That's it: looks like I originally used the word "is" but I later clarified my position.

I couldnt understand anything Erwin was posting [img]graemlins/cry.gif[/img]

It was meant to confuse people [img]smile.gif[/img] lol..

Well they didnt quote you paul. They at least could have quoted ya!!

paul's new sig :D

Paul Niwranski - false audio god & head lemming
Blow your mind - port your box..

D R A G U L A
Let us prey...
Old Skool is Too Kool..
Hey - if you don't like it send me an email or deal.

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

got to like this slam

"any real engineer would have imediatly recognized erwins technical premise, so it was not hard to identify the so called expert as a fraud"

so from this I read any real engineer would have recognized such a technical post as being from another engineer and would have imediatly agreed with it since it was technical and from another engineer and all

and because paul didn't agree he's abviously a fraud and not really an engineer......... [img]graemlins/puke.gif[/img]

I have no idea who was right or wrong there since it's way over my head but that above quote is total crap ............even an educated engineer type can be wrong........and to think people should just agree with him and not question just because he's educated is arrogant ........

what a load of crap :mad:

Very interesting.

"Originally a forum was intended as a meeting of learned people to exchanged and discuss issues."

A meeting of learned people?? Is there something wrong with that grammer or is it just me?


"In an opinion-based forum, you might discuss the effectiveness of the government. Two sides can come up with totally different viewpoints, yet both are valid and neither is really provable until after history is written." - Interesting enough, I consider this forum an opinion-based forum. To me what was happening in that thread was several sides of arguements. And since I don't think there is anyway to really "prove" which is right both points should be "valid". But I guess since Dukk didn't have the same view as an "expert" he was automatically wrong.


"There was on person, a so-called expert, who would spout a totally false premise and then announce that he was an engineer, causing the majority in the forum to beleive him." Interesting, isn't the author of this article doing the same. Pretty much saying his friend is an expert and if you don't beleive him or agree you are wrong.


I guess this guy has spent too much time behind a computer typing up stories then actually working in the field with cars and car audio. [img]graemlins/dunno.gif[/img] :confused:


But after reading this article, I can't wait to go over his troubleshooting pages and find mistakes! [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Sorry to say it man.. but it's just you :D

It reads a bit awkwardly but the word is pronounced like learn-ed and the grammar is fine.

The meeting of learned people just sounds weird.. i dunno lol..

Im with DuKK on that one, with his reflective theory and its true. However Myer did have some good points, but he wrote it in such a way that it was difficult for newbies to car audio to figure out.

SHY

[ August 01, 2003, 09:47 AM: Message edited by: ShYYLO ]

for 1, yes, it is learn-ned. for 2, i wouldnt exactly call derek lee someone who sits behind a desk writing storys, having no experience in car audio. (or matman for that matter)