Karl Uppiano wrote:
"Keith G" wrote in message
news
"Rob" wrote in message
...
Arny Krueger wrote:
"Rob" wrote in
message

OK - I can't see any clear reference to method - just a
list of (incomplete) variables and population. Googling
gets me to:
http://www.pcabx.com/
with an odd statement about methodology.

What exactly is
the ontological and epistemological basis of the 'virtual
reality' methodology? I have to be absolutely clear on
these points to accept what you say.
Nice job of raising the bar to impossible heights. I've seen this
technique used many times before and I'm not playing.
Well, it's your ball :-)


What's this? Arny crying 'no fair'...!!??

:-)


(That's Game, Set and Match to Dr Rob, I think...!! :-)

It seems to me, the sudden change in terminology (without definitions) by Dr
Rob seems to indicate a B.S. gambit here.


Do you mean ontology and epistemology? They're common enough words when
discussing methodology - Arny started that ball rolling. I do tend to
agree that a lot of BS accompanies philosophical 'analysis'.

Frankly, I don't know why they're discussing (or I'm reading) an issue that
was already settled 25 years ago by anyone willing to accept the obvious
physical, mathematical and usability advantages of digital audio,

Agreed. But I didn't start it :-)

instead
of, oh, I don't know, whether Western Civilization has the nerve to fight a
dangerous religious war to the death, or if we're in life-threatening
denial. At least we have our priorities straight. :-)


I didn't start that one either!