Remember that bit of news on Dec. 9 focusing on how SpeakDolphin Founder and Researcher reportedly uncovered how dolphins "see" using echolocation and which came with an enhanced image processed using an instrument called CymaScope. The things is that there are a lot of reasons why and how that supposed breakthrough could be wrong even if you want to believe it.
We're not going to pretend to be experts in Marine Biology and Cymatics but just by looking at the overall weight of the claimed breakthrough and the process which gained the resulting image should make you think twice about concurring with the findings.
Lack of Credibility
We're not taking the path of some academic snobs who refuse to recognize the credibility of research findings if the researcher has no Graduate or Post-Graduate degree, but we can at least look at the specific goals and methods in Jack Kassewitz's research so we can see for ourselves if everything is aligned. Since Kassewitz and his team consider the images as a breakthrough, surely the study is available somewhere and experts in the field have checked it over to confirm that everything was done correctly, right?
Here's your answer: No, you won't be able to find his study in any journal because he doesn't seem to want any other opinion from anyone else in the scientific community except from the "research associates" he works with. By research associates, he's referring to Scott Taylor and Amanda Hain from the Cetacean Studies Institute whose field of study neither academically nor scientifically relate to cetaceans.
"I know that this discovery is p--sing off and shaking off a lot of people. I'm not going to hide it... People will say this can't be. My response to that is, well, are you a physicist? Can you show me the math that shows it can't be?," Kassewitz said in an interview.
The question remains: How can physicist show Kassewitz "the math" to build up or break down his findings if he refuses to submit his study and choose to self-e-publish to avoid comments?
It's like asking a blindfolded person to confirm the color of the wall you're seeing.
Interpretation
"For the first time in the history of dolphin and animal communication, scientists have imaged what a dolphin saw when echolocating on a human," the press release says.
The argument is best answered in the tweet of Nerdist editor Kylo Hill.
My problem with the "what dolphins see" study is that it isn't," it's the acoustic reflection of a click. Seeing is rendered in the brain.
— Kylo Hill (@Sci_Phile) December 9, 2015
It's not just a case of misunderstanding because the press release clearly claims that the image is "what a dolphin saw" and the claim itself is problematic because it shows that there is a lack of understanding on how the senses work in relation to the brain.
Just because a machine translated the image in a certain way does not automatically mean that it is the exact way the brain translates it for an organism. We don't even have to go too far.
Just think of how color-blind people perceive color as opposed to people who see the full spectrum. Same optic organ, different brain translation.
