Klarinet Archive - Posting 000624.txt from 2003/02

From: "Raycraft" <raycraft@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Impingo Wood Supply for Clarinets
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 19:01:07 -0500

"Up Paul's nose? How very cute!
Sue

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Leeson" <leeson0@-----.net>
Subject: Re: [kl] Impingo Wood Supply for Clarinets

> Thank you Kent. I am, of course, aware of the papers you mentioned,
> particularly the one about the flute, which presents the strongest
> argument. And I thank you for posting them in any case. I had planned
> to insert those references up Paul's nose as evidence of two things: (1)
> he has no idea of the extent of the literature that argues strongly
> against the point that he so boldly and foolishly made, and (2) his ad
> hominen remarks about him getting tired of my voicing opinions as facts
> (which, of course, is exactly what he did) was not an argument I chose
> to rise to.
>
> I think that he fails to understand where the burden of proof lies in an
> argument of this nature. In any discussion of scientific phenomena, the
> part who asserts a hypothesis as being true (i.e., "the sound character
> is a function of the material") must present evidence to defend that
> point, while the party who says, "There is no evidence to support that
> hypothesis," doesn't have to do anything. He or she need only sit back
> and wait.
>
> It is called the Godfather strategy, or the death by 1000 bites on the
> ass; i.e., one makes an offer that the other cannot refuse and then that
> party winds up like a whale in a bathtub.
>
> Dan

---------------------------------------------------------------------