tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post7666176767355349854..comments2023-10-06T03:21:26.130-07:00Comments on trust but verify: The Winnowing: One Mint JulichDBrowerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17718913310467614671noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-50975323523222690222008-12-30T16:54:00.000-08:002008-12-30T16:54:00.000-08:00OMJ, it is good to see you appear here, even if it...OMJ, it is good to see you appear here, even if it is at the last minute! You have many fans on this site, me among them.<BR/><BR/>I had always hoped to get your reaction to my last magnum opus here, at <A HREF="http://trustbut.blogspot.com/2008/08/larrys-last-call.html" REL="nofollow">Bourbon and Beer</A>. <BR/><BR/>I have read you to say that the LNDD testing and the WADA delta-delta standard are fair topics for criticism, but that it is hard to get around a delta-delta reading of -6. That's a good argument, but it's based on the assumption that a delta-delta of -6 falls well outside of three standard deviations beyond the mean. The point of my last magnum opus is that the scientific studies fail to agree either on the mean or on the measurement of a delta-delta standard deviation. <BR/><BR/>I'm no scientist, but I can read a scientific study, and I can compare one study to the other. At least I think I can.<BR/><BR/>In any event ... I have learned a lot from you. Any reaction to my magnum opus would be appreciated. Thanks for all you've written, and best of luck to you in your future endeavors.Larryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08976868079076669453noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-31819641.post-77531402085921084412008-12-26T15:45:00.000-08:002008-12-26T15:45:00.000-08:00OMJ, It's nice to hear an honest, unbiased opinion...OMJ, It's nice to hear an honest, unbiased opinion on this matter.<BR/><BR/>However, I'll say right now that I feel you fail to realise the true significance of the practicalities of performing the IRMS test. It's not just my opinion, Dr Simon Davis has expressed a similar view that the "result" you get is very sensitive to how you process the data. It is easily possble to shift the results from a negative to a positive with but a nudge of the mouse. That's a fact which nobody wants to accept, but remains the truth.<BR/><BR/>I really don't think that fact was ever accepted by most observers ... maybe it just seems too unlikely that "science" could be so subjective. Well, let history judge this situation, not me. I know the facts. They're pretty easy to follow. It's a no brainer (as you Americans say). It all boils down to mathematics, and the numbers don't lie !<BR/><BR/>AlasdairAlihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00786387057717601356noreply@blogger.com