“Injury to widespread brain networks” in victims of mystery attacks in Cuba

Doctors stumped by sonic experiences, doubt cause is viruses, delusions, or chemicals.

Read the whole story

 

[lewax00]

What I've always found creepy about this was that the symptoms pretty much exactly match what my dad experienced when he was having radiation therapy for brain cancer. Sometimes he'd hear things, other times he'd see weird colors, but every experience I've heard of reminded me of what he went through.

Except these people aren't "hearing things", they heard things. As in they don't keep hearing them anymore, and the sounds were recorded, so actually happened.

I heard that recording. It did not sound loud at all. Im calling bs on it being evidence of an attack.

So turn your volume up?

 

[lewax00]

What I've always found creepy about this was that the symptoms pretty much exactly match what my dad experienced when he was having radiation therapy for brain cancer. Sometimes he'd hear things, other times he'd see weird colors, but every experience I've heard of reminded me of what he went through.

Except these people aren't "hearing things", they heard things. As in they don't keep hearing them anymore, and the sounds were recorded, so actually happened.

I heard that recording. It did not sound loud at all. Im calling bs on it being evidence of an attack.

So turn your volume up?

Yes I did. At max volume it sounds like an annoying buzz. Not loud. Did you even listen to it before snark?

Ok, let me spell it out: saying the recording isn't very loud is a nonsense argument, because it can vary wildly from reality. There are too many factors involved: the capabilities and settings of the recording device, the position of the recording device relative the source of the noise, the settings and capabilities of the playback device, and position of the listener relative to the playback device, and so on...anyone can make it loud or quiet without actually changing the data.

It's like complaining that a case of beer wasn't cold at the supermarket because you store it in your pantry at home.

 

[lewax00]

Except these people aren't "hearing things", they heard things. As in they don't keep hearing them anymore, and the sounds were recorded, so actually happened.

I heard that recording. It did not sound loud at all. Im calling bs on it being evidence of an attack.

So turn your volume up?

Yes I did. At max volume it sounds like an annoying buzz. Not loud. Did you even listen to it before snark?

Ok, let me spell it out: saying the recording isn't very loud is a nonsense argument, because it can vary wildly from reality.

Presumably the person recording it was hearing it and wanted a good recording so would have recorded it in the same circumstance as he was hearing it. He would want it to be representative. Thats why he recorded it.
----------------------------------------------
Besides which, they are reporting repeated attacks. So then, why havent better recordings been made? The gear to record microwaves, infrasonics, and ultrasonics is ridiculously easy to come by. If they are interested in figuring it out then why have they not done this?

Because if it was an attack, the attacker likely would have stopped once found out, so recording now probably wouldn't going to do any good? Unless the attacker wanted to get caught it would be pretty damn stupid to continue.

If it's not, maybe they'll find something. But what evidence do you have that such devices haven't been deployed?

As far as the recording, it may have been captured by something set up to record something else, and only captured it coincidentally. Or captured on something of poor quality, like a cellphone. Or by someone who heard it, but wasn't in the location it was loudest. Etc. Again, the volume of the recording is entirely irrelevant. Just hook it up to a more powerful sound system and crank it up and suddenly it's a loud recording.

It's like complaining that a case of beer wasn't cold at the supermarket because you store it in your pantry at home.

More like saying that you were watching real footage of an eclipse on National Geographic.

Didn't even hurt a bit watching it on TV, so staring at the real eclipse should pose no threat at all. What's all the fuss about?

Yeah, that's a better analogy.