Kylie's LP Challenge

[Yttrium]

Who has the most reasonable position? You, or Bill?

Well, Bill has a point. I'm very fallible. So I'd say he has the more reasonable position. After all, the odds of an old record surviving this long unscathed aren't that good. I'm going to remain skeptical, though. Very, very skeptical.

However, since the record is in such great condition, I conclude that it doesn't really matter if it was scratched and repaired or not.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, Bill has a point. I'm very fallible. So I'd say he has the more reasonable position. After all, the odds of an old record surviving this long unscathed aren't that good. I'm going to remain skeptical, though. Very, very skeptical.

However, since the record is in such great condition, I conclude that it doesn't really matter if it was scratched and repaired or not.

Welcome to CF, Yttrium!

 

[SelfSim]

... This piece of paper says that the LP was once scratched, but brilliantly restored.

The real query here is about the claimed 'brilliant' restoration process.
I've personally never heard of a vinyl recording being 'restored' (other than by purchasing another copy of the same recording).
It is unlikely that the claimed process ever occurred and if it did, there would be evidence of either the original damage or the claimed restoration process on the LP surface itself.

Bill's claim and his opinions are irrelevant.

 

[Kylie]

First of all, I'm not sure what 'LP' stands for; sorry, I think it must be a cultural thing.

Long Play, it's a vinyl record.

I would say in your scenario, I think you're trying to give an equivalent to the Bible, for instance. I would say the analogy probably falls flat for several reasons:

a) The number of extant manuscripts showing that the scriptures do exist and are accurate are more than to show the Shakespeare's works are in tact.
b) The number of authors for the Bible is 40 or so; in your analogy, we're talking one person.
c) If it is the actual existence of God you are trying to get at, eye witness testimony to the existence of a person or multiple things that person does is completely sufficient in a court of law; so why is it not sufficient to prove God's existence?

Argument from popularity isn't going to cut it.

And eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.

 

[Kylie]

THIRD MESSAGE: Okay, now that I understand what the heck an LP is!

What claims of the Bible have been made that you tested that have not panned out and that you believe other Christians may have 'overlooked' simply because they trust that whatever God said is therefore true?

The creation account, for one.

 

[Kylie]

Ok, I will be the first to comment on this mysterious note claiming the brilliantly restored RECORD. What is the other evidence, you did not state, that makes this note unreliable?

I've given you everything you need to answer the question.

 

[Kylie]

The real query here is about the claimed 'brilliant' restoration process.
I've personally never heard of a vinyl recording being 'restored' (other than by purchasing another copy of the same recording).
It is unlikely that the claimed process ever occurred and if it did, there would be evidence of either the original damage or the claimed restoration process on the LP surface itself.

Bill's claim and his opinions are irrelevant.

You can blame AV for that, he's the one who first did a "challenge" with an LP that was restored...

 

[Justasurvivor]

Your friend Bill shows you an LP. It looks to be in pristine condition.

Bill has a piece of paper that was written by someone neither of you has met (Bill thinks it was the guy who used to live in his flat but moved away before Bill lived there, although he can't be sure). This piece of paper says that the LP was once scratched, but brilliantly restored.

You want to know if the paper's account is accurate, so you subject the LP to tests, but you can find no evidence to support the claim written on the paper (as well as several things which seem to contradict the paper's claim).

Bill, however, is under the impression that the guy who used to live in his flat was completely trustworthy, and since he also thinks that this guy wrote the paper, the claim written on it must be true. Bill also says that the things you found that contradict the paper's claim must simply be a result of your own fallibility.

Here's my challenge:

Who has the most reasonable position? You, or Bill?

dang, have u considered on making a youtube channel haha

 

[variant]

Is there a known way to unscratch a LP?