Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Theseus
Well, Thank You.... you finally (inadvertantly) answered my question. I'm sure you didn't mean to, but you did.
Graham said; ".....just as it is impossible to prove there are no signal lines"
That's the answer I've been looking for all along, which proves No Matter what evidence I place here proving that signal lines do not exist - YOU (in your infinite wisdom  ) would not accept it, and WOULD NOT change your mind about signal lines. Wonderful!
Consequently, me going to the trouble of placing my test results and evidence here would be a huge waste of my time.
Thanks again for finally answering my question, even though you didn't mean to.  |
You are exactly right.
I wouldn't accept it unless you showed some ground-breaking new test method that could convince Carl-NC you succeeded in performing the impossible test.
Carl, Qiaozhi, me, and anyone with a basic understanding of testing theory know the limitations that make some claims impossible to disprove. We all know you have been passing off your opinions as fact while it is certain you never ran any tests that prove "signal lines" are imaginary. After seeing how you have nothing to show, appears obvious to me that you never ran any tests of "signal lines" or LRLs at all.
But you are wrong to think I didn't mean to answer your question. I answered it repeatedly in my posts above. You never asked the question if it is possible to make a scientific test that "proves signal" lines don't exist. You asked about content, data and format. I explained some basic testing theory for Goldfinder because he does not need to be persuaded to believe your claims that you made tests that prove "signal lines" are imaginary. I figured it might educate you as well when you read it. Maybe I was wrong about that.
It appears you are so ignorant of testing theory that you actually believe you can trick people into thinking you proved "signal lines" don't exist in a test. We still haven't seen any evidence you ran any kind of tests at all. Do you really expect anyone to believe you know how to design and conduct tests?
We spent three days watching the "Theseus Flying Circus" of fake BS testing claims for what?
So you can clog up the Remote Sensing forum with stories of Santa Claus, the The Tooth Fairy, fake testing and other hot air?
What was your purpose?
To demonstrate you make fraudulent claims?
To learn methods from LRL promoters weasel out of backing up your claims?
It's ok.
We know you, we love you, we can't live without you,
even if you tell us fake BS about your testing prowess.
Best wishes,
J_P