None of those comments show me "claiming you secretly agreed with me."
You continue undermining your credibility because you defend your ego with wild, incorrect claims about others. This is strange behavior right out of the old New Atheist age.
You say "You are so focused on winning a fight and nitpicking, you're totally neglecting frequency in your critique and leaning on dB as a crutch"
And then say the way I'm ignoring frequency is that sub 20 Hz can never be audible. But this is actually a factual disagreement we have. You're doing the same thing again.
I lose patience for being blatantly lied about, including lying about a Twitter thread anyone can read.
Speaking as a fan of your work mr M you're being slightly douchy here. This is the sort of rigorous disagreement it is worth engaging with even when you disagree with the argument imo.
I wrote 5000 words addressing the disagreement at the link! But Bear keeps throwing out terrible confused arguments and accusing me of dodging them, and instead of trying to find a common place where we can go through them one at a time he just throws out other new bad arguments and then new accusatory language. I don't know how someone could have written this post in good faith, each argument here is such a weird misreading of what I said. I answer everything at the link.
Like "Andy didn't mention sound pressure, so therefore I will title the first section 'he doesn't seem to know what a decibel is'" is a really bizarre move I can't read any other way than just trying to confuse the conversation.
Coming at it cold, he's taking roughly the same exasperated somewhat snarky tone you did in your initial article, and honestly there's more points of agreement between you than disagreement. It sucks when people get things wrong but imo it's worth trying hard to get over your emotional reactions, and looking for points of commonality.
I'll leave it there, i like your stuff and hope you keep it up
The lit review the first guy later posted in his defense says it might even be beneficial, which sounds like the exact opposite to me. Too much of your piece is riding on that exact phrase in the midst of the serious criticisms you both agree on.
My takeaway was the audibility threshold was important specifically because, above it, there is evidence and they have no disagreement. Not that it couldn't even theoretically affect the body. You even concede that he brings up a physiological response to subthreshold IS independently.
In any case, data centers are an essential part of being able to even read this response (on an ethically questionable site). I think the people who control them are largely terrible and will happily abuse their residential neighbors, and they need to be regulated within an inch of their existence, but so far low-pressure IS seems no more worthy of acknowledgment than the dragon in Carl Sagan's garage.
Staring at a bioluminescent tide on a sunny day might be more apt than a 500-nit screen.
There is decades-spanning scientific literature and studies on infrasonic and low-frequency sound waves and their interactions and effects on biological tissue and animal physiology - 'colossal' as described by the Portuguese scientists. At the scale of industrially generated, and therefore industrial intensity soundwaves, to argue that it is not injurious... it's odd how so many fail to mention what is known.
To reduce it to noise is misleading, because noise is defined by the individual. It takes responsibility away from the sources generating it, usually companies and corporations.
A sound is an oscillation - a vibration, it's kinetic/mechanic energy. See the use of low frequencies to put out fires.
It transcends the ear and it penetrates materials too. There is a cosmetic application of low frequency soundwaves to destroy fat - the problem is that it is exploding the whole cell, not just fat. That is dangerous.
I would like a write up on the issues with Jordan’s work here, sounds cool. Also dude is an anarchist? Fkn sick, thought he was just cool.
I hope Jordan can up the quality of his work if there are places to improve.
Andy sounds like a - He sounds like a uncool dude who is being actively harmful. giving him benefit of the doubt here does not seem equivalent to the props you give Jordan.
It seems Jordan did poor research and scientific inquiry at most.
He is uh … he is really getting too much credit. Jordan’s response seems pretty tame. It may be the assumption of insanity, or cookieness? Genuine suggestion, not an accusation. Because it feels like Jordan got a finger wag for being mad at someone for being mean. I am genuinely confused by the way you positioned each person. It may also be a accident in tone
Nah I do https://blog.andymasley.com/p/to-be-clear-i-do-understand-how-sound
So you just straight up lie about me in the intro. Feel free to demonstrate where any of what you said happened did.
I'm starting to not be willing to give you the benefit of the doubt anymore, my friend.
Here! https://x.com/AndyMasley/status/2046449238192570412 and here's where you claim infrasound is never audible https://x.com/AndyMasley/status/2046456215337611677. You lied about me over and over again in this post! If this "motte and bailey" was something else I'm happy to clarify. How exactly am I misrepresenting you here?
None of those comments show me "claiming you secretly agreed with me."
You continue undermining your credibility because you defend your ego with wild, incorrect claims about others. This is strange behavior right out of the old New Atheist age.
You say "You are so focused on winning a fight and nitpicking, you're totally neglecting frequency in your critique and leaning on dB as a crutch"
And then say the way I'm ignoring frequency is that sub 20 Hz can never be audible. But this is actually a factual disagreement we have. You're doing the same thing again.
I lose patience for being blatantly lied about, including lying about a Twitter thread anyone can read.
Speaking as a fan of your work mr M you're being slightly douchy here. This is the sort of rigorous disagreement it is worth engaging with even when you disagree with the argument imo.
I wrote 5000 words addressing the disagreement at the link! But Bear keeps throwing out terrible confused arguments and accusing me of dodging them, and instead of trying to find a common place where we can go through them one at a time he just throws out other new bad arguments and then new accusatory language. I don't know how someone could have written this post in good faith, each argument here is such a weird misreading of what I said. I answer everything at the link.
Like "Andy didn't mention sound pressure, so therefore I will title the first section 'he doesn't seem to know what a decibel is'" is a really bizarre move I can't read any other way than just trying to confuse the conversation.
Coming at it cold, he's taking roughly the same exasperated somewhat snarky tone you did in your initial article, and honestly there's more points of agreement between you than disagreement. It sucks when people get things wrong but imo it's worth trying hard to get over your emotional reactions, and looking for points of commonality.
I'll leave it there, i like your stuff and hope you keep it up
I guess none of my reactions feel emotional, just “oh this guy isn’t taking this seriously, it’s time to jump ship”
Typo thread. I noticed some minor typos related to articles, likely from rewrites:
'At a infrasonic frequencies', 'if taken with grain of salt', 'a low pitched sound and a low pitched sounds are audible'
The lit review the first guy later posted in his defense says it might even be beneficial, which sounds like the exact opposite to me. Too much of your piece is riding on that exact phrase in the midst of the serious criticisms you both agree on.
My takeaway was the audibility threshold was important specifically because, above it, there is evidence and they have no disagreement. Not that it couldn't even theoretically affect the body. You even concede that he brings up a physiological response to subthreshold IS independently.
In any case, data centers are an essential part of being able to even read this response (on an ethically questionable site). I think the people who control them are largely terrible and will happily abuse their residential neighbors, and they need to be regulated within an inch of their existence, but so far low-pressure IS seems no more worthy of acknowledgment than the dragon in Carl Sagan's garage.
Staring at a bioluminescent tide on a sunny day might be more apt than a 500-nit screen.
Yeah it's like they're not even really disagreeing here but they're doing it very angrily
There is decades-spanning scientific literature and studies on infrasonic and low-frequency sound waves and their interactions and effects on biological tissue and animal physiology - 'colossal' as described by the Portuguese scientists. At the scale of industrially generated, and therefore industrial intensity soundwaves, to argue that it is not injurious... it's odd how so many fail to mention what is known.
To reduce it to noise is misleading, because noise is defined by the individual. It takes responsibility away from the sources generating it, usually companies and corporations.
A sound is an oscillation - a vibration, it's kinetic/mechanic energy. See the use of low frequencies to put out fires.
It transcends the ear and it penetrates materials too. There is a cosmetic application of low frequency soundwaves to destroy fat - the problem is that it is exploding the whole cell, not just fat. That is dangerous.
I would like a write up on the issues with Jordan’s work here, sounds cool. Also dude is an anarchist? Fkn sick, thought he was just cool.
I hope Jordan can up the quality of his work if there are places to improve.
Andy sounds like a - He sounds like a uncool dude who is being actively harmful. giving him benefit of the doubt here does not seem equivalent to the props you give Jordan.
It seems Jordan did poor research and scientific inquiry at most.
He is uh … he is really getting too much credit. Jordan’s response seems pretty tame. It may be the assumption of insanity, or cookieness? Genuine suggestion, not an accusation. Because it feels like Jordan got a finger wag for being mad at someone for being mean. I am genuinely confused by the way you positioned each person. It may also be a accident in tone
Overall enjoyed the article