On Fri, 28 Dec 2007 10:23:13 +0000, David Looser wrote:

"Malcolm" wrote in message
...

The problem is that many (most?) such tests fail to reliably
distinguish between A and B. One cannot, in that case, say that A and B
are the same. That's a logical fallacy. If/when the tests fail to show
a difference between A and B, one still doesn't know if A and B are the
same or not - which seems to me to make the test a bit of a waste of
time!


So in other words you pre-judge the outcome by asserting that there *is*
an audible difference between A & B. Then, if the test fails to support
this assertion you dismiss the test as flawed.

Hmmm...

David.

No pre-judging involved whatsoever. I have not "asserted" that A and B
are necessarily different. The same conclusion (quoted above) applies
whether A and B are different ot not. All I'm saying is that if such
a test fails to show a difference between A and B then that at the end
of the test you still have no "certainty" whether A is different to B
or not.

Malcolm