Pretty sure, the last time I checked, it's rather easy to determine the age of some bone or rock or whatever using carbon dating or some other technique. That's no secret.
- 43 posts total
- 43 posts total
IMO, for all the science behind it radiometric dating has some serious problems, including the assumptions about the samples. I have read of lava from eruptions less than 150 years ago dated in the tens of millions of years, and of a fresh killed animal dated at millions.
Such results call into serious question the efficacy of radiometric dating. Often the "wrong" results, those not supporting the reigning long age paradigm are tossed in favor of those which sit well with the theory.
There are always going to be comments about an amount on wire that is more than the component being out of perspective. There is only one perspective here and that is that if a power cord that costs thousands more than the component lets everything the component is capable of be revealed it is not a waste of money.
Say you are comparing a $20k CD player to an $8000 CD player, and say that as is often the case the $8000 one is actually capable of outperforming the much more expensive one. Would it be a fair comparison to use a $1500 cord on the cheaper one and a $3500 one on the expensive one? No, if the expensive cord is better it will give the expensive CD player an unfair advantage. Now if the same cord is used and the cheaper CD is actually better you have an $8k component and a $3500 cord that is a performance bargain compared to the $23k of the one that doesn't sound as good.
Middle of the road excellent equipment paired with extraordinary cable is going to sound better than extraordinary equipment with middle of the road performance cable.