I think you should make a YouTube video about this, or work with someone who will. Takedown videos do pretty well because people like drama, and it would get many orders of magnitude more views that this post
Depends in my view. His views tend to go against conventional wisdom in those areas as well.
At his worst I have always found he likes to overcomplicate things particularly when talking about workflows. It always seems like he adds at least 1-2 extra steps for esoteric reasons.
At the same time he makes interesting music, but he is also very unconventional and almost completely self taught.
Excellent writeup. As a working audio engineer, these video titles alone were lighting up my BS detector. Even most audio engineers don't really understand the decibel scale and SPL metrics because the field is so under-credentialized, so these topics are natural targets for this kind of fear mongering.
I can report from my work that there is a class of subwoofer in common use in high-end movie theaters and EDM concerts called infra-subs. This includes products like the D&B J-Infra and the Meyer VLFC (this one was actually originally developed for vibration testing in NASA labs). We use them when some special effect calls for some serious felt impact, like an explosion or a bass drop. Funnily enough, their use usually makes people smile, not vomit, convulse, or see ghosts!
I had not heard of this! I just read a few different sources and it was some very interesting history.
This seems to be some basic selection bias used for marketing purposes. I am reading that 800 cinemas were outfitted with the technology around the world, so naturally there would be some correlated instances of vomiting and headaches. I think the loosened plaster claim seems true and believable though. Grauman's Chinese Theater opened in 1927, and the Sensurround installations happened in 1974. I would expect 50+ year old plaster could be quite crumbly in any case.
For some frame of reference, these were dual-18" W-folded horn subwoofers driven by 1600W power amplifiers. These are really commonplace specs for modern systems other than the massive wood cabinet design- actually quite weak compared to whats used on high end concerts. The bulky folded horn cabinet would have been made them super efficient for their size and power, but still not anything that would match or exceed a modern design.
This was brave. I couldn't make it through the whole video when it first appeared, it just set off every pseudoscience/crackpottery alarm. Plus, Benn Jordan previously promoted a "data poisoning" tool against Suno - which was just conceptually nonsensical, not to mention scale-wise - and before that IIRC he was trying to fingerprint samples to prove copyright violations by them. So I'm assuming he has a serious prior grudge against AI.
There's fascinating and depressing psychology at work here, where AI is deeply associated with an intrinsic "wrongness" in some people's minds, paired with a weird kind of essentialism. So while ordinary industrial noise is a nuisance, AI data center noise casts an evil, sickening spell due to its corrupting "AI-ness". There's also likely some purity/authenticity thing going on here.
That's not the official explanation, of course, but it's very tempting for some people to believe that if AI can intrude on domains that were once exclusively human, it must still have something fundamentally wrong with it at the unseen deeper level.
I'm interested to hear what you think about the data-poisoning tool. I saw that video and I didn't really have any of the background knowledge to question it. Does it not work?
The architecture, training data and training code of Suno's current models hasn't been disclosed. (They did publish "Bark", a text-to-speech model with a research paper behind it three years ago, which presumably served as the original basis.) We can infer a few things from how the Suno site behaves, but that's really it.
So any "poisoning" attempt will be a) pure guesswork; b) untestable in a lab; c) unverifiable in practice. Meanwhile, no poisoning has ever been shown to work at scale, outside of a controlled experiment, and where the target model's architecture wasn't already fully known. The whole thing is like confidently designing a vaccine against an unknown or imaginary virus.
And if the idea is to disrupt or degrade future training, then you'd have to affect a significant fraction of the likely _millions_ of tracks in the training data. Tracks that Suno probably already pulled from Spotify / YouTube videos / ripped off CDs long ago. So it's also too little, too late.
But if instead the idea is to protect your own music against being trained on (that's assuming Suno is actively scraping Bandcamp for new songs, which seems unlikely), then sure, it's possible that Suno's data ingestion will flag the poisoned track as "low quality" or "broken" and ignore it. Or... the track will look perfectly fine in whatever latent space it's converted to. We just don't know.
And while I don't think he says it in so many words, though, he implies that if your music gets trained on, Suno may start to reproduce elements of your sound or songs. But nobody who understands AI well enough to be able to design - even in theory - any kind of poisoning would seriousy believe that.
The technical details are like the infrasound thing: they sound plausible because they're presented with conviction, that's all.
Thank you for this! I watched the original videos and totally fell for them. The claims sounded completely plausible. It's illuminating to hear that it was all wrong anyway.
It takes so much energy to refute misleading nonsense claims. Good job on this one.
One of the saddest realisations I’ve had is that the fundamental incentive structure of the attention economy is completely tilted against truth, nuance, and verifiability.
We have real environmental issues to deal with, we need to electrify our heating and modernise the grid, not rally against made up data center problems. But guess which one gets 1m views.
If there was ever a treasure trove of logical fallacies and pseudoscience, at least outside parapsychology and flat earth circles, Benn Jordan's videos on this topic are it.
As usual, an excellent critique. I especially liked that you looked at the papers Jordan flashes on the screen. I saw exactly what you did. They do not provide anything close to adequate support for his claims; some present potent counter evidence to his claims. Did he not read them or not understand them? Perhaps he should’ve used GenAI to help him navigate this territory. It’s not clear whether he’s being intentionally deceptive or just sloppy. But in either case, it’s a good example of what Harry Frankfurt called “bullshit,” speaking without a proper regard for truth. What’s demonstrably harmful is Jordan's systematic disregard for well-proven criteria of cogent reasoning. It’s becoming increasingly common to replace these with question-beginning narratives.
Let me illustrate.
His main claims are causal, but he presents no serious causal argument in anything I’ve seen. In fact, he gives us every reason to think that he doesn’t know what a cogent causal argument is even supposed to look like. He bludgeons us with textbook causal fallacies (e.g., confusing correlation and causation, post hoc, and false cause).
Also, apart from the nocebo effect, he doesn’t understand that, while it may be prima facie reasonable to accept people’s first-person reports (e.g., how they feel or what they've seen), it’s fairly rare that people can dial-in an accurate story about the cause(s) of their experiences. In general, people are not very good at causal reasoning, and the more nuanced the causal chain, the less reliable they are. This is why courts limit the content of eye-witness testimony, in contrast to expert testimony which is given more latitude and includes testimony involving inferences from observation.
One more. His videos are also full ad hominem rhetorical tricks. For example: "And it turns out that a lot of this research is either partially or completely funded by the fossil fuel industry to try and find something nefarious or wrong with wind energy.” As you rightly say, "What Jordan is not-so-subtly implying is that the infrasound research is invalid because fossil fuel money touched it." In addition to your sound counter to Jordan at this juncture, his comment is a circumstantial ad hominem. Now, if it were frosting on the cake of a robust critical engagement with the studies in question, I’d be happy to look the other way. But the problem is that these kinds of rhetorical maneuvers are consistently cheap "click-bait" styled substitutes for serious argumentation.
Generally, the reasoning in these videos is so bad that I could barely get through them, Andy. I may use them in my Critical Thinking classes. I'll have to assess whether it's morally justified to subject my students to a high level of predictable suffering. (They're already upset about having to write on Garry Nolan's ET arguments.) Regardless, I’m always looking for popular examples of poor reasoning. Social media is well that’s unlikely to ever go dry in its supply. So that's a silver lining I suppose.
I don't know very much about sound physics or public health, but I do spend a lot of my time reading and listening to stuff debunking and breaking down pseudoscience and conspiracy theories. And I have to say, when I watched Benn Jordan's infrasound data center video (because I was linked to it by an anti-AI advocate) it set off every alarm bell that I have. Starting with the fact that he flashed these studies up on the screen so fast it was impossible to catch what they were or read their abstracts, but then there was no list of sources, and more than that, that like literally the Wikipedia page on Infrasound says that data is — at the very least — extremely mixed and not particularly suggestive of Infrasound harms, and the fact that he never actually said what absolute decibel value he was measuring outside of these data centers.
So I can't say I'm particularly surprised to see this debunk, but I really appreciate how in-depth you went explaining every point and level at which he was wrong. It always takes a hundred times the effort to correct misinformation as it takes to spread it, but I appreciate you just the bite the bullet and invest the effort anyway.
It's really frustrating to me how invested people seem to be in complete misinformation about AI and AI data centers to around energy, water and infrasound, and it's even more frustrating to me that a lot of the people I'll link to this rebuttal will dismiss it out of hand because you are to their mind a fan of AI or whatever. I understand why people are so campus and close-minded and predisposed to accepting misinformation about this stuff — because of the labor cultural and power dynamic issues — but it's still frustrating.
You seem to be very confident that Benn Jordan is knowingly spreading misinformation. I'm a lot less confident about that.
My theory is that he confused low-frequency sound with infrasound during his "research". He had this preconceived notion that infrasound causes harm, searched for sources that agreed and was pretty careless.
It just seems too random to me that someone would spend so many months working on a project they know to be fake without being paid a lot by some interest group or something.
It would also explain why he reacted the way he did. You attacked him by making him out to be a grifter. He knows this isn't true, so he assumes that you must be paid to attack him. He didn't pay much attention to your object-level claims about the video because he assumed that those are full of shit.
If that's true, doing a call with him might actually resolve the disagreements.
I have been a fan of his music for a long time and have followed his career since the early 00s.
Incredibly talented musician and a complete idiot once you leave the domain of music production. He has been like that for decades.
This was the perfect trap as it is close enough to something he knows that he was overconfident in what he was saying and felt no need to research that deeply when he saw results he wanted.
Understandable. I think he's intelligent and could understand the studies, but he doesn't because of confirmation bias (which is extra strong (because he knows the videos will do well) and becomes even stronger over time (because of sunk costs)). I think he engaged in motivated stopping (He did a quick search, found some papers that look like they support his view and then stopped).
After I watched this Veritasium video: https://youtu.be/zB_OApdxcno, stuff like this doesn't seem surprising to me.
I think he feels okay with overstating findings and using tricks to seem more convincing but actually does believe he's correct (Infrasound probably causes harm, but is understudied).
I would give at least 6:4 odds that he's sincere, because I have a prior that most humans are good people (my model is that when people do evil stuff, it seems normal given their social environment, or they are psychopaths (but the former is not the case here (unless he has grifter friends or something) and the latter is unlikely)).
I will say this as someone who has followed his career as a fan of his music for decades at this point, he has a touch of narcissism that has always been present.
He has always gone off on social and political tangents half cocked from the beginning and get hyper defensive and his views tend to crumble quickly with any pushback.
A ridiculous conspiracy theory reply. I say over and over in the post that audible noise pollution is a real problem. You're effectively saying we can't ever comment on pseudoscience if there are separate reasons to be worried about something. I'm gonna block, I don't have time for insane moves like this.
This is great and important, thanks! But oh man is it a poster child for "It takes an order or magnitude more effort to refute bullshit than to create it."
Well, after about 3-4 days I finally finished reading this!
Funny enough, yesterday someone at my workplace (I work at a scientific institution) had posted a news article about the "negative effects" of infrasound. Your article armed me with some of the information to gently let them know that this was likely a non-issue.
ALSO funny enough Benn Jordan has shared another article on BlueSky today:
The article itself that he shared was published yesterday by the Guardian.
It was interesting how you presented this as a conspiracy theory, I hadn't really thought of it like that before - and the connection to "Wind Turbine Syndrome" is alarming. And I definitely agree that the public is armed to criticise data centres in any way they can, even if the issues are illegitimate. I suspect this is because the economy is down the toilet at the moment, and the massive expansion of data centres only offers a small amount of jobs in comparison to the car factories or mines of old. This is another real issue that data centre construction presents (just like AUDIBLE noise pollution, degrading air quality, etc.).
Eventually I'll get round to reading the scientific papers themselves to make sure you also aren't lying!
Horrible response for Benn, very obvious to the reader that you beat the bullshit asymmetry here when he refused to address a single substantive issue raised. I am very worried that his yt video now shows up in Gemini description to is infrasonic sound dangerous?
Yeah it’s pretty crazy. Most helpful thing to do is to share this if you’re up for it, more eyes means more pressure to actually confront the crazy problems with the videos.
Wow, I'm an acoustic expert dealing with misinformation on infrasound from wind turbines and your explanations were very clear and concise, well done! Much better than I can manage... I didn't know the same nonsense is being peddled for data centres, pretty much for the same reasons and psychological fear factor triggers... Other fun fact is a study by the great Geoff Leventhall (who I had the pleasure to meet many times) showing that internal process like blood pumping cause around 100dB at 1Hz in the inner ear....
I think you should make a YouTube video about this, or work with someone who will. Takedown videos do pretty well because people like drama, and it would get many orders of magnitude more views that this post
Yeah I think I will
those physics kids are about to learn the truth!!
You got this. I'm sure you have support in your network ot make it happen.
I preferred it when Benn Jordan was making videos about music production. Admittedly I am now worried about the validity of those videos too 😬
Depends in my view. His views tend to go against conventional wisdom in those areas as well.
At his worst I have always found he likes to overcomplicate things particularly when talking about workflows. It always seems like he adds at least 1-2 extra steps for esoteric reasons.
At the same time he makes interesting music, but he is also very unconventional and almost completely self taught.
Excellent writeup. As a working audio engineer, these video titles alone were lighting up my BS detector. Even most audio engineers don't really understand the decibel scale and SPL metrics because the field is so under-credentialized, so these topics are natural targets for this kind of fear mongering.
I can report from my work that there is a class of subwoofer in common use in high-end movie theaters and EDM concerts called infra-subs. This includes products like the D&B J-Infra and the Meyer VLFC (this one was actually originally developed for vibration testing in NASA labs). We use them when some special effect calls for some serious felt impact, like an explosion or a bass drop. Funnily enough, their use usually makes people smile, not vomit, convulse, or see ghosts!
I had not heard of this! I just read a few different sources and it was some very interesting history.
This seems to be some basic selection bias used for marketing purposes. I am reading that 800 cinemas were outfitted with the technology around the world, so naturally there would be some correlated instances of vomiting and headaches. I think the loosened plaster claim seems true and believable though. Grauman's Chinese Theater opened in 1927, and the Sensurround installations happened in 1974. I would expect 50+ year old plaster could be quite crumbly in any case.
For some frame of reference, these were dual-18" W-folded horn subwoofers driven by 1600W power amplifiers. These are really commonplace specs for modern systems other than the massive wood cabinet design- actually quite weak compared to whats used on high end concerts. The bulky folded horn cabinet would have been made them super efficient for their size and power, but still not anything that would match or exceed a modern design.
if you want this to reach the audience that took benn's video at face value should probably convert this to a video essay
This was brave. I couldn't make it through the whole video when it first appeared, it just set off every pseudoscience/crackpottery alarm. Plus, Benn Jordan previously promoted a "data poisoning" tool against Suno - which was just conceptually nonsensical, not to mention scale-wise - and before that IIRC he was trying to fingerprint samples to prove copyright violations by them. So I'm assuming he has a serious prior grudge against AI.
There's fascinating and depressing psychology at work here, where AI is deeply associated with an intrinsic "wrongness" in some people's minds, paired with a weird kind of essentialism. So while ordinary industrial noise is a nuisance, AI data center noise casts an evil, sickening spell due to its corrupting "AI-ness". There's also likely some purity/authenticity thing going on here.
That's not the official explanation, of course, but it's very tempting for some people to believe that if AI can intrude on domains that were once exclusively human, it must still have something fundamentally wrong with it at the unseen deeper level.
I'm interested to hear what you think about the data-poisoning tool. I saw that video and I didn't really have any of the background knowledge to question it. Does it not work?
The architecture, training data and training code of Suno's current models hasn't been disclosed. (They did publish "Bark", a text-to-speech model with a research paper behind it three years ago, which presumably served as the original basis.) We can infer a few things from how the Suno site behaves, but that's really it.
So any "poisoning" attempt will be a) pure guesswork; b) untestable in a lab; c) unverifiable in practice. Meanwhile, no poisoning has ever been shown to work at scale, outside of a controlled experiment, and where the target model's architecture wasn't already fully known. The whole thing is like confidently designing a vaccine against an unknown or imaginary virus.
And if the idea is to disrupt or degrade future training, then you'd have to affect a significant fraction of the likely _millions_ of tracks in the training data. Tracks that Suno probably already pulled from Spotify / YouTube videos / ripped off CDs long ago. So it's also too little, too late.
But if instead the idea is to protect your own music against being trained on (that's assuming Suno is actively scraping Bandcamp for new songs, which seems unlikely), then sure, it's possible that Suno's data ingestion will flag the poisoned track as "low quality" or "broken" and ignore it. Or... the track will look perfectly fine in whatever latent space it's converted to. We just don't know.
And while I don't think he says it in so many words, though, he implies that if your music gets trained on, Suno may start to reproduce elements of your sound or songs. But nobody who understands AI well enough to be able to design - even in theory - any kind of poisoning would seriousy believe that.
The technical details are like the infrasound thing: they sound plausible because they're presented with conviction, that's all.
Thank you for this! I watched the original videos and totally fell for them. The claims sounded completely plausible. It's illuminating to hear that it was all wrong anyway.
It takes so much energy to refute misleading nonsense claims. Good job on this one.
One of the saddest realisations I’ve had is that the fundamental incentive structure of the attention economy is completely tilted against truth, nuance, and verifiability.
We have real environmental issues to deal with, we need to electrify our heating and modernise the grid, not rally against made up data center problems. But guess which one gets 1m views.
i'd hate to be a random youtuber and see andy masley coming 😤
If there was ever a treasure trove of logical fallacies and pseudoscience, at least outside parapsychology and flat earth circles, Benn Jordan's videos on this topic are it.
As usual, an excellent critique. I especially liked that you looked at the papers Jordan flashes on the screen. I saw exactly what you did. They do not provide anything close to adequate support for his claims; some present potent counter evidence to his claims. Did he not read them or not understand them? Perhaps he should’ve used GenAI to help him navigate this territory. It’s not clear whether he’s being intentionally deceptive or just sloppy. But in either case, it’s a good example of what Harry Frankfurt called “bullshit,” speaking without a proper regard for truth. What’s demonstrably harmful is Jordan's systematic disregard for well-proven criteria of cogent reasoning. It’s becoming increasingly common to replace these with question-beginning narratives.
Let me illustrate.
His main claims are causal, but he presents no serious causal argument in anything I’ve seen. In fact, he gives us every reason to think that he doesn’t know what a cogent causal argument is even supposed to look like. He bludgeons us with textbook causal fallacies (e.g., confusing correlation and causation, post hoc, and false cause).
Also, apart from the nocebo effect, he doesn’t understand that, while it may be prima facie reasonable to accept people’s first-person reports (e.g., how they feel or what they've seen), it’s fairly rare that people can dial-in an accurate story about the cause(s) of their experiences. In general, people are not very good at causal reasoning, and the more nuanced the causal chain, the less reliable they are. This is why courts limit the content of eye-witness testimony, in contrast to expert testimony which is given more latitude and includes testimony involving inferences from observation.
One more. His videos are also full ad hominem rhetorical tricks. For example: "And it turns out that a lot of this research is either partially or completely funded by the fossil fuel industry to try and find something nefarious or wrong with wind energy.” As you rightly say, "What Jordan is not-so-subtly implying is that the infrasound research is invalid because fossil fuel money touched it." In addition to your sound counter to Jordan at this juncture, his comment is a circumstantial ad hominem. Now, if it were frosting on the cake of a robust critical engagement with the studies in question, I’d be happy to look the other way. But the problem is that these kinds of rhetorical maneuvers are consistently cheap "click-bait" styled substitutes for serious argumentation.
Generally, the reasoning in these videos is so bad that I could barely get through them, Andy. I may use them in my Critical Thinking classes. I'll have to assess whether it's morally justified to subject my students to a high level of predictable suffering. (They're already upset about having to write on Garry Nolan's ET arguments.) Regardless, I’m always looking for popular examples of poor reasoning. Social media is well that’s unlikely to ever go dry in its supply. So that's a silver lining I suppose.
I don't know very much about sound physics or public health, but I do spend a lot of my time reading and listening to stuff debunking and breaking down pseudoscience and conspiracy theories. And I have to say, when I watched Benn Jordan's infrasound data center video (because I was linked to it by an anti-AI advocate) it set off every alarm bell that I have. Starting with the fact that he flashed these studies up on the screen so fast it was impossible to catch what they were or read their abstracts, but then there was no list of sources, and more than that, that like literally the Wikipedia page on Infrasound says that data is — at the very least — extremely mixed and not particularly suggestive of Infrasound harms, and the fact that he never actually said what absolute decibel value he was measuring outside of these data centers.
So I can't say I'm particularly surprised to see this debunk, but I really appreciate how in-depth you went explaining every point and level at which he was wrong. It always takes a hundred times the effort to correct misinformation as it takes to spread it, but I appreciate you just the bite the bullet and invest the effort anyway.
It's really frustrating to me how invested people seem to be in complete misinformation about AI and AI data centers to around energy, water and infrasound, and it's even more frustrating to me that a lot of the people I'll link to this rebuttal will dismiss it out of hand because you are to their mind a fan of AI or whatever. I understand why people are so campus and close-minded and predisposed to accepting misinformation about this stuff — because of the labor cultural and power dynamic issues — but it's still frustrating.
You seem to be very confident that Benn Jordan is knowingly spreading misinformation. I'm a lot less confident about that.
My theory is that he confused low-frequency sound with infrasound during his "research". He had this preconceived notion that infrasound causes harm, searched for sources that agreed and was pretty careless.
It just seems too random to me that someone would spend so many months working on a project they know to be fake without being paid a lot by some interest group or something.
It would also explain why he reacted the way he did. You attacked him by making him out to be a grifter. He knows this isn't true, so he assumes that you must be paid to attack him. He didn't pay much attention to your object-level claims about the video because he assumed that those are full of shit.
If that's true, doing a call with him might actually resolve the disagreements.
I feel like it’d just be massively disrespectful to him to assume he couldn’t understand the studies. Idk maybe that’s wrong
I have been a fan of his music for a long time and have followed his career since the early 00s.
Incredibly talented musician and a complete idiot once you leave the domain of music production. He has been like that for decades.
This was the perfect trap as it is close enough to something he knows that he was overconfident in what he was saying and felt no need to research that deeply when he saw results he wanted.
Understandable. I think he's intelligent and could understand the studies, but he doesn't because of confirmation bias (which is extra strong (because he knows the videos will do well) and becomes even stronger over time (because of sunk costs)). I think he engaged in motivated stopping (He did a quick search, found some papers that look like they support his view and then stopped).
After I watched this Veritasium video: https://youtu.be/zB_OApdxcno, stuff like this doesn't seem surprising to me.
I think he feels okay with overstating findings and using tricks to seem more convincing but actually does believe he's correct (Infrasound probably causes harm, but is understudied).
I would give at least 6:4 odds that he's sincere, because I have a prior that most humans are good people (my model is that when people do evil stuff, it seems normal given their social environment, or they are psychopaths (but the former is not the case here (unless he has grifter friends or something) and the latter is unlikely)).
I will say this as someone who has followed his career as a fan of his music for decades at this point, he has a touch of narcissism that has always been present.
He has always gone off on social and political tangents half cocked from the beginning and get hyper defensive and his views tend to crumble quickly with any pushback.
A ridiculous conspiracy theory reply. I say over and over in the post that audible noise pollution is a real problem. You're effectively saying we can't ever comment on pseudoscience if there are separate reasons to be worried about something. I'm gonna block, I don't have time for insane moves like this.
CGP Grey video about Nocebo effect. Alas, it starts with ultrasound, rather than infrasound.
https://youtu.be/O2hO4_UEe-4?si=5wydOp2jELCVTfyY
This is great and important, thanks! But oh man is it a poster child for "It takes an order or magnitude more effort to refute bullshit than to create it."
Well, after about 3-4 days I finally finished reading this!
Funny enough, yesterday someone at my workplace (I work at a scientific institution) had posted a news article about the "negative effects" of infrasound. Your article armed me with some of the information to gently let them know that this was likely a non-issue.
ALSO funny enough Benn Jordan has shared another article on BlueSky today:
https://bsky.app/profile/bennjordan.bsky.social/post/3mkjl6y4hms2y
The article itself that he shared was published yesterday by the Guardian.
It was interesting how you presented this as a conspiracy theory, I hadn't really thought of it like that before - and the connection to "Wind Turbine Syndrome" is alarming. And I definitely agree that the public is armed to criticise data centres in any way they can, even if the issues are illegitimate. I suspect this is because the economy is down the toilet at the moment, and the massive expansion of data centres only offers a small amount of jobs in comparison to the car factories or mines of old. This is another real issue that data centre construction presents (just like AUDIBLE noise pollution, degrading air quality, etc.).
Eventually I'll get round to reading the scientific papers themselves to make sure you also aren't lying!
Thanks for the post.
Flattered you read through the whole thing!
Horrible response for Benn, very obvious to the reader that you beat the bullshit asymmetry here when he refused to address a single substantive issue raised. I am very worried that his yt video now shows up in Gemini description to is infrasonic sound dangerous?
Yeah it’s pretty crazy. Most helpful thing to do is to share this if you’re up for it, more eyes means more pressure to actually confront the crazy problems with the videos.
For sure commented on the yt too but probably will be drowned out, video essay would be great!
Wow, I'm an acoustic expert dealing with misinformation on infrasound from wind turbines and your explanations were very clear and concise, well done! Much better than I can manage... I didn't know the same nonsense is being peddled for data centres, pretty much for the same reasons and psychological fear factor triggers... Other fun fact is a study by the great Geoff Leventhall (who I had the pleasure to meet many times) showing that internal process like blood pumping cause around 100dB at 1Hz in the inner ear....