Wire is Wire - The Proof

[Rikki]

But the point is that personal observations are not proof of anything, especially considering how our observations can be, and are often, fallible.

Personal observations can be fallible. However, personal observations can also be enough "proof" to put someone in jail for the rest of their life, if say you alone see/hear someone commit a crime and others believe you "beyond a reasonable doubt".

I'll take personal observation advice over a geek in a laboratory with a muitimeter crunching numbers anyday when it comes to spending thousands of dollars on audio equipment. If I, or a jury of my peers, can't hear the difference, then there is no difference.

And I still say wire is wire beyond a reasonable doubt. The prosecution now rests

[Monstrous Mike]

However, personal observations can also be enough "proof" to put someone in jail for the rest of their life, if say you alone see/hear someone commit a crime and others believe you "beyond a reasonable doubt".

Are you kidding me? One guy says A, the other says B. Why would you believe one over the other? The answer is you wouldn't. You need a hell of a lot more evidence before believing one guy over the other.

If personal observations were enough "proof" to put somebody away for life, then it would be pretty easy to lock away somebody you didn't like, now wouldn't it?

If you ever get called for jury duty, all the defendant's lawyer would have to do is dig up this thread and you be tossed in a minute.

[Mike That Likes Music]

No one wants to say anything about my last post? It was 3 days ago. I was asked to come up with data, and I cited physical law. I have yet to hear from anyone on either side of this thing. So I'll reask the question: Are cables exempt from physical law? (see my last post for my whole argument) I'd love to slice one of those things open and take a REALLY close look at the conductors, but sadly my scanning electron microscope is in the shop (having its tires rotated).
To those who just want to stir the pot or raise language-use issues over other's postings, please ignore this. I'm looking for a well thought out response here.
And remember, lack of proof is not disproof. 50,000 years ago, every time it thundered it was because the gods were angry. Now we have solid scientific evidence of why thunder happens. Anyone think they'll ever come up with a scientific way to end this argument?
Mike