Return to Question

A few hours ago I asked and self-answered "Does tuning music to A = 432 Hz versus A = 440 Hz have a measurable effect on listeners?". Since then, based on comments and another answer, it's become clear that

1. The source of the debate I was asking about apparently stems from an anti-semitic, pseudo-scientific conspiracy theory, and
2. The primary article cited (and referenced in several of the other papers cited) comes from a junk journal called EXPLORE.

While I look further into these issues myself, I'd like to gauge the community's feeling of whether the entire Q&A should stay or go. So far there are multiple downvotes on both the question and my answer, but no close votes or explicit suggestions the question should be closed or deleted. On the other hand, I can imagine the post(s) could give offense, lend support to pseudo-science, or simply lead to an excess (by SE standards) level of commentary.

Is there value in the Q&A, if only to make the point that a frequently discussed "issue" is meritless? Would it be sufficient to update my own answer to reflect the dubious nature of the evidence (or at least of the source[s] that published it)? Should the whole thing just be deleted?

UPDATE: The lead answer currently has 19 upvotes, so it clearly has significant value to the community.

A few hours ago I asked and self-answered "Does tuning music to A = 432 Hz versus A = 440 Hz have a measurable effect on listeners?". Since then, based on comments and another answer, it's become clear that

1. The source of the debate I was asking about apparently stems from an anti-semitic, pseudo-scientific conspiracy theory, and
2. The primary article cited (and referenced in several of the other papers cited) comes from a junk journal called EXPLORE.

While I look further into these issues myself, I'd like to gauge the community's feeling of whether the entire Q&A should stay or go. So far there are multiple downvotes on both the question and my answer, but no close votes or explicit suggestions the question should be closed or deleted. On the other hand, I can imagine the post(s) could give offense, lend support to pseudo-science, or simply lead to an excess (by SE standards) level of commentary.

Is there value in the Q&A, if only to make the point that a frequently discussed "issue" is meritless? Would it be sufficient to update my own answer to reflect the dubious nature of the evidence (or at least of the source[s] that published it)? Should the whole thing just be deleted?

UPDATE: The lead answer currently has 19 upvotes, so it clearly has significant value to the community.

UPDATE #2: The lead answer is currently at 51 votes. Seems like a keeper. In light of the response to the OP as well as the discussion here, I'm in the process of critiquing the studies I cited and will update after I've posted my conclusions.

A few hours ago I asked and self-answered "Does tuning music to A = 432 Hz versus A = 440 Hz have a measurable effect on listeners?". Since then, based on comments and another answer, it's become clear that

1. The source of the debate I was asking about apparently stems from an anti-semitic, pseudo-scientific conspiracy theory, and
2. The primary article cited (and referenced in several of the other papers cited) comes from a junk journal called EXPLORE.

While I look further into these issues myself, I'd like to gauge the community's feeling of whether the entire Q&A should stay or go. So far there are no down votes (UPDATE: there are two and one downvotes on the question and my answer, respectively), close votes, or explicit suggestions it should be closed or deleted. On the other hand, I can image the post(s) could give offense, lend support to pseudo-science, or simply lead to an excess (by SE standards) level of commentary.

Is there value in the Q&A, if only to make the point that a frequently discussed "issue" is meritless? Would it be sufficient to update my own answer to reflect the dubious nature of the evidence (or at least of the source[s] that published it)? Should the whole thing just be deleted?

UPDATE: The lead answer currently has 19 upvotes, so it clearly has significant value to the community.

A few hours ago I asked and self-answered "Does tuning music to A = 432 Hz versus A = 440 Hz have a measurable effect on listeners?". Since then, based on comments and another answer, it's become clear that

1. The source of the debate I was asking about apparently stems from an anti-semitic, pseudo-scientific conspiracy theory, and
2. The primary article cited (and referenced in several of the other papers cited) comes from a junk journal called EXPLORE.

While I look further into these issues myself, I'd like to gauge the community's feeling of whether the entire Q&A should stay or go. So far there are multiple downvotes on both the question and my answer, but no close votes or explicit suggestions the question should be closed or deleted. On the other hand, I can imagine the post(s) could give offense, lend support to pseudo-science, or simply lead to an excess (by SE standards) level of commentary.

Is there value in the Q&A, if only to make the point that a frequently discussed "issue" is meritless? Would it be sufficient to update my own answer to reflect the dubious nature of the evidence (or at least of the source[s] that published it)? Should the whole thing just be deleted?

UPDATE: The lead answer currently has 19 upvotes, so it clearly has significant value to the community.

A few hours ago I asked and self-answered "Does tuning music to A = 432 Hz versus A = 440 Hz have a measurable effect on listeners?". Since then, based on comments and another answer, it's become clear that

1. The source of the debate I was asking about apparently stems from an anti-semitic, pseudo-scientific conspiracy theory, and
2. The primary article cited (and referenced in several of the other papers cited) comes from a junk journal called EXPLORE.

While I look further into these issues myself, I'd like to gauge the community's feeling of whether the entire Q&A should stay or go. So far there are no down votes (UPDATE: there is one downvote on each of the question and my answer), close votes, or explicit suggestions it should be closed or deleted. On the other hand, I can image the post(s) could give offense, lend support to pseudo-science, or simply lead to an excess (by SE standards) level of commentary.

Is there value in the Q&A, if only to make the point that a frequently discussed "issue" is meritless? Would it be sufficient to update my own answer to reflect the dubious nature of the evidence (or at least of the source[s] that published it)? Should the whole thing just be deleted?

A few hours ago I asked and self-answered "Does tuning music to A = 432 Hz versus A = 440 Hz have a measurable effect on listeners?". Since then, based on comments and another answer, it's become clear that

1. The source of the debate I was asking about apparently stems from an anti-semitic, pseudo-scientific conspiracy theory, and
2. The primary article cited (and referenced in several of the other papers cited) comes from a junk journal called EXPLORE.

While I look further into these issues myself, I'd like to gauge the community's feeling of whether the entire Q&A should stay or go. So far there are no down votes (UPDATE: there are two and one downvotes on the question and my answer, respectively), close votes, or explicit suggestions it should be closed or deleted. On the other hand, I can image the post(s) could give offense, lend support to pseudo-science, or simply lead to an excess (by SE standards) level of commentary.

Is there value in the Q&A, if only to make the point that a frequently discussed "issue" is meritless? Would it be sufficient to update my own answer to reflect the dubious nature of the evidence (or at least of the source[s] that published it)? Should the whole thing just be deleted?

UPDATE: The lead answer currently has 19 upvotes, so it clearly has significant value to the community.