Quote:

Quote:
Well, I'd say his stuff is more SciFi, but ...

I prefer to think of my stuff as SciFri - science friction. This friction probably explains why you're hot under the collar. Almost all great scientific discoveries are initially considered preposterous by the scientific community.

In other words, you have no evidence, no willingness to examine your own materials, and can't explain how you actually test your devices before delivery.

Not surprising, really, but a customer is entitled to an expectation that you (your company) actually tests their product before delivery.

Almost all great scientific discoveries are initially considered preposterous by the scientific community.

I agree. Even Edison and Tesla were mocked to a degree. But aren't all scientific discoveries eventually proven by facts therefore amalgumated into a scientific conscensus?

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
Well, I'd say his stuff is more SciFi, but ...

I prefer to think of my stuff as SciFri - science friction. This friction probably explains why you're hot under the collar. Almost all great scientific discoveries are initially considered preposterous by the scientific community.

In other words, you have no evidence, no willingness to examine your own materials, and can't explain how you actually test your devices before delivery.

Not surprising, really, but a customer is entitled to an expectation that you (your company) actually tests their product before delivery.

Glad you care so much about my products, my product development and my explanations. Most people don't care nearly as much as you.

"Willingness to examine my own materials?" Geez, what are you going on about? That's a new wrinkle on an old prune. Reminds of the guy over on AA who warned that quantum dots are dangerous to your health. Hey, there's a new tactic for you!

We don't do animal testing -- are you saying that's not enough to satisfy customers these days? Ha Ha

Quote:

Quote:
Well, I'd say his stuff is more SciFi, but ...

I prefer to think of my stuff as SciFri - science friction. This friction probably explains why you're hot under the collar. Almost all great scientific discoveries are initially considered preposterous by the scientific community.

Great scientific discoveries?!?! By YOU???
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!!

Quote:
Glad you care so much about my products, my product development and my explanations.

A lie, plain and outright.

Quote:

Most people don't care nearly as much as you.

You don't pollute others' landscapes with deceit and composted bovine droppings.

Quote:

"Willingness to examine my own materials?" Geez, what are you going on about? That's a new wrinkle on an old prune. Reminds of the guy over on AA who warned that quantum dots are dangerous to your health. Hey, there's a new tactic for you!

In other words, you don't test your own products? Is that what this means? I didn't mention this ridiculous idea, you did. Maybe you're just exposing your own fears? You are starting to remind me of the fellow who was claiming that MP3 files would cause the breakdown of the USA.

Now, just tell us all, exactly how do you test the product as it goes out the door? Or maybe your sales are zero, and you don't have any product to sell? What is it? Surely you can't sell untested product, even the local chiropractic association asks its clients if they feel better.

Quote:

We don't do animal testing -- are you saying that's not enough to satisfy customers these days? Ha Ha

So, now, you still haven't told me how you test your product. The "animal testing" deceit is just another page in your unwillingness to actually detail how you validate your products.

I'm starting to think Buddha is right, but that wouldn't explain how you've been deliberately destroying discourse on audio bulletin boards for quite a while now, I mean, that's a long time to stay hidden in your mom's basement, like Buddha says.

Why don't you come out into the light. Or are you worried you'll turn to stone if exposed to the light of reason?

Quote:

Quote:
Glad you care so much about my products, my product development and my explanations.

A lie, plain and outright.

Quote:

Most people don't care nearly as much as you.

You don't pollute others' landscapes with deceit and composted bovine droppings.

Quote:

"Willingness to examine my own materials?" Geez, what are you going on about? That's a new wrinkle on an old prune. Reminds of the guy over on AA who warned that quantum dots are dangerous to your health. Hey, there's a new tactic for you!

In other words, you don't test your own products? Is that what this means? I didn't mention this ridiculous idea, you did. Maybe you're just exposing your own fears? You are starting to remind me of the fellow who was claiming that MP3 files would cause the breakdown of the USA.

Now, just tell us all, exactly how do you test the product as it goes out the door? Or maybe your sales are zero, and you don't have any product to sell? What is it? Surely you can't sell untested product, even the local chiropractic association asks its clients if they feel better.

Quote:

We don't do animal testing -- are you saying that's not enough to satisfy customers these days? Ha Ha

So, now, you still haven't told me how you test your product. The "animal testing" deceit is just another page in your unwillingness to actually detail how you validate your products.

I'm starting to think Buddha is right, but that wouldn't explain how you've been deliberately destroying discourse on audio bulletin boards for quite a while now, I mean, that's a long time to stay hidden in your mom's basement, like Buddha says.

Why don't you come out into the light. Or are you worried you'll turn to stone if exposed to the light of reason?

I can't shake the feeling you''re trying to speak for all mean-spirited pseudo-skeptics and trolls everywhere. I always thought you were considerably funnier, and far more convincing, when you posted over on AA a couple years back, posing as a dim-witted briarhopper from Arkansas.

Quote:
We aren't the skeptics, you are.

We believe in science, your are the skeptic.

You can sit in your (or your mom's) armchair and debunk science all you like. Doesn't make your sales talk (or science fair placebo study) any more honest.

Hey, did you tell J_J about plants in rooms functioning only as placebos? Maybe you can find common ground and classify your "products" as plants.

You believe in science? Yeah, right! That's the last resort of the disingenuous blowhard pseudo-skeptic! This must be the Attack of the Killer Blowhards.

Word to the wise, you don't want to wind up like jj, do you?

Quote:

You believe in science? Yeah, right! That's the last resort of the disingenuous blowhard pseudo-skeptic! This must be the Attack of the Killer Blowhards.

Word to the wise, you don't want to wind up like jj, do you?

By your above statement and your products it's obvious you don't even apply science to your thinking or product results. Obviously you believe in Voodoo and the gullibility of potential customers to feed your income. Oh yes and also you are invoking the "victim" response, it's you against the world

Here's a definition of you Geoff

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiose_delusions

Quote:

Quote:

You believe in science? Yeah, right! That's the last resort of the disingenuous blowhard pseudo-skeptic! This must be the Attack of the Killer Blowhards.

Word to the wise, you don't want to wind up like jj, do you?

By your above statement and your products it's obvious you don't even apply science to your thinking or product results. Obviously you believe in Voodoo and the gullibility of potential customers to feed your income. Oh yes and also you are invoking the "victim" response, it's you against the world

Here's a definition of you Geoff

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grandiose_delusions

Ah, the entry level dude continues to try to make his bones, however lamely.

Quote:
Too bad he can't live a life of more quiet desperation.

Well, if he didn't run all over the internet with his disgused advertising and relentless attacks on the real science behind audio reproduction, he'd be a harmless kook.

Unfortunately, he seems compulsively bound to run around, destroying discussion wherever he get get permission to post for a while.

I've no idea if it's deliberate or a disease speaking.

Quote:

Quote:
Too bad he can't live a life of more quiet desperation.

Well, if he didn't run all over the internet with his disgused advertising and relentless attacks on the real science behind audio reproduction, he'd be a harmless kook.

Unfortunately, he seems compulsively bound to run around, destroying discussion wherever he get get permission to post for a while.

I've no idea if it's deliberate or a disease speaking.

20 years of trolling audio forums and this is the best you can come up with? Truly pathetic. If there is such a thing as troll school I suggest you go back for rehab.

Quote:
Delusions of grandeur!

geoffie got stalled at delusions of sub-mecriocrity. A guy with no Hi Fi pushing back-page-of-comic-book crap.

Too bad he can't live a life of more quiet desperation.

To throw him a bone, I improved his clock radio's performance with this purple font.

You're welcome.

Purple, I get it, the color of your enraged be-sotted face. Can I suggest self medication? Credit where credit's due, you're the Avis of trolls, you try harder. Heck, I might even bump you up to Jr. Associate Staff Troll.

Quote:

Ah, the entry level dude continues to try to make his bones, however lamely.

Awwwwwwww is da lil bitty pebble boy need a nappy time?

Here, I'll help you out with your entry level stereo just for you. It will easily be good enough for your ears no doubt.Be careful it might be above your ability to operate it but I'm sure using all of your tweak products that it will easily outperform anything available on the market today

Quote:
Delusions of grandeur!

To throw him a bone, I improved his clock radio's performance with this purple font.

You're welcome.

As Larry the cable guy would say: "Thats funny as hell.....I don't care who you are." -

Quote:
Boy, you assign rage as an emotion alot.

geoffie, it's apathy mixed with some disdain.

In keeping with your delusions of adequacy, your opinion of your affect on others is also over-blown.

You do not rise to the level worthy of a feeling of rage or a state of enragement.

Just as one would note the presence of a leech, but not get "enraged" by it; you and your religious prosyletyzing are a nuisance more than anything else. You are a form of pollution, to be more accurate.

How long you will be such a monotone nusiance may be an interesting question...I mean, you are more monotonous and unenlightening than Ethan, and they ran him. Your love affair with David_L is far less dynamic than Ethan and Michigan's....Your continued sales pitches make Ethan look like a general renaissance man.

More rantings from the local tweakaphobe.

By the way, no fair you and David_L ganging up on me.

Quote:

More rantings from the local tweakaphobe.

By the way, no fair you and David_L ganging up on me.

Tweakaphobe? We only rant against those that sell useless tweaks like yours

See? It's "you against the world" again.....us ganging up on you

By the way that Dumb and Dumber picture has been used over and over many times by you and is LAME to the extreme by now, get yourself a new set of pictures.

I suggest you place this sign on your webpage describing your products.....

Quote:

Quote:

More rantings from the local tweakaphobe.

By the way, no fair you and David_L ganging up on me.

Tweakaphobe? We only rant against those that sell useless tweaks like yours

See? It's "you against the world" again.....us ganging up on you

By the way that Dumb and Dumber picture has been used over and over many times by you and is LAME to the extreme by now, get yourself a new set of pictures.

I suggest you place this sign on your webpage describing your products.....

Just curious, are you retarded or something? If it's an act it's very convincing.

Quote:

Just curious, are you retarded or something? If it's an act it's very convincing.

LAME......get a new act. You have this "thing" about retardation it seems it crops up in your posts most of the time.Were you dropped on your head as a child? That would explain you taking your own BS so seriously.

Look what happens when I type in Machina Dynamica in Google with the instant feature turned on.....the fifth suggestion is "Machina Dynamica Fraud" seems pretty popular huh?

http://tinyurl.com/29hp7s9

More bad fifth suggestions.

Here, Let Me Google That For You

Quote:

Quote:

Just curious, are you retarded or something? If it's an act it's very convincing.

LAME......get a new act. You have this "thing" about retardation it seems it crops up in your posts most of the time.Were you dropped on your head as a child? That would explain you taking your own BS so seriously.

Look what happens when I type in Machina Dynamica in Google with the instant feature turned on.....the fifth suggestion is "Machina Dynamica Fraud" seems pretty popular huh?

http://tinyurl.com/29hp7s9

What can I tell you? Apparently you're not the only retard out there.

Quote:

What can I tell you? Apparently you're not the only retard out there.

Again with the retard word PLUS the whole world is against you again? You need to work on your vocabulary.
Oh I found a picture of you......

K guys,

I dont want to discontinue this thread b/c I think the topic of tweaks is always fun. Please please remember to keep the personal insults to a minimum/none at all. Its always fun to take jabs at your opponent but it should only be done within the reference of the subject and not with bland overarching insults--> There have been homophobic remarks (in case you need clarification: calling someone gay with an intention to insult is homophobic - we're talking about audio here, not sexuality), and I was taught not to call people "retarded" back in the 5th grade.

Again, most importantly: stick to the topic.

All of our questions will be answered this way. Calling names only gets us off subject.

So here are my questions:
Geoff, if you don't want to use science to defend/explain these tweaks, then what sort of explanation do you offer? How do you expect me to buy your product if you can't tell me how it works?

Are we dealing with the psychology of listening here? Are we expecting to hear new things b/c of these tweaks (and not based on the actual changes from them)? Or are they actually making a change physical change to the sonic waveform? I'm still confused by what you propose a tweak such as the Clever Little Clock actually does ie HOW DOES IT WORK? Show me the measurements which indicate a change in the listening experience or tell me its happening in my head. If there are no measurements to quantify the change in the listening experience, how do you come up with the idea that your tweak will affect the system?

Quote:
So here are my questions:
Geoff, if you don't want to use science to defend/explain these tweaks, then what sort of explanation do you offer? How do you expect me to buy your product if you can't tell me how it works?

Excellent question, I have taken quite a bit of time over the years to explain the science behind my tweaks; explanations for almost all of my products are provided on my web site. As it turns out almost all of my products operate via "resonance" in one form or another - mechanical/acoustic resonance, atomic resonance or "morphic resonance." Please feel free to visit my site if you wish detailed discussions of my products.

www.machinadynamica.com

Quote:
Are we dealing with the psychology of listening here? Are we expecting to hear new things b/c of these tweaks (and not based on the actual changes from them)? Or are they actually making a change physical change to the sonic waveform? I'm still confused by what you propose a tweak such as the Clever Little Clock actually does ie HOW DOES IT WORK? Show me the measurements which indicate a change in the listening experience or tell me its happening in my head. If there are no measurements to quantify the change in the listening experience, how do you come up with the idea that your tweak will affect the system?

None of my products operate on the psychological level. This is not to say that the brain is not involved, esp. for the Clock and Tele-tweak. My products range from vibration isolation stands to a device for eliminating background scattered laser light in CD players. Another is a special duplex cover for outlets in the room, including non-audio outlets and even unused ones. My newest product is a wall-mounted acoustic resonator. By last count there were 11 products, including The New Intelligent Chip which, in fact, contains artificial atoms.

The explanation for how the Clever Little Clock works was finally put together recently with the help of May Belt and can be seen at:

www.machinadynamica.com/machina42.htm

Cheers

Quote:

www.machinadynamica.com/machina42.htm

Pretty sure I followed this whole thing, but just to make sure: the intention of The Clever Little Clock is to simulate the sensation of a Present Time Signal (your explanation with the Olympics actually rang true). I still don't think your piece clearly explained how YOUR clock does create a Present Time Signal. Could you please clarify what insights/technology/developments led you to believe that your Clever Little Clock does what you claim it does in your explanation?

Quote:

Quote:

www.machinadynamica.com/machina42.htm

Pretty sure I followed this whole thing, but just to make sure: the intention of The Clever Little Clock is to simulate the sensation of a Present Time Signal (your explanation with the Olympics actually rang true). I still don't think your piece clearly explained how YOUR clock does create a Present Time Signal. Could you please clarify what insights/technology/developments led you to believe that your Clever Little Clock does what you claim it does in your explanation?

The clock is the orginal concept of PWB Electronics, who taught me how to construct the clock 10 years ago. As it exists today - the Signature Version - the clock is a more refined, evolved version of the original PWB clock of around 15 pr 20 years ago. I was given permission to market my version of the clock by PWB aound 5 years ago. My explanation is a theory - one that would be rather difficult to prove IMO. But I don't think there's another explanation that would be at all satisfactory, so mine wins by default.

The CLC doesn't produce a Present Time signal, it's actually set up to produce a Future Time signal, as confusing as that might be. Recall from the explanation that the Present Time signal is produced by our internal clock, that is continuously time-stamping all incoming sensory data.

I would add more but you get the idea and Oh btw that's just me discussing Geoff's explanation, nothing personal of course

Hehe

I think it would be accurate to say that geoff's explanations are as effective as his products.

Quote:

I think it would be accurate to say that geoff's explanations are as effective as his products.

Bite me, Zippy. Some people should stick with People magazine.

Quote:

Quote:

I think it would be accurate to say that geoff's explanations are as effective as his products.

Bite me, Zippy. Some people should stick with People magazine.

So you admit that both are bogus?

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I think it would be accurate to say that geoff's explanations are as effective as his products.

Bite me, Zippy. Some people should stick with People magazine.

So you admit that both are bogus?

It's such a nice day, shouldn't you be outside riding your bicycle?

I'm sure the high level of geoff's discourse is winning more converts as he writes.

Quote:

It's such a nice day, shouldn't you be outside riding your bicycle?

Actually is was a nice day thank you. Nice blue skies and the temps were moderate. I enjoyed my time out. How was your day in your parent's basement?

Quote:

I'm sure the high level of geoff's discourse is winning more converts as he writes.

I'm not trying to set the world on fire, just start a flame in a few hearts. I think it's usually best to let sleeping dogs lie.

Quote:

Quote:

I'm sure the high level of geoff's discourse is winning more converts as he writes.

I'm not trying to set the world on fire, just start a flame in a few hearts. I think it's usually best to let sleeping dogs lie.

Heartburn you mean?

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:

I'm sure the high level of geoff's discourse is winning more converts as he writes.

I'm not trying to set the world on fire, just start a flame in a few hearts. I think it's usually best to let sleeping dogs lie.

Heartburn you mean?

Ya got me there. Sorry about that.

Quote:
But I don't think there's another explanation that would be at all satisfactory, so mine wins by default.

making the assumption that your explanation was satisfactory...no?

to each his own.

just don't push your product on the boards (or start threads purely for the purpose of validating your product)and you're ok by me.

Quote:

Quote:
But I don't think there's another explanation that would be at all satisfactory, so mine wins by default.

making the assumption that your explanation was satisfactory...no?

to each his own.

I have no problem with anyone doubting or disagreeing with my explanation of the clock, after all it is a theory and as I previously stated difficult for me or anyone to prove conclusively. You may recall that black holes were suspected by some scientists as early as the beginning of the 20th century, but many other important scientists - including Albert Einstein - refused to accept the possibility of their existence, alrgely on grounds that they were "unnatural." Before any black holes could actually be observed (indirectly, of course) or measured, the theory of black holes, including their physical characteristics, was very complete by the end of the 1960s. So here we are, 100 years after the first conjecture of black holes and, while the existence of black holes appears to be 99% conclusive, there will still be doubters. C'es la vie. In science, as in law, preponderance of the evidence is a determining factor regarding the attractiveness of a given theory.

Quote:

I have no problem with anyone doubting or disagreeing with my explanation of the clock, after all it is a theory and as I previously stated difficult for me or anyone to prove conclusively. You may recall that black holes were suspected by some scientists as early as the beginning of the 20th century, but many other important scientists - including Albert Einstein - refused to accept the possibility of their existence, alrgely on grounds that they were "unnatural." Before any black holes could actually be observed (indirectly, of course) or measured, the theory of black holes, including their physical characteristics, was very complete by the end of the 1960s. So here we are, 100 years after the first conjecture of black holes and, while the existence of black holes appears to be 99% conclusive, there will still be doubters. C'es la vie. In science, as in law, preponderance of the evidence is a determining factor regarding the attractiveness of a given theory.

And the fallacy of appeal to ignorance is exhibited.

Quote:

Quote:

I have no problem with anyone doubting or disagreeing with my explanation of the clock, after all it is a theory and as I previously stated difficult for me or anyone to prove conclusively. You may recall that black holes were suspected by some scientists as early as the beginning of the 20th century, but many other important scientists - including Albert Einstein - refused to accept the possibility of their existence, alrgely on grounds that they were "unnatural." Before any black holes could actually be observed (indirectly, of course) or measured, the theory of black holes, including their physical characteristics, was very complete by the end of the 1960s. So here we are, 100 years after the first conjecture of black holes and, while the existence of black holes appears to be 99% conclusive, there will still be doubters. C'es la vie. In science, as in law, preponderance of the evidence is a determining factor regarding the attractiveness of a given theory.

And the fallacy of appeal to ignorance is exhibited.

I'm afraid your logic needs a little brushing up on. Sorry to end a sentence with a preposition. An appeal to ignorance applies to propositions that have no evidence, not ones that have no proof.

If your logic were to prevail then all theories would constitute appeals to ignorance, and we know this is not true as there can be evidence, even circumstantial evidence, without proof, as in my example of black holes. E.g., the very bright light in the center of the Sombrero galaxy in the photo I posted is evidence of a supermassive black hole but not proof of one.

Re-read the last sentence in my previous post: In science, as in law, preponderance of the evidence is a determining factor regarding the attractiveness of a given theory.

Quote:
I'm afraid your logic needs a little brushing up on. Sorry to end a sentence with a preposition. An appeal to ignorance applies to propositions that have no evidence, not ones that have no proof.

And, you've offered no meaningful evidence that your stuff works, so stop trying to muddy the water.

Quote:

Quote:
I'm afraid your logic needs a little brushing up on. Sorry to end a sentence with a preposition. An appeal to ignorance applies to propositions that have no evidence, not ones that have no proof.

And, you've offered no meaningful evidence that your stuff works, so stop trying to muddy the water.

I'm pleased to see you've backed off your demands for proof. What kind of evidence would be acceptable to you?

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I'm afraid your logic needs a little brushing up on. Sorry to end a sentence with a preposition. An appeal to ignorance applies to propositions that have no evidence, not ones that have no proof.

And, you've offered no meaningful evidence that your stuff works, so stop trying to muddy the water.

I think we can give geoff credit for several logical blunders.

J_J is correct enough pointing out geoff's penchant for improperly using an argument from ignorance (appeal to ignorance): The fallacy of assuming that something is true because it has not been proven false. This is the main food group of the Belt/Machina Dynamica cabal.

Point to J_J.

Similarly, geoff is fond of using negative proof: attempting to avoid the burden of proof for some claim by demanding proof of the contrary from whoever questions that claim. This may be his favorite trick, but it is also a simple fallacy-type claim. geoffie calls it inappropriate "debunking" if people don't automatically buy into his religion.

The "quantum" marketing term is slick, too. By using a word that people associate with honest intellectual or scientific endeavors, geoff tries to lay claim to some sort of legitimacy. By using equivocation: the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time), geoff tries to advance ludicrous products via their marketing vocabulary.

geoffie's best play may be one he learned from May: "Honor by Association." Einstein had theories that were proven to be correct. I have theories, therefore I will be proven to be correct, as well."

I think geoff has the fallacy waterfront well covered in his marketing scheme.

Kudos! I can't recall a more disingenuous, pseudological post. But a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing. There've been pseudological arguments "proving" that the holocost never took place, that we never landed astronauts on the Moon and that the World Trade Center attacks were not terrorism, but planned and carried out by our own government. The mind of the obsessive, determined pseudoskeptic is wonderous to behold.

In a small sense, I salute your talent in constructing a phony argument - one that someone with no knowledge of quantum physics or logical argument and an inclination toward hysteria, cynicism and tweakabphobia might be inclined to buy into. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Breathe deep the gathering gloom,
Watch lights fade from every room.
Bedsitter people look back and lament,
Another day's useless energy spent.
Impassioned lovers wrestle as one,
Lonely man cries for love and has none.
New mother picks up and suckles her son,
Senior citizens wish they were young.
Cold hearted orb that rules the night,
Removes the colours from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which is right.
And which is an illusion???

Quote:

In a small sense, I salute your talent in constructing a phony argument - one that someone with no knowledge of quantum physics or logical argument and an inclination toward hysteria, cynicism and tweakabphobia might be inclined to buy into. A little knowledge can be a dangerous thing.

Breathe deep the gathering gloom,
Watch lights fade from every room.
Bedsitter people look back and lament,
Another day's useless energy spent.
Impassioned lovers wrestle as one,
Lonely man cries for love and has none.
New mother picks up and suckles her son,
Senior citizens wish they were young.
Cold hearted orb that rules the night,
Removes the colours from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow white,
But we decide which is right.
And which is an illusion???

You're one to talk about phony arguments A little knowledge in your case would be a good thing but alas you went around the bend a long time ago and never came back

PLEASE don't quote The Moody Blues in your defense. It only defames their good name and musical heritage being associated with you Geoff although the last word "illusion " does describe your products.