The science of opinion ...

I started to read the article but I only got as far as this. Then I stopped reading. Was that wrong? 

“At the scale of a group, repeated local influences among group members may give rise to complex patterns of opinion dynamics such as consensus formation, polarization, or fragmentation [8]–[11]. For example, it has been shown that people sharing similar extreme opinions, such as racial prejudices, tend to strengthen their judgment and confidence after interacting with one another [12]. Similar mechanisms of opinion dynamics can take place in a variety of social contexts.”

atdavid
I never used the word charlatan, but generally that word is assigned to someone who makes extraordinary claims, claims that they are unwilling to or can’t back up in something approaching a controlled situation where the claims can be verified or disproved.

>>>>>There it is! Just as I predicted two hours ago! It’s always the others who don’t understand. It’s the others who make false claims. It’s the others who are delusional.

I used to think this thread was a drama. Now I realize it’s a comedy. 🤡

By the way, your definition of charlatan is bogus, Ethan dude.

Two hours ago, I predicted two decades ago that people like you would never be honest and would always try to twist words to suit their attempted argument.

I am not making claims (for the most part), though I may be refuting claims. The burden of proof has always been on the one making the claim, especially when it goes against a vast established body of ... well real evidence. This really is a hard concept. "Trust me" ... only gets you so far.

It is totally totally weird how easy it is to set up something approaching a controlled situation for proving claims (and increasing sales) in audio, and yet no one does. I don’t mean most don’t do it, I don’t mean it is not done very often, I mean well never. When my company does something better than our competitors, we go out of our way to show our claims are factual. Strange huh .... you would think "trust us" would be more than enough, but no, they actually want us to prove it.

geoffkait18,071 posts11-07-2019 11:19am

>>>>>There it is! Just as I predicted two hours ago! It’s the others who don’t understand. It’s the others who make false claims. I used to think this thread was a drama. Now I realize it’s a comedy. 🤡 By the way, your definition of charlatan is bogus, Ethan.

"Just not so open that your brains fall out. It’s very messy and hard to clean up."

I disagree.

"Ethan is good with spinning numbers on a calculator or whatnot, but even a dog or horse can be trained to do that."

How big is the horse calculator? It has to be able to withstand lots of force.