Tuesday
1 hour ago
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
My Blog List
-
-
-
Billion Dollar Electric Chargers3 hours ago
-
-
-
-
Reconstructing the Esper Reconstruction5 months ago
-
Energy output dented by wind drought5 months ago
-
ビタミンと勃起の関係9 months ago
-
What I’ve Been Up To10 months ago
Subscribe To
Posts
Comments
4 comments:
Recently Tom said, “I think Mennill cherry-picked these specific toots because they sorta-kinda sounded intriguing. You don't think the ARUs picked up a whole lot of other toots that didn't even make Mennill's very liberal cut?”
OK, so without ever having heard a toot himself, he picked a group of toots that were all about a tenth of a second longer than any historic recorded toots, editing out other random toots both equal in length to historic toots, and shorter than historic toots. Why he did this we don’t know. He cherry-picked carefully to generally correspond with the chronology of human detections that had already been documented before his analysis began, and in one case he lined up a toot within minutes of a Tyler Hicks record. He chose to neglect night toots, neglect toots an hour before dusk, and neglect toots an hour before dawn, while nonetheless continuing to successfully cherry-pick for pre-dawn double-knocks. Again, why he did this we don’t know, but none of his many analysts have blown the whistle so it seems they’re all in on this.
Now comes Richard Martin with the first humanly recorded toots, and guess what? They sound a lot like the range of toots Mennill selected long ago (without ever having heard one in the field himself). Possibly Martin is part of the cabal and in fact recorded countless other toots on his video recorder before selecting these few for release.
But seriously, what the Martin toots confirm is that the range of Mennill toots come from a single source, not from “lotsa’ things”. And wind is not the source.
pd
(Trees and branches sway at natural frequencies of their own. Low wind speeds or high wind speeds could initiate swaying, so I don’t think wind speed proves anything. But the metronome like pace of branch movements won’t create a sudden burst of sound producing interactions that are haphazard in both pitch and cadence.)
Hey PD,
Do you think that Cornell's Mobile Search team shares your apparent enthusiasm for these toots?
I don't know what they'll eventually say about these particular toots. However, if they have indeed already left "The Choc", I'd say they've clearly "voted with their feet".
Tom
Whatever happened to:
1. Get out of the canoe
2. Move towards "kent" sounds
3. Get video
????
You know, even if the IBWOs have now evolved to be more wary, sooner or later someone should be able to sneak up on one and get pics. But no. And, there should be "unfit" individuals for natural selection to continue to act negatively upon to maintain the "wariness."
But the metronome like pace of branch movements won’t create a sudden burst of sound producing interactions that are haphazard in both pitch and cadence
Branch movements are not necessarily metronome-like. Any interaction between adjacent branches will affect the pitch and cadence. Changes of wind speed/direction will also affect the sound produced.
Post a Comment