...

You never considered that "the faillibility" of human hearing was the reverse side of the coin , and reflect his creativity in perception of meanings ... We never hear sound as in physical waves, we hear meanings ...No perception exist without a concept behind it ... If not only meaningless chaos exist ...

@tomic601 I'm in the frozen Northern part of Flyoverlandia. A double blind bartender.... now that's some real scientific experimentation. Results are inconclusive, we'll try again tomorrow... Cheers!

Illegitimati non carborundum

“Every time I point you to that recording, you come back with evasion, side stepping something so simple as listening to another perspective that would help to educate yourself.”

Have you read Toole’s book or any of Olive’s blog posts or any of the actual peer reviewed ARSJ papers of their research that documents their actual testing?

I have. Do you think that this interview will demonstrate that Toole’s and Olive’s own accounts and published papers misrepresented their use of double blind tests? Simple question. If you do think that this interview will somehow prove that both Olive and Toole misrepresented their use of double blind protocols in their research I will give it a listen. If you don’t think demonstrates that they misrepresented their work I see no reason to read second hand accounts of their work after having read their first hand accounts and their actual research papers. 

Why did you not listened to me and spoke about your friend Edgar invention instead of this crusade about double blind test for all ?

You would have been useful for all here, even for me because i read about it in awe but dont own it , but instead you choose to be annoying ...

I think i get it : We are not worthy of this communication as a subjectivists deluded audiophile crowd ... 😁

So ridiculous is my thought i could not discover any other explanation for your opinionated obsession about double blind test for all ...

«Every man is a different mystery»-- Anonymus thinker

«Hell is only this : science at all cost and only science for all and for the greatest good»-- Anonymus reader of the novel Morwynn by John Cowper Powys