John Curl's Blowtorch preamplifier part II

Status
Not open for further replies.
As usual, I want to defend whatever SY criticizes. '-)
I think that a recent performance of Fleetwood Mac is OK. I would never pay to go, but if there are enough people who want to, so be it. I really like to hear those songs of around 40 years ago. Heck, I like to hear stuff that I used to like 60 years ago! Brings me back to my youth (for a short time).
As far as commercialization is concerned, OF COURSE, one of the main reasons for such a recent tour of Fleetwood Mac or even the Greatful Dead is to lay in money for their old age. So what? Is everybody here independently wealthy, so they would never do the same thing, if they had a chance? What else are the members of these groups supposed to do with their time? Charity?
 
As far as commercialization is concerned, OF COURSE, one of the main reasons for such a recent tour of Fleetwood Mac or even the Greatful Dead is to lay in money for their old age.

Certainly that it s indeed for their old age but for what exactly within their old age is an unknown as they dont need to do so, they have enough authors rights, just imagine that Patrick Hernandez who released a single worldwide hit in 1978 aknowledged that this still bring him 8000€/month in author s rights, so Fleetwood Mac are just running after some easily made money to pay for their Ferraris and five or six secondary homes more..
 
back to the study from BEM, about precognition:

NEWS: Can Dogs Read Minds? Not Exactly.

Replication is of course the hallmark of valid scientific research—if the findings are true and accurate, they should be able to be repeated by others. Otherwise the results may simply be due to normal and expected statistical variations and errors. If other experimenters cannot get the same result using the same techniques, it’s usually a sign that the original study was flawed in one or more ways.

Last year a group of British researchers tried and failed to replicate Bem’s experiments. A team of researchers including Professor Chris French, Stuart Ritchie and Professor Richard Wiseman collaborated to accurately replicate Bem’s final experiment, and found no evidence for precognition. Their results were published in the online journal PLoS ONE.

Now a second group of scientists has also replicated Bem’s experiments, and once again found no evidence for ESP. In an article forthcoming in The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, researchers Jeff Galak, Robyn LeBoeuf, Leif D. Nelson, and Joseph P. Simmons, the authors explained their procedure: “Across seven experiments (N = 3,289) we replicate the procedure of Experiments 8 and 9 from Bem (2011), which had originally demonstrated retroactive facilitation of recall. We failed to replicate that finding. We further conduct a meta-analysis of all replication attempts of these experiments and find that the average effect size (d = .04) is no different from zero.” In other words there was no evidence at all for ESP. The paper, “Correcting the Past: Failures to Replicate Psi,” is available on the web page of the Social Science Research Network.

Controversial ESP Study Fails Yet Again : Discovery News

The problem was found by doing something akin to meta studies.

All groups whom were to do the testing were shown the protocols. All stated that they felt the protocols were as clean as a whistle, and that even a minor statistical blip was significant, etc.

Meaning, they know more than you, they've done a ton more than you and their science is impeccable, you have nowhere to hide and your doubt (if any) after what I'm about to relate, is wasted and you are in denial. Are we clear on that? That you have no "yah but, did they..." places to hide. Zero, nothing.

The first group believed in PSI, they achieved positive results.

The second group was ambiguous and achieved ambiguous results.

The third group was negative on PSI and achieved negative results.

This happened over and over....and over.

You are left with the observer-interaction/wave-particle paradox.

But as a real thing, found to be abundantly true on the macro-newtonian world/scale,and how it relates to the creation of the record as projected and coupled through time and human will as a direction/directive.

But, you see, this goes back to that problem where all is subjective and objectivity is a cardboard cut-out of a 'fart in a windstorm', made out of fundamentally subjective bits.

That the whole thing is inter-relational. There is no absolute -----only differential.

So, when someone talks about DBT is the only real way to test audio, etc, whatever audio argument they may have....in my book or view, they are so far of the reality trail that they have no idea what the hell they are or what is going on or what this place is. That they are seriously misinformed in the most fundamental ways possible, just as a start.
 
Last edited:
Last I heard, he had a salmon farm up in Scotland.

. . .

Ian Anderson set up a very good salmon smokery in Inverness..........The salmon I have sent there always came back with the most delicate of flavours. [Some Scottish smokers so overdo it that you can hear the carving knife cut through the salt!!]

He, Anderson, is well known for having invested large sums to encourage local employment creation in rural areas of Scotland.]
 
Taj Mahal recently played at the King Bisquit Blues Festival, on the bank of the Mississippi River, and sounded at least as good as ever. Third song of the set was Henry Thomas' "Fishin Blues" from 1927. He also played several M. John Hurt songs from the same era, including "Richland Women Blues" and "Slidin Delta" ("Big Kate Adams, got ways just like man. Steal your baby ever time she lands."). All stuff that he played in the late 60's, early 70's.

When old blues or jazz guys play their glory days stuff it's _carrying on a tradition_. Rock isn't so broad minded. But Fleetwood Mac's best days were with Bob Welch!

All good fortune,
Chris
 
Status
Not open for further replies.