RC vs CC again

[David Love]

Don't know him at all.  I responded to the language.  The reply quoted
below came in response to my comments which said, yes, let's look at the
math and not make the mistake of confusing anecdotal evidence with science.
Those comments didn't warrant a sermon and that's what I got.  Get off my
case and quit trying to be everybody's hero. 

That being said, you are right, I don't know a lot about the technical
aspects of this subject which is why I have followed it so carefully.  I
still agree with Ron N. whose approach of trying to establish a common base
from which to work made sense since there seems to be so much disagreement
about the fundamentals.  Some people, you included, seem so hung up on
opinion based on anecdotal evidence and theoretical speculations at the
exclusion of the science that the conversation has largely become redundant
and useless.  I find this topic strange in that people seem so emotionally
caught up in it.  When somebody offers a rational, mathematically based
explanation for things that have one, they seem to be labeled as a heretic
or accused of representing their own self interests.  People thought the
earth was flat once too, and burned witches at the stake.  I guess we are
not so far removed from that, are we?   Is that provocative enough for you
Ric?  I think I will step out of this RC/CC conversation for awhile,
though.  I'm not seeing much progress, nor, I will admit, contributing to
it.  

David Love
davidlovepianos@earthlink.net


> [Original Message]
> From: Richard Brekne <Richard.Brekne@grieg.uib.no>
> To: <davidlovepianos@earthlink.net>; Pianotech <pianotech@ptg.org>
> Date: 10/13/2003 4:04:00 AM
> Subject: Re: RC vs CC again
>
> What a wonderfully non-provacative approach David.
>
> .. since you yourself declare openly you know little or nothing really of
these
> matters, what makes you think this fellow is deserving of such a reply,
whilst
> some others who have demonstrate on a regular basis a  far more
declarative
> are worthy of your admiration ?
>
> I'm just curious as to what you base your judjement on. Do you know this
fellow
> or what ?
>
> RicB
>
> David Love wrote:
>
> > Say what?  Would that be Reverend Thomason.  I didn't realize that's
what I
> > was doing.  But thank you for saving me from a life of hellfire and
> > damnation.
> >
> > David Love
> > davidlovepianos@earthlink.net
> >
> >
> > ...Place not your faith in someone simply because he or she is able to
> > dazzle you with simple maths you yourself have long forgotten. And
> > remember... the person who does not question h'self, who attempts to
define
> > others perspectives and insights as useless drivel unless they fit
nicely
> > into a pre-judiced carton is not a scientist by any definition of the
> > word...
> > >
> > > Calin Thomason.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
>
> --
> Richard Brekne
> RPT, N.P.T.F.
> UiB, Bergen, Norway
> mailto:rbrekne@broadpark.no
> http://home.broadpark.no/~rbrekne/ricmain.html
> http://www.hf.uib.no/grieg/personer/cv_RB.html
>