Looking for Skeptics

Status
Not open for further replies.
scrappy said:
I don't understand your reaction? She asked for a file with volume normal.If you drop this attitude we could move forward and prove Flaccon to be deluded or not.
Click to expand...
The attitude is of your making. Your claims which you will not support, your reluctance to listen to any samples we create, your strange insistence on emailed file when we all know it makes not a whit of difference. Don't you think this behaviour is just a little frustrating? No?

Put up, scrappy. Give us the file or files you think have clear voices and sentences. Why is it you refuse that?
 
abaddon said:
The attitude is of your making. Your claims which you will not support, your reluctance to listen to any samples we create, your strange insistence on emailed file when we all know it makes not a whit of difference. Don't you think this behaviour is just a little frustrating? No?

Put up, scrappy. Give us the file or files you think have clear voices and sentences. Why is it you refuse that?
Click to expand...

Because there's no such thing?

Lies.
 
Last edited:
scrappy said:
There is nothing rude in requesting a file. All we have asked for is a recording made on volume normal. Ref to 4412 Tracy knows who I refer to as cowards and its no one on this site.
Click to expand...

Volume normal is so vague as to be meaningless.
What you've been given is a normalized recording. That has the specific meaning of amplifying the signal so that the loudest noise in the recording is as loud as the digital format will permit without distorting the sound.
If you don't need it that loud, simply turn down the volume when playing it back.
 
scrappy said:
There is nothing rude in requesting a file. All we have asked for is a recording made on volume normal. Ref to 4412 Tracy knows who I refer to as cowards and its no one on this site.
Click to expand...
But there is something rude in insisting that it has not been provided even when it has again, and again, and again.

And how rude is it that you refuse to provide your file? Do the rules not apply to you? I shall request again. Send me the file containing clear voices and full sentences. You now have my addy.
 
Scrappy and flaccon won't come up with any sensible answers. They both know that ghosts aren't real. They are just trying to make a big enough smokescreen to cover the lack of evidence and the fact that they themselves proved that when people die, they are gone and lost forever.

Flaccon will not agree to a protocol. She has no interest in it.
Breach of rules 0/12 removed. Do not insult others posters.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Cuddles
 
Last edited by a moderator:
TjW said:
Volume normal is so vague as to be meaningless.
Click to expand...

But flaccon doesn't have the technical knowledge to describe what recording level she wants.

She just wants files which sound like what happens on her own laptop if she makes a webcam recording in a quiet room.

Looking at (I forget which file it was now - the one which got quieter at 21 seconds) on an oscilloscope, the waveform looked square and castellated. That suggested to me that, like a blocky pixellated image, the quieter section is right at the very limit of its ability to record any detail. Only one or two least significant bits were active.

Anyway, I figure flaccon just wants some files with quiet ambient background noise so I made some. Her current claim is that the original files will change when she listens to emailed copies and I'm willing to indulge her in that testable claim.

If flaccon sends me an email address in a Private Message I'll send the files directly. Otherwise I'm happy to let a proxy forward them.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
But flaccon doesn't have the technical knowledge to describe what recording level she wants.
She just wants files which sound like what happens on her own laptop if she makes a webcam recording in a quiet room.
Looking at (I forget which file it was now - the one which got quieter at 21 seconds) on an oscilloscope, the waveform looked square and castellated. That suggested to me that, like a blocky pixellated image, the quieter section is right at the very limit of its ability to record any detail. Only one or two least significant bits were active.

Anyway, I figure flaccon just wants some files with quiet ambient background noise so I made some. Her current claim is that the original files will change when she listens to emailed copies and I'm willing to indulge her in that testable claim.

If flaccon sends me an email address in a Private Message I'll send the files directly. Otherwise I'm happy to let a proxy forward them.
Click to expand...

This seems right to me. If I'd understood that a little more clearly, that's what I would have done. But I don't think flaccon is to blame for not having technical knowledge about sound.
 
calebprime said:
This seems right to me. If I'd understood that a little more clearly, that's what I would have done. But I don't think flaccon is to blame for not having technical knowledge about sound.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but why not? There is plenty of information out there about sound recording. If you're going to have a whole worldview build around sound recordings, a bit of research is in order, no?

Not knowing much to start with, I understand. But unwilling to learn? That's just dishonest.
 
calebprime said:
This seems right to me. If I'd understood that a little more clearly, that's what I would have done. But I don't think flaccon is to blame for not having technical knowledge about sound.
Click to expand...

OK I spent 5 years teaching tech and you cannot blame any individual for lack of knowledge. What you can do is pass on that which you have learned to those receptive to it. Flaccon seems to revel in her lack of knowledge, indeed, to celebrate it.
 
Maurice Ledifficile said:
Sorry, but why not? There is plenty of information out there about sound recording. If you're going to have a whole worldview build around sound recordings, a bit of research is in order, no?

Not knowing much to start with, I understand. But unwilling to learn? That's just dishonest.
Click to expand...
Disagree, to an extent. There are buckets of folks out there who cannot tell their mouse from their modem. That is no aspersion on them, they simply have no reason to know. I have a neighbour, in her late seventies, who has not a clue about computers. She happens to want to use Skype to communicate with one of her daughters, yet has no clue how it works. Now she does, since I explained it all, and she glommed onto it no problem.

Flaccon is the reverse. She has somehow decided that she knows how it works, and everyone else is wrong. How? Dunno. Why? Dunno.
 
scrappy said:
Yes I did, and there where 4 of us present. The lady in question explained to us what the spirits meant when they spoke with her on a personal level.
Click to expand...

Sounds like your run of the mill seance.

ETA:If flaccon had said she could manifest the spirit world while in a box you'd all laugh but since she has wrapped it into a computer everyone feels obligated to explain it.
 
Last edited:
I just emailed scrappy two files of ambient noise recorded with Sound Recorder on my trusty old laptop;

8.wav with the MD5 hash 25A587F493B73AE50550E054336034DA
10.wav with the MD5 hash 665E15FD29F3BB0564B521EC03FE2401
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom