https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy Colin Jex en-us 2018-04-01 19:33:01 UTC 2023-04-03 02:15:35 UTC hello@padlet.com jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247693983 By: Colin Jex ]]> 2018-04-01 19:34:19 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247693983 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247694033 This website explains what Taos Hum is and it provides explanations into what it is they are hearing. One of the red flags I noticed in this article is confirmation bias. The theory states that everyone hears background noises but that in some parts of the world certain people can hear a noise. There is a different reason and explanation for why they hear these noises but it doesn't address that it can be heard in certain parts of the world, it does not explain what possible things could cause this. I believe the article does not explain certain things so that it can lead the readers to believe in the theory. ]]> 2018-04-01 19:35:13 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247694033 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247694900 This article on geek.com says that it has all of the answers to the world's Hum's. This article also has the red flag confirmation bias as well as red herring and mystical energy. Although the article has a lot of information it does not give any scientific proof and leaves the reader to interrupt what they say. I think the article has mystical energy in it because it says that it is the worlds natural sound and because of the position the combination of noises it can be thought that it is possible for only certain people to hear the noises. I believe that the article tries to distract the readers of more scientific proof. ]]> 2018-04-01 19:47:50 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247694900 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247695363 In this article the introduce Taos Hum and provide a few examples of what the noise resembles. I think that in this article the red flag that is most apparent is red herring. The article stats that only 2 percent of residents in the town are able to hear the noise and that the sounds are impeding sleep. The article does state that noise detecting equipment was placed around the town and nothing was detected. So although it does give scientific proof it tried to distract the readers by giving what the noises could be rather than further stating that the noises can not be proven. ]]> 2018-04-01 19:55:14 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247695363 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247695954 This video gives a background on the town and what noises could be. The video is dated back to many different stories of what people hear and what it does to them like rattling their teeth. Throughout this video the red flag the is very apparent is mystical energy. Many of the people in the video talk about what they think causes the noise. They talk about the crust of the earth being shallow, the volcanoes that used to be active there and on person stats that it could be an alien spaceship crashed into the hills and is making the noise from underground. In the video any scientific proof or reasoning isn't talked about but instead it gives stories and allows for the viewers to hear why it happens and believe that it is happening. Many people believe that it is because of some energy that is released from the earth. ]]> 2018-04-01 20:04:26 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247695954 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247696502 This video here is just a short video that is playing an audio clip of what is thought to be the noise heard. The video does not state what was used to detect the noise or provide any scientific reasoning. I believe the red flag in the video is unexplained. I think that because the video does not help explain the noise or give any information on it. I think because of that the video is not further explaining anything but is allowing the listeners to believe in the theory. If the video explained scientifically what was going on and compared it to other noises that are thought to be the cause it would be a very good form of proof. Because of that I don't believe this video helps to prove anything in this theory. ]]> 2018-04-01 20:12:34 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247696502 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247697418 In this video telegraph sounds some researchers to try to prove the noise with more of a scientific approach. Even though the team sent to investigate takes all the proper equipment a red flag throughout this video is confirmation bias. The team interviews locals that have heard the noise and this allows for them to believe they are hearing the noise but as stated in the video in is not possible to differentiate the difference between what noise they are searching for and just a quite background noise. Because the team is informed of what the noise sounds like it is very easy to believe that is what they are hearing when it could easily be explained as hydro lines or faint noises of machines and vehicles. ]]> 2018-04-01 20:22:30 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247697418 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247697839 This image is a photo of what is picked up on some devices. Although the image is trying to prove that the noise can be detected in the article with this image a red flag that is used is red herring. Throughout the explanation of the image the article provides facts that are not helping to prove the theory. Rather the facts are to distract and allow for the readers to distracted and use their own thinking to complete the points. By doing this it allows for people to come up with their own reasons and solutions for the noise. This allows for more people to believe in the theory rather than if more scientific facts are given less people would be lead to believing in the theory. ]]> 2018-04-01 20:29:26 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247697839 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247698552 This image is showing the town of Taos Hum and what the noise wavelengths looks like. Although this article talks about other places that the noise can be heard it does not provide any scientific reasoning specific to Taos Hum. Throughout the article the mystical energy is referenced multiple times. The article states that because of the earth emitting a low frequency hum and because of the locations of certain places it can be heard. The article doesn't state why only certain can hear it and why noise detecting devices are any able to prove what the noise is. ]]> 2018-04-01 20:40:03 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247698552 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247699199 This image is showing wavelengths of noise reaching the ear. The image however does not show how the Taos Hum is heard or what devices are used to hear it. A common red flag with this is unexplained. The article with the image is giving many different reasons on what the noise is however it doesn't further explain any theories rather it gives many different places where a noise can be heard. The article gives a lot of useless information on many different circumstances. I think it is very easy to come to your own conclusions with this article and not enough scientific proof is used for it to be considered a useful image. ]]> 2018-04-01 20:50:26 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247699199 jexy12 https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247699907 Answers to post #11.]]> 2018-04-01 21:01:42 UTC https://padlet.com/jexy12/s9fuq5s4homy/wish/247699907