Please make a video that talks more about these things which would reach more and don't really need to throw shade.
You should talk about the other things people should worry about with these data centers instead of what he talks about.
I am wondering did you message him to talk about these issues? I feel usually when people do not want to have a discussion it is not productive and this actually can harm regular people. Maybe that would be a great discussion both of you can have and even in a podcast form to gain a bigger audience?
Forgive me for not caring too much.
I have generally enjoyed Benn Jordan's videos, but I have also been skeptical about the infrasound / hum stuff. It seemed like amplifying a fringe pseudoscience, much like the wireless and 5g stuff. So not that surprised to see a debunking article.
Light causes damage at a chemical level: heat, photochemical and ionization. It damages our cells. While light carries energy, it must interact with our tissue to deposit that energy and that interaction is quantum, i.e. frequency-dependent.
Sound causes mechanical damage to organs. It works at a different scale.
So intuition about the relationship between waves and harm is unrelated between light and sound, analogies between the two are not very useful.
samhclark•3h ago
When I first saw his videos, they didn't quite sit right with me. I was reminded of the arguments people made about WiFi and 5G. But I couldn't put my finger on the flaws in the logic, or the specifics of it. I also didn't feel like I had the time to dig in and research all his claims myself, so I just kinda left them feeling skeptical.
Reading this article felt great. Admittedly, it confirmed my biases so I tried spot checking it here and there. What little I did check seemed right and I trust Andy Masley's previous reporting.
I only have two criticisms of the article. First, the few cheap digs he took at Jordan (e.g. the CO2 emissions from his long drive) which I agree with but are unrelated to the overall argument. Second, some of the paragraphs had a strong "written by AI" tone. Maybe they were, maybe they weren't, but that made me trust those specific paragraphs slightly less.