I'll just add that even for a single sustained note, it's not just the ratio of energy of steady-state sinusoidal components that combine to our perception of a violin vs horn, for example, but it also heavily depends on the temporal evolution of that energy. If the steady state were all that mattered, just about any eq on top of a sound would really screw with our ability to recognize it. Put a steep eq on any instrument, then listen to just a few notes. You can still easily recognize it even though you've drastically altered the ratio of energy different frequencies. Hell, play a note louder and your ears will attenuate their physical response to the louder overtones, dulling the energy ratios between different frequencies. It's a fascinating machine. A jet engine does not have clean overtones, which means the amplitude in any given filter in our ear fluctuates wildly. Though it's still debated how much the temporal cues vs the place (spectral) cues really weigh into these precepts.

Where do you get that idea from, other than guessing because you noticed her nostrils? With or without the nasal passage your throat and mouth give multiple audible resonances to your voice. And she is largely only using one. One pitch precept comes from the actual vibration frequencies of her vocal folds, the other from a pronounced resonance from the shape of her mouth & throat. Where do you get the idea that a separate pathway via the nasal passage is required?

By my understanding, it's basically the same way you make different vowel sounds. Vowels like ah or oh or ee are just creating resonances at different places in the spectrum. And, like whistling (which uses some of the same mechanisms for creating a resonance), you need to practice to really get the mouth/throat shape down to achieve a really sharp resonance. My understanding of throat singing is the same, so I'd imagine those tutorials would cover it, though I never really looked too deeply into that so it's possible that uses a different mechanism, though I can't imagine what.

0% margin of error? How do you figure? Maybe I'm just mixing up terms (surely you don't just mean standard deviation in the sample?), but it seems to me that no matter your assumptions a 0% margin of error based on this study would be rather foolish and meaningless.

But it will make it even harder to compete against an even more behemother company that can leverage now even more assets and power to crush little uprisings of entrepreneurial rebellion. Though I'm not sure there is any chance to begin with even without the merge.

To be fair, standard deviation has a meaning for any distribution, but there's a lot you can infer from alone only when dealing with Gaussians. Many people try to infer those same things with non-Gaussian data, and there lies the problem.

I thought trans fat was only about texture and stability / shelf life (while being cheaper than animal fats). Do you have more info on the claim that trans fats were thought to help prevent heart disease?

Additionally, there are some natural trans fats too, but they do not have the same effect on heart disease as currently manufactured trans fats

Maybe I'm missing something but, but you appear to be asking what currently available GMO crops contain "entirely separate species". Ignore this if I misread.

There are only a few currently on-the-market GM crops, where GM refers to transgenic modification, not hybridization. Probably the most commonly known is the Roundup ready line of crops, including soy and corn, but I'm a little sketchy on the details. It appears to have something to do with the bacterium Agrobacterium tumefaciens . Almost as commonly known are crops such as Bt corn and potatoes, which have a gene from the bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis , The SunUp papaya has a gene fragment from the papaya ringspot virus. Liberty Link corn, soy, etc., has a gene isolated from Streptomyces bacteria. Golden rice has been produced different ways, including genes from daffodil, bacteria, and corn.

Anyway, that's a partial list, in case you're interested. I don't suppose you are actually claiming that there is no practical difference between cross-breeding and transgenics.

Probably most of them. But a few that I know better I'd be pretty confident in saying the feeling is their own. Still might be a more chronic version of what you're talking about, where people learn to "care" about the kinds of "news" that get clicks and headlines. Maybe you don't see that as any different...anyway I do.

They'll keep their mouths a little more shut in public, and maybe that will actually lead to some good (maybe), but not to their children. Strong opinions + lack of open conversation = more polarization.

And, to me, it is the point. There are issues I frankly care more about a food company's position on than whether a pasta company dude thinks that the iconic family that he wants to portray in his ads includes a woman in the kitchen. I don't speak for Minupla, and have no problem if this issue makes or brakes his pasta-buying choices over other issues that I wished more people cared more about. But against his point as stated, I think my point stands valid.

I guarantee you that if you by any pasta, or really any product at all, you're supporting someone whose views you don't agree with.

If there are only five, I must know them all, because I've seen at least that many posts from folks in my fb network. So while it may be hype that will die down for something else next week, it's still more than just the media saying it.

Which is one of the reasons I did/do not support this boycott. Best I could tell, he expressed his opinion, but wasn't or isn't actively trying to suppress gay rights. If we boycott companies for honestly stating opinions, as is my read of this situation (please inform me of any more relevant details, however), then we don't change their opinions, we just change what they say. Everybody loses.

Yes.

Also, ditto on arctic sea ice volume, which is a more meaningful metric

I value my health and sometimes eat burgers => you are wrong, QED.

Really, though, burger meat can be ground on premises from whatever cut of meat you'd like (and I do this myself sometimes, a decent food processor will do the trick), so why the distinction based solely on form?