Re: HUM_FORUM: Dear Chip
- The "arrogance of science" lies in the belief that humans can
codify the so called "Laws" of scientific belief. The first thing
that "true and open scientific minds" discover is that there are
no "laws" in scientific knowledge that have not had to either be
modified or re-written to explain subsequent findings. Newton's
"Law of gravity" is a perfect example of this. and since nearly all
discoveries of the studies of Physics, Chemistry, and Biology base
their conclusions on the intrinsic "proofs" found in mathematical
formulae, obviousely, the "science" of Mathematics is vulnerable to
the same lack of imagination. Deductively, therefore, "science" is
merely a "best informed guess" as it's pinnacle, and an arrognt
refusal to admit other options exist at it's worst.
In firstname.lastname@example.org, "kallio_mn" <kallio_mn@...> wrote:
> --- In email@example.com, "Sandra Shultz" <sandnella@> wrote:
> > Science is an OPINION of the scientist studying the universe.
> > Nothing has been proven beyond a doubt.
> Science is not the opinion of the scientist. It is both the body of
> collected knowledge and the process of expanding that body of
> The drugs that can save your life are not the result of opinions.
> the advances in microelectronics that enables you to read thisand
> posting. They are the result of an organized discipline of thought
> As for doubt, that is the realm of a branch of mathematics called
> statistics. And like any other science, you can learn more there
> you would ever care to. But it does take the effort to look.
> Science has not done a good job promoting itself. That may be the
> result of its own intrinsic rewards. It often encounters resistance,
> such as the recent trend to dismiss something as "Fuzzy Science" by
> those who are political opposed to its findings.
> Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
26 out of 26 correct on the Distorted Tunes Test. Unfortunately, there is a bias on this test, as I am sure some younger people may not be familiar with all of the tunes used for the test.
Distorted Tunes Test: http://www.nidcd.nih.gov/tunetest/
Musical Listening Test: http://www.delosis.com/listening/home.html
Auditory Localization: http://www.psypress.com/mather/resources/topic.asp?topic=ch05-tp-03
Demo, the Precedence Effect: http://www.psypress.com/mather/resources/swf/Demo5_2.swf
Auditory Scene Analysis: http://www.psypress.com/mather/resources/topic.asp?topic=ch05-tp-05
It's actually interesting if you take the time to listen to the samples and compare it to the spectrograph. What seems incomprehensible to the eye on the spectrograph is readily discerned from the background noise/music by the ear: http://www-users.cs.york.ac.uk/~alistair/research/dphil/enm/asa/complex.html
Also Streaming: http://www.psypress.com/mather/resources/swf/Demo5_3.swf
Loudness Perception: http://www.psypress.com/mather/resources/topic.asp?topic=ch05-tp-01#ch05-it-01
As I ferret out other links, I'll post them as well.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Chip Johnson <chip@...> wrote:
> The link is strange indeed...but 23/27 is pretty darned good! However I wanted to direct you to the Auditory Localisation test. If you are able to get to the page that you just described (Pitch Perception), then look to the column on the left-hand side under Contents/5.Perception of Sound, the the third bullet down should be Auditory Localisation--> try clicking there and it should bring you to the correct test...
> Hope this works!