Quote Originally Posted by Monstrous Mike
Umm, because they hit that 1 in 17 chance thingy?

Surely you know that if you flip a coin long enough you are going to get ten heads in a row. Does this mean the coin is imbalanced? Hey, I hit 20 free throws in a row once. Does this mean I have a good shot? No, it means that some days, the sun even shines on a dog's ass.

You can't isolate test results to support your theories. You wouldn't let me do it and I won't let you do it.
I've already addressed the coin flip analogy, which is not appropriate. I'm surprised you don't see the difference. Or did you just think I would be too stupid not to see it.

That analogy assumes all listeners are identical as to hearing ability, experience and training (remember, your god, Dr. Toole, say training of the listeners is very important). Every flip of the coin is equivalent. But each listener is a unique "packet" and different from all the other "packets". In a coin toss I can pick any interval of 15 tosses I want in order to come up with the particular ratio out of 15 tosses I'm looking for. Can't do that with the individual "packets".

I don't claim the McLaren tests show anything reliable because of the two subjects that hit 11 or 15. However, if they came back 4 or 5 times and repeated that performance, only a few people such as yourself would find some weird way of ignoring those results.