I buy your view to a point, Marc. It is an interesting idea worthy of
discussion in another forum.
I find it disconcerting though, all the arguments on this forum that
anthropogenic sounds are somehow "nature sounds". Of course humans
along with technology have evolved with and are part of the natural
world, and most people would never deny that. But why are folks so
blatantly trying to divert attention from what this group is obviously
set up to study?
Yes it is all one natural world, but we have to be able to separate
the components to study and understand them, right? So the terms
"nature" or "natural" have evolved to represent views into that which
is less impacted by human development. And even if there are no places
left untouched in the world it is still very important for the sake of
our own and other species to look, listen, and study in that
direction. This in my opinion is what this group is about.
So, for the sake of this forum, please listen in that direction and it
will be clear what is meant by "nature" or "natural."
John Hartog
--- In Marc Myers <> wrote:
>
> In a number of ways. The evolution of the noise regulation, for
example. Organizing the rhythm of work around very loud sounds like
jack hammers for another. As a person who grew up in New York I rely
in part on the traffic noise to tell me something when and where to
cross the street. Cities are largely monotypic but that single species
does produce a fair amount of cooperative sound. Also there's no
requirement that any soundscape have any cooperative sounds.
|