If you go to this link and listen to it 3 times in a row…. you tell me why the church banned this ghost band?
Please leave your comments on the original page… and wait to see what happens….guess what the church was scared off???
lets see who posts the right answer before October 31 2010
Banned by the Catholic Church
Categories: Sound Oddities
Sound Clip: Shepard Tone by Roger Shepard
This is a classic sound oddity and illusion. Or is it? There are some corrections to this post with much discussion, see below and follow the trail of comments to clarify the inaccuracies.
“It is rumored to be called the “devil’s tone” by the Catholic church. The Shepard tone is a sound consisting of a superposition of sine waves separated by octaves. When played with the base pitch of the tone moving upwards or downwards, it is referred to as the
Shepard Scale. This creates an auditory illusion that continually ascends or descends in pitch, yet which ultimately seems to get no higher or lower.”
Corrections here and below in comments from Brent Williams:
“Baned by the Catholic Church“, about a Shepard-Risset Glissando. This post contained links to certain webpages, but when the post went up (even before it was moderated) the links were missing. Just in case you want to put them up for your readers, here they are:
The original source page for this sound file is here . It is in French.
You can find the Wiki source page here . This contains a little more info on the sound. This is where I confirmed that the sound is a minor chord of synchronised Shepard-Risset glissandi.
Read about Diana Deutsch here . She is currently a Professor at UCSD.
All the best, and please continue with your excellent website.
Categories: Sound Oddities -
BEIJING (Reuters) – Senior Chinese military officers have proposed that their country boost defense spending, adjust PLA deployments, and possibly sell some U.S. bonds to punish Washington for its latest round of arms sales to Taiwan.
The calls for broad retaliation over the planned U.S. weapons sales to the disputed island came from officers at China’s National Defence University and Academy of Military Sciences, interviewed by Outlook Weekly, a Chinese-language magazine published by the official Xinhua news agency.
The interviews with Major Generals Zhu Chenghu and Luo Yuan and Senior Colonel Ke Chunqiao appeared in the issue published on Monday.
The People’s Liberation Army (PLA) plays no role in setting policy for China’s foreign exchange holdings. Officials in charge of that area have given no sign of any moves to sell U.S. Treasury bonds over the weapons sales, a move that could alarm markets and damage the value of China’s own holdings.
While far from representing fixed government policy, the open demands for retaliation by the PLA officers underscored the domestic pressures on Beijing to deliver on its threats to punish the Obama administration over the arms sales.
“Our retaliation should not be restricted to merely military matters, and we should adopt a strategic package of counter-punches covering politics, military affairs, diplomacy and economics to treat both the symptoms and root cause of this disease,” said Luo Yuan, a researcher at the Academy of Military Sciences.
“Just like two people rowing a boat, if the United States first throws the strokes into chaos, then so must we.”
Luo said Beijing could “attack by oblique means and stealthy feints” to make its point in Washington.
“For example, we could sanction them using economic means, such as dumping some U.S. government bonds,” Luo said.
The warnings from the PLA come after weeks of strains between Washington and Beijing, who have also been at odds over Internet controls and hacking, trade and currency quarrels, and President Barack Obama’s planned meeting with the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan leader reviled by China as a “separatist.”
MILITARY SPENDING BOOST
Chinese has blasted the United States over the planned $6.4 billion arms package for Taiwan unveiled in late January, saying it will sanction U.S. firms that sell weapons to the self-ruled island that Beijing considers a breakaway province of China.
China is likely to unveil its official military budget for 2010 next month, when the Communist Party-controlled national parliament meets for its annual session.
The PLA officers suggested that budget should mirror China’s ire toward Washington.
“Clearly propose that due to the threat in the Taiwan Sea, we are increasing military spending,” said Luo.
Last year, the government set the official military budget at 480.7 billion yuan ($70.4 billion), a 14.9 percent rise on the one in 2008, continuing a nearly unbroken succession of double-digit increases over more than two decades.
The fresh U.S. arms sales threatened Chinese military installations on the mainland coast facing Taiwan, and “this gives us no choice but to increase defense spending and adjust (military) deployments,” said Zhu Chenghu, a major general at China’s National Defence University in Beijing.
In 2005, Zhu stirred controversy by suggesting China could use nuclear weapons if the United States intervened militarily in a conflict over Taiwan.
The United States switched official recognition from Taiwan to China in 1979. But the Taiwan Relations Act, passed the same year, guarantees Taiwan a continued supply of defensive weapons.
China has the world’s biggest pile of foreign currency reserves, much of it held in U.S. treasury debt. China held $798.9 billion in U.S. Treasuries at end-October.
But any attempt to use that stake against Washington would probably maul the value of China’s own dollar-denominated assets.
China has condemned previous arms sales, but has taken little action in response to them. But Luo said the country’s growing strength meant that time has passed.
“China’s attitude and actions over U.S. weapons sales to Taiwan will be increasingly tough,” the magazine cited him as saying. “That is inevitable with rising national strength.”
(Editing by Jeremy Laurence)
- Tania Branigan in Beijing and agencies
- guardian.co.uk, Sunday 24 January 2010 15.49 GMT
- Article history
A protest over the Iranian election in Washington last June. Photograph: Molly Riley/Reuters
The United States used “online warfare” to stir up unrest in Iran after last year’s elections, the Chinese Communist party newspaper claimed today, hitting back at Hillary Clinton’s speech last week about internet freedom.
An editorial in the People’s Daily accused the US of launching a “hacker brigade” and said it had used social media such as Twitter to spread rumours and create trouble.
“Behind what America calls free speech is naked political scheming. How did the unrest after the Iranian election come about?” said the editorial, signed by Wang Xiaoyang. “It was because online warfare launched by America, via YouTube video and Twitter microblogging, spread rumours, created splits, stirred up and sowed discord between the followers of conservative reformist factions.”
Washington said at the time of the unrest that it had asked Twitter, which was embraced by Iranian anti-government protesters, to remain open. Several social media sites, including YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, have been blocked in China in the last year.
The editorial asked rhetorically whether obscenity or activities promoting terrorism would be allowed on the net in the US. “We’re afraid that in the eyes of American politicians, only information controlled by America is free information, only news acknowledged by America is free news, only speech approved by America is free speech, and only information flow that suits American interests is free information flow,” it added.
It attacked the decision to cut off of Microsoft’s instant messaging services to nations covered by US sanctions, including Cuba, Iran, Syria, Sudan and North Korea, as violating America’s stated desire for free information flow. Washington later said that such services fostered democracy and encouraged their restoration.
China initially gave a low-key response to Google’s announcement that it was no longer willing to censor google.cn. The internet giant said it had reached its decision following a Chinese-originated cyber attack targeting the email accounts of human rights activists, and in light of increasing online censorship.
Clinton’s direct challenge to China, in a speech that had echoes of the cold war with its references to the Berlin wall and an “information curtain”, led Beijing to warn that US criticism could damage bilateral relations. Clinton called on China to hold a full and open investigation into the December attack on Google.
In an interview carried by several Chinese newspapers today, Zhou Yonglin, deputy operations director of the national computer network emergency response technical team, said: “Everyone with technical knowledge of computers knows that just because a hacker used an IP address in China, the attack was not necessarily launched by a Chinese hacker.”
US diplomats sought to reach out to the Chinese public by briefing bloggers in China on Friday. They held a similar meeting during Barack Obama’s visit in November.
Pyramids of Control
December 28, 2009
|We can be pretty sure that this new technology will be implemented, pronto, with its full capability, and with no choice to opt-out: mission accomplished.|
The holiday season has greeted us with “Terr’ists” who prefer their underwear to their shoes (and they need well-dressed escorts when they forget their passport). It would all seem ridiculous if it hadn’t already caused a dramatic increase in airport security, as people are now being told to show up 4 hours in advance for international flights. This is a rather large problem. For those in the business of creating problems, though, this was a well-chosen stratagem for eliciting the all-important reaction; is there ever a more stressful time or event than Christmas travel? So, as dot connectors, we need to look at what solutions are being offered for this problem. Enter stage left (and right): Tyranny.
1. The new 3D body scanning device that makes us all more naked than naked was met with faux consternation when it was first revealed. It was, naturally, played down. But we can be pretty sure that this new technology will be implemented, pronto, with its full capability, and with no choice to opt-out: mission accomplished.
2. Prisoner training. After the hassle of actually getting to, and getting on the plane, it will literally be prison-like conditions once aboard. No electronic devices or hand-held items (books), and no bathroom breaks for the last hour of the flight. As DHS Secretary Napolitano stated on the TSA website:
Passengers flying from international locations to U.S. destinations may notice additional security measures in place. These measures are designed to be unpredictable, so passengers should not expect to see the same thing everywhere. Due to the busy holiday travel season, both domestic and international travelers should allot extra time for check-in.
3. The Patriot Act: As of December 16, the renewal of the Patriot Act in its present form was still being disputed, delayed, and debated. Pretty sure it will be sailing through, with even more draconian measures attached: mission accomplished.
4. Expanding the war (s). Yemen? Who knew? Well now the world knows that it is near Pakistan, Afghanistan . . . heck, it’s in the Middle East — TERRORISTS — BOMBS AWAY! No Congress, no discussion needed: mission accomplished.
5. The African connection. They have been working on Africom legitimacy for a while. Underwear bombers from Nigeria with connections to Yemen (and born in England?): mission accomplished.
6. (More) Military presence on American soil. Let it not be said that there isn’t freedom somewhere in America — you just have to be part of NORTHCOM or INTERPOL. Total freedom to investigate, abuse, arrest, and never to be questioned about it: mission accomplished.
7. Keeping Americans at home, while discouraging inbound tourists. In a November 14th article titled, “International Tourism Decline on the Upswing, if America Doesn’t Sabotage the Recovery,” we can read a call to action in this interesting choice of words — if you are standing at the top of the pyramid. The last thing that people who are trying to consolidate power, and siphon as much money from bottom to top, would want is a recovery in the real economy. Additionally, the fear of travel reinforces U.S. isolationism. The ultimate effect? Dependence on the government for both security and financial aid: mission accomplished.
8. Overall security must be increased. Although Janet Napolitano almost unforgivably forgot her script, she is back on track the day after and in lockstep with security apparatchiks everywhere — current security measures are never enough, more must be done: mission accomplished.
So, if all it takes is Terror to create Tyranny, then the words of the Underpants Bomber seem to ring true for 2010: There is more to come.Start Slide Show with PicLens Lite
Population control called key to deal
The real inconvenient truth
The whole world needs to adopt China’s one-child policy
Copenhagen: Global Population Control Program Suggested To Stop Climate Change
Source: Washington Post – Anthony Faiola, Juliet Eilperin and John Pomfret
COPENHAGEN — If the talks that resulted in an imperfect deal to combat global warming provided anything, it was a glimpse into a new world order in which international diplomacy will increasingly be shaped by the United States and emerging powers, most notably China.
Friday’s agreement, sources involved in the talks said, boiled down to President Obama and Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao personally hammering out a pact both could live with, even if many other leaders could not. Wen even squelched his own negotiator’s protests.
What Obama heralded as a “breakthrough” — after getting India and other rising powers to sign on — was decried by some nations as too little, too late. The leaders of Europe, Japan and other countries at the summit were largely left to rubber-stamp the deal. The Swedish prime minister’s office dubbed it “a disaster.”
Ever since the concept of a G2was proposed this year by former U.S. national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, the idea that the United States and China together are going to solve all the world’s problems has been pooh-poohed by both American and Chinese officials. China hated the notion because it put too much responsibility on a country that has done very well rising in the shadows. Many U.S. officials opposed the idea on the grounds that the best way to influence China was through multinational partnerships.
So, more than anything else, critics said, Friday’s climate agreement reflected the domestic political realities in Washington and Beijing. Both nations, the two biggest emitters of greenhouse gases, remain more cautious than, say, the governments of Europe about establishing a strict set of international rules to combat global warming. Not coincidentally, the agreement allows nations to set their own emission reduction targets and provides no deadline for signing a binding international accord.
A shifting relationship
As such, the deal may portend how issues from world trade to nuclear proliferation will be negotiated in the years ahead, with China leading a caucus of rising powers on one side and the United States on the other.
“The mark is being stamped on a new political world,” said Duncan Marsh, who directs international climate policy for the Nature Conservancy. Said Jake Schmidt, international climate policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Fund: “Coming into this conference, it was about 193 countries, and coming out of it, it clearly came down to a conversation between the leaders of those two superpowers.”
Orville Schell, a longtime China watcher who is director of the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the Asia Society, said the erratic dance between China and the United States is another example of how the bilateral relationship is at a tipping point. China is becoming a major player, albeit reluctantly; the United States, with similar unease, is making room for China at the table of world leaders.
“We’re not exactly partners, but we’re much more equals,” Schell said. “The Chinese miss the idea that there’s some grander, stronger authority. They are not used to this role of actually helping to fashion and form things.”
Indeed, the events at the summit showed how the U.S.-China relationship remains stormy and complex, constructive and adversarial. At one point in Friday’s tense talks, for instance, China’s top climate change negotiator exploded in rage at U.S. pressure after Obama walked in on the Chinese while they were holding talks with the Indians, South Africans and Brazilians. After Obama asked whether the Chinese could commit to listing their climate targets in an international registry, Xie Zhenhua launched into a tirade, pointing his finger at the U.S. president.
A compromise from China
The United States had made any deal contingent on international verification of emission cuts made by nations, seeing it as key to winning over skeptical lawmakers on Capitol Hill who are still resistant to sweeping climate change legislation at home. But there was no way China would agree to international verification, Xie told the Americans.
It was a position that China had held to closely over months of negotiations with the United States and other countries. China’s vice minister of foreign affairs, He Yafei, had reiterated it just hours earlier.
Published on 08-12-2009
GENEVA — China’s Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi called Wednesday for international diplomacy to avert an “arms race in outer space.”
Space should be reserved for peaceful purposes, Yang told the 65-nation Conference on Disarmament in Geneva.
“Outer space is now facing the looming danger of weaponization,” he said. “Credible and effective multilateral measures must be taken to forestall the weaponization and arms race in outer space.”
China and Russia have been vocal advocates of a global treaty against space-based weapons and argue for this to be included in future Conference of Disarmament negotiations.
The United States has dismissed the criticism as designed to block its plans for a missile interceptor system — while leaving untouched Chinese and Russian ground-based missiles that can fire into space.
“Countries should neither develop missile defense systems that undermine global strategic stability nor deploy weapons in outer space,” Yang said.
He added that China welcomed moves to rid the world of nuclear weapons.
“The complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons and a nuclear weapon-free world have become widely embraced goals,” Yang said. He appeared to be referring to President Barack Obama’s call in April for a “world without nuclear weapons.”
“We welcome these developments,” Yang said.
The actor told a forum on the southern Chinese island of Hainan, whose attendees included Wen Jiabao, the Chinese prime minister, he was not sure “freedom” was necessary.
Chan, 55, whose latest movie, Shinjuku incident, was banned in China, was asked about censorship and restriction on the mainland. He expanded his comments to discuss Chinese society in general.
“I’m not sure if it is good to have freedom or not,” he said. “I’m really confused now. If you are too free, you are like the way Hong Kong is now. It’s very chaotic. Taiwan is also chaotic.”
He added: “I’m gradually beginning to feel that we Chinese need to be controlled. If we are not being controlled, we’ll just do what we want.”
His comments were applauded by the Chinese audience, but triggered fury in Hong Kong and Taiwan.
Leung Kwok-hung, a pro-democracy MP in Hong Kong, said: “He has insulted the Chinese people. Chinese people are not pets. Chinese society needs a democratic system to protect human rights and rule of law.”
Albert Ho, another MP, said Mr Chan was “racist” and added: “People around the world are running their own countries. Why can’t the Chinese do the same?”
Mr Chan is a favourite of the authorities in Beijing, and performed in both the opening and closing ceremonies of the Summer Olympics.
He is also the vice chairman of the China Film Association, a key industry group.
However, he lost some of his goodwill among the audience when he criticised the quality of Chinese-made goods.
“If I need to buy a television, I would definitely buy a Japanese television,” he said. “A Chinese television might explode.”