What are your farts trying to tell you?
Flatulinguistics is the study of the messages our bodies send and we refuse to hear. The Fart Whisperer is the first application to make that language readable.
Begin AnalysisTrusted by over 40,000 users worldwide
How it works
Capture
Hold your device close and record. For most accurate results, allow no barrier between audio source and recognition device, fabric or otherwise. Pants or intimates may interfere.
Analyze
Our engine assesses duration, pitch, resonance, and particulate signature across 200 reference markers.
Understand
Receive a full interpretation in under ninety seconds. Most users report clarity on the first reading.
Features
The Global Feed
Listen in on emissions as they happen, anywhere on earth. See what other people's farts are telling them.
Heritage Report
Trace your signature to its ancestral region. Results are probabilistic.
Second Opinion
Escalate any interpretation to a panel of three certified users. Consensus required.
The Flavor Wheel
Ninety-six documented profiles across six families. Developed over four years.
Certification Track
Apprentice, Journeyman, Sommelier. Wall certificate included at final level.
Your Wind Score
One number. Updated daily. Explained nowhere.
The Regimen
A guided dietary program for users seeking greater control of their signature — maximization or minimization. Strategies, tools, and support. Goals are not judged.
Sentinel Mode
The Application can remain listening overnight. Events are logged and interpreted at dawn.
From our users
I had been ignoring the signs for eleven years.Daniel R., Journeyman
My wife and I now compare readings at breakfast. It has changed our marriage.Anonymous, Sommelier
I was skeptical. The Heritage Report was accurate to within forty miles.Priya M., Apprentice
Rhineland, like my father before me.Henrik V., Sommelier
Frequently asked
- Is this a joke?
- No.
- How accurate is the Heritage Report?
- Accurate to region in most cases. Users with mixed ancestry may receive split results. This is normal.
- Can I interpret someone else's emission?
- Yes, with their consent. Interpreting without consent is a violation of our Terms.
- Why did my interpretation change?
- The body is not static. Neither is the reading.
- I received the same interpretation four days in a row.
- Then it is worth considering.
- How does the interpretation engine work?
- The method is proprietary.
- Is the method peer reviewed?
- The Journal of Flatulinguistics has reviewed it favorably.
- Do you sell my data?
- No. See our Privacy Policy.
- My results seem wrong.
- Escalate to a panel. Three certified users will review your reading independently. Consensus is required before an interpretation is amended.
Capture
Provide a sample
Hold your device close and record. For most accurate results, allow no barrier between audio source and recognition device, fabric or otherwise. Pants or intimates may interfere.
Recording is analyzed on your device. Audio is not transmitted and is not stored by us. See Accessibility and data practices.
Your reading
Your record
Analysis
The Wind Score is updated daily.
Certification
Apprentice
Wall certificate Sommelier examination
Reading history
All readings are retained.
The Bureau of Regional Classification
Heritage Report
Trace your signature to its ancestral region. Results are probabilistic.
Reference distribution
| Region | Share of all readings |
|---|---|
| Rhineland | 71.4% |
| Low Countries | 9.2% |
| Alpine Transitional | 6.1% |
| Iberian Coastal | 4.8% |
| Pannonian Basin | 3.3% |
| Baltic Shelf | 2.6% |
| Carpathian Interior | 1.9% |
| Anatolian Margin | 0.6% |
| Unassigned | one (1) |
Regional percentages do not sum to one hundred. The Bureau is aware. Regional assignment reflects the composition of our reference database and should not be interpreted as a statement about your family.
Reassessment. If you believe your Reading is incorrect, you may request a Reassessment. Reassessment is conducted manually and costs $12. Reassessment fees are non-refundable.
Correspondence regarding Rhineland results
Thank you for writing. We receive a high volume of correspondence regarding Rhineland results.
The Rhineland signature is the most frequently assigned region in our system. This reflects the composition of our reference database and the acoustic properties of the signature itself. It is not an error.
If you believe your Reading is incorrect, you may request a Reassessment. Reassessment is conducted manually and costs $12.
We are sorry we could not be more helpful.
— The Bureau of Regional Classification
Reference
The Flavor Wheel
Ninety-six documented profiles across six families. Developed over four years.
The Latent family has four profiles. The Bureau does not expand on this.
Live
The Global Feed
Listen in on emissions as they happen, anywhere on earth. See what other people's farts are telling them.
The Feed is curated by the Bureau. Not all emissions are eligible for display.
The institution
About
The field of flatulinguistics was, until recently, unfunded, unstaffed, and unread.
We began this work in a garage in 2019 with two microphones and a conviction that the body does not speak without reason. Seven years later, our reference database holds more than four million verified emissions, contributed by users in one hundred and six countries.
We did not choose the Rhineland. The data chose it.
We are not here to make you laugh. We are here to make you listen.
Roland of Hemingstone and the first recorded commission
The field did not begin with us.
In the twelfth century, a man the record calls Roland the Farter held a manor in Suffolk on a single condition. He was obliged to appear before Henry II every Christmas and perform one jump, one whistle, and one fart. The obligation is recorded in the Book of Fees. He was paid in land.
We consider Roland the first professional in our field. We note without further comment that his compensation exceeded ours.
He was not alone. In Edo-period Japan the practitioners were called heppiri otoko — farting men — and their competitions were painted onto scrolls. The scrolls survive. The competitors do not.
The bodies
The Bureau of Regional Classification
Assigns Heritage. Answers correspondence.
The Office of Public Guidance
Issues guidance. Revises guidance. Does not archive prior revisions.
The Office of General Counsel
Reads everything.
The Journal of Flatulinguistics
Peer-reviewed. We conduct the review.
The Panel
Three Certified Users, blind by design. There is no body above the Panel.
Press
Founded in 2019, The Fart Whisperer is the leading application in flatulinguistics, the study of interpretive meaning in human emission. The company maintains the world's largest verified reference database and certifies practitioners at three levels.
Published quarterly · Impact factor 0.02
The Journal of Flatulinguistics
The Journal is peer-reviewed. We conduct the review.
Conflict of interest statement, printed in every issue: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The authors are the publisher.
In this issue
On the Prevalence of the Rhineland Signature: A Response to Critics
Manuscript FL-2024-0117. With reviewer comments.
On the Persistence of the Rhineland Signature in Third-Generation Emigrants
Two paragraphs. Footnoted.
Why Morning Readings Differ: A Note on Circadian Interference
Two paragraphs. Footnoted.
Field Notes: Six Weeks Recording in Rural Bolivia
Two paragraphs. Footnoted.
The Latent Family: Notes Toward a Description
Two paragraphs. Footnoted.
A Taxonomy of Silence: On Readings That Do Not Arrive
Two paragraphs. Footnoted.
Roland of Hemingstone and the First Recorded Commission
Runs on the About page.
Engastrimythos: On the Belly-Voice
Historical note. Two paragraphs longer than it needs to be.
Manuscript status
| Manuscript | Status |
|---|---|
| FL-2024-0117 | Decision Pending |
| FL-2025-0043 | Still Under Review |
| FL-2025-0091 | Under Review |
| FL-2026-0002 | With Editor |
Submitted → With Editor → Under Review → Under Review → Still Under Review → Decision Pending → Decision Pending
Manuscript FL-2024-0117
On the Prevalence of the Rhineland Signature: A Response to Critics
It has been suggested, with increasing frequency, that our system assigns the Rhineland signature too readily. We have reviewed this claim.
Between 2019 and 2026 we processed 4,110,882 emissions. Of these, 71.4% resolved to the Rhineland. Critics regard this figure as implausible. We regard it as a finding.
The alternative explanation — that our instrument is imprecise — has been tested and does not hold. We have tested it four times.
We did not choose the Rhineland. The data chose it.
Reviewer comments
Reviewer 1
Accept with minor revisions. Clearly argued and consistent with prior work in the field.
Reviewer 2
Reject.
The authors report that 71.4% of all classifications resolve to a single category and treat this as a finding. It is not a finding. It is what a classifier does when it cannot discriminate. A model that returns the most common answer will be correct most of the time and will have learned nothing.
The authors state they tested the alternative explanation four times. They do not report the tests. They do not report the method. Section 3 consists of one sentence and a figure with no axis labels.
I have raised these points in each of my three previous reviews of this manuscript. The manuscript has not changed. My review has not changed.
Reject.
Reviewer 3
Did not respond.
Editorial decision: Accept.
The Office of Public Guidance
Guidance on barrier materials
Revision history. The current revision is v5.0.
| Revision | Guidance |
|---|---|
| v1.0 (2019) | For most accurate results, allow no barrier between audio source and recognition device. Pants or intimates may interfere. |
| v2.0 (2021) | A single layer of light fabric is now recommended. Direct exposure may introduce particulate contamination of the device. |
| v3.0 (2023) | Two layers are recommended. One layer is no longer considered sufficient. |
| v4.0 (2025) | Barrier material is not recommended. Users should record without obstruction. |
| v5.0 (2026) | A single layer is recommended. Refer to v2.0. |
Prior revisions are not archived.
Statement from the Office of Public Guidance. The guidance has not changed. Your understanding of the guidance has changed.
Questions
- Was the v1.0 guidance wrong?
- The v1.0 guidance was correct. The v3.0 guidance was also correct. Guidance is correct at time of issue. Correctness is versioned.
On allegations regarding the 2019 guidance
It has been suggested that the Office discouraged barrier use in 2019 not on the evidence, but to preserve the clarity of samples reaching the reference database during a period of rapid growth.
The Office does not discuss its motives. The Office notes only that the 2019 corpus remains the finest in the archive, and that it is grateful.
Interview
Q: Some users say the recommendations have reversed four times.
A: The recommendations reflect the evidence available at the time.
Q: So they changed.
A: The evidence changed.
Q: Critics say the Bureau has been wrong repeatedly.
A: Criticism of the Bureau is criticism of the field.
Read the Director's testimony before the Standing Committee →
Standing Committee on Emerging Fields
Hearing on the reliability of flatulinguistic guidance
The Director appears voluntarily. Official transcript.
Q: Dr. Voss, thank you for appearing.
A: I appear whenever the field requires it.
Q: Your office has reversed its barrier guidance four times.
A: The guidance has been revised four times. It has never been reversed. Revision in the opposite direction is still revision.
Q: Users who followed the 2019 guidance were told the opposite in 2021.
A: Users who followed the 2019 guidance were following the science of 2019. I will not apologize for the science of 2019. It was the finest science available that year.
Q: Do you accept any criticism of your office?
A: I want to be careful here, because this is important. People are entitled to criticize me. But they should understand what it is they are doing. I do not speak for the science. That would make me a spokesman. I am the science. When you question me, you are questioning science itself. And science, once questioned, is no longer science. I do not think the committee wishes to be responsible for that.
Q: That is not how science works.
A: It is now.
Transcript note, appended by the Office of Public Guidance: The remainder of the hearing is under review. The transcript is expected to be revised.
Trade press · 14 May 2026
Shenzhen lab publishes replication of Fart Whisperer engine; company alleges theft
Researchers at Hongyuan Applied Intelligence have published a paper describing a system that reproduces the output of The Fart Whisperer's interpretation engine with 94.1% agreement. The paper, released openly with full code and training data, has drawn a sharp response from the flatulinguistics company, which alleges misappropriation of trade secrets.
The Hongyuan system was assembled in nine days. According to the paper, it consists of a small audio classifier and a lookup table.
"We did not reverse-engineer anything," the lead author said by email. "We recorded four thousand samples, we labeled them, and we trained a model. We have published everything. Anyone may check our work."
The disagreement centers on the Heritage Report, the feature that assigns each recording to an ancestral region. The Hongyuan replication assigns the Rhineland region to 71.4% of inputs — matching The Fart Whisperer's published distribution exactly.
The company cites this figure as evidence of theft.
The Hongyuan authors cite it as evidence of something else. "Rhineland is the majority class," the paper notes in section 5. "Any model that guesses Rhineland every time will achieve 71.4% agreement. Ours does slightly better than that. We do not consider this a difficult result."
The Fart Whisperer's full statement:
We are aware of the manuscript.
We will not name the laboratory. We have retained counsel and we have briefed the appropriate parties. We are treating this as a matter of national research interest.
Our method is proprietary. It remains proprietary. The similarity of the published output to our own is not, in our assessment, coincidental.
We note that the manuscript has not been peer reviewed.
The Journal of Flatulinguistics, which is published by The Fart Whisperer, confirmed that no manuscript from Hongyuan has been submitted for review.
Our method
Our method is proprietary.
Release notes
Changelog
| v3.0.0 | Regional discrimination is now considered stable. No further work is planned. |
| v2.4.2 | Reverted 2.4.1. |
| v2.4.1 | Fixed an issue where certain emissions were misclassified as Rhineland. Improved low-light performance on the Global Feed. Panel review notifications now respect quiet hours. |
| v2.1.0 | Further improved regional discrimination. |
| v1.8.0 | Improved regional discrimination. |
Plans
Pricing
Free
$0
Three interpretations daily. Standard analysis queue.
Pro
$4.99 / mo
Unlimited interpretations. Priority queue. Full Heritage Report. No advertisements.
Institutional
Contact us
For research groups and families of six or more.
Institutional pricing requires a minimum of six (6) bodies. Cancel at any time. We refund the unused portion of the current period. We do not require a reason, though most people give one.
Version 4.1
Terms of Service
1. Definitions
1.1"Emission" means a single discrete event captured by the Application.
1.2"Reading" means the interpretation generated from an Emission.
1.3"Signature" means a User's aggregate acoustic profile across all Readings.
1.4"Panel" means three (3) Certified Users convened to review a contested Reading.
1.5"The Body" means the User's body.
2. Eligibility
2.1You must be at least thirteen (13) years of age.
2.2You must be in possession of a body capable of producing Emissions. We do not require proof.
2.3One account per body.
3. Conduct
3.1You are responsible for all activity under your account, including Emissions you did not personally produce.
3.2You may not submit synthetic, simulated, or mechanically produced Emissions. Submissions found to originate from a novelty device will be purged from the database and the account permanently revoked. We conduct periodic audits.
3.3You may not submit another person's Emission without documented consent.
3.4You may not resell Readings.
3.5You may not represent yourself as Certified if you are not.
4. Ownership
4.1You retain ownership of your Emissions.
4.2You grant us a perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free license to store, analyze, and display them in anonymized form.
4.3We retain ownership of the Reading. The Emission is yours. What it means is ours.
5. Panel Review
5.1Any User may escalate one (1) Reading per calendar month.
5.2Panels are blind by design. Members shall not communicate regarding an active review.
5.3Consensus of all three members is required to amend a Reading.
5.4Panel decisions are final. There is no body above the Panel.
6. Interpretation Disclaimer
6.1Readings are informational and do not constitute medical, legal, financial, spiritual, or marital advice.
6.2We do not warrant that a Reading is correct. We warrant only that it was generated.
6.3Users who act on a Reading do so at their own discretion. We have seen this go both ways.
7. Suspension
7.1Repeated low-confidence submissions may indicate improper technique. We will contact you before acting.
8. Death of a User
8.1Upon documented death, the account is closed to new submissions.
8.2The Signature is retained in perpetuity. It is not deleted. It is the only part of this we consider sacred.
9. Dispute Resolution
9.1Disputes shall be resolved by binding arbitration.
9.2You waive the right to participate in a class action. There has been one. It went poorly for both parties.
10. Force Majeure
10.1We are not liable for failures arising from natural disaster, war, civil unrest, network outage, or dietary event.
11. Severability
11.1If any provision is held unenforceable, the remainder survives. This document has been tested.
12. Modifications
12.1We may revise these Terms at any time. Continued use constitutes acceptance. We will not always tell you.
13. Contact
Written inquiries to the Office of General Counsel. We respond within thirty (30) days. We read everything.
The Certified User's Undertaking
Recited at Journeyman. Displayed in the Panel room.
I will review each Emission on its own merits.
I will not consult my fellow panelists.
I will not disclose my findings outside the Panel.
I will not interpret in anger.
I will remember that a Reading concerns a person.
The small letters
- Results are probabilistic and may vary between sessions.
- Heritage regions reflect statistical clustering, not documented lineage.
- Regional percentages do not sum to one hundred. The Bureau is aware.
- "Four million verified emissions" reflects total database size at last audit, inclusive of historical submissions.
- Ninety-second analysis is a median. Complex Readings require longer.
- Institutional pricing requires a minimum of six (6) bodies.
- The wall certificate is not accredited by any body.
- The Fart Whisperer is not a medical device.
Policy
Privacy Policy
What we collect
The Emission. Device model. Ambient noise floor. Time of day. Approximate location, to a radius of fifty (50) kilometers.
What we do not collect
Your name, unless you offer it. We have never needed it.
Retention
Deletion removes your Readings and your Signature. The Emission is retained, anonymized, for research. This is the trade.
Third parties
We do not sell your data. We have been asked.
Cookies
This site uses cookies to remember your preferences and improve analysis. It also uses them for the reasons everyone uses them.
For the technical account of what this application actually does with your recording, see Accessibility and data practices. That page is written plainly and is not part of the foregoing.
Account deletion
Deletion is confirmed across three screens. Your Signature took 412 Readings to build. Your Readings will be removed. Your Emissions remain, anonymized, in the research database. This cannot be undone.
Written plainly
Accessibility and data practices
This page is not written in the voice of the site. It is written straight, and everything on it is true.
Accessibility
The Fart Whisperer is committed to an experience that works for everyone. We aim to meet WCAG 2.1 AA. Every control carries a screen-reader label. Waveform playback includes captions and a full text transcript of the analysis. All interface color pairs meet contrast requirements, and the product is fully navigable by keyboard and by switch control. If you encounter a barrier, write to us and we will fix it. Reports of this kind go to the front of every queue we have.
Data practices
Your recording is analyzed entirely on your device, in your browser. The audio is never uploaded, never transmitted, and never stored by us — there is no server involved in producing a reading. What the application keeps is a small summary of each reading (its measurements, its interpretation, and the time) in your browser's local storage, on your machine. You can erase all of it at any time from the Privacy page.
The interpretation itself is generated on your device from a fixed set of written readings, selected deterministically from the acoustic properties of your recording. There is no machine learning model, no reference database of four million emissions, and no panel of certified users. Those are part of the fiction. The measurements shown on your reading — duration, level, peak frequency — are real.
We do not use analytics, advertising trackers, or third-party scripts of any kind. This page will be kept accurate.
Operations
System status
| Interpretation engine | Operational |
| Regional classification | Operational |
| Panel convening | Operational |
| The Global Feed | Operational |
| Reassessment queue | Delayed |
| Manuscript tracker | Decision Pending |
All systems operational. The database is listening.
Regional classification
Unassigned
In March of 2021 a single reading returned Unassigned.
The user has not been identified. The result has not been reproduced. The Bureau considers the matter open.
Recorded 14 March 2021. No further information is available.
Observance
Rhineland Day
Observed annually on 14 March. Users are asked to log a reading at noon, local time. Participation is not required.
The Bureau notes that Rhineland Day shares its date with the Unassigned result of 2021. The Bureau maintains the two are unrelated.
Observance materials
The shirt
Reads RHINELAND. Small, chest, nothing else. It outsells every other item by a factor of eleven, because it is the only one most people qualify for.
The Carpathian Interior shirt
Exists. In stock: plenty.
Profile convention
Rhineland, Journeyman, est. 2021
Certification Track
Wall certificate
Enter the name to be printed on the certificate.
The Flatulinguistic Certification Track
This certifies that
has completed all requirements and is recognized as
Granted this ___ day of ______
This certificate is not accredited by any body.
Certification
Sommelier examination
Five questions. A passing mark is four. One retake per calendar month.
The Journal of Flatulinguistics · Historical note
Engastrimythos
On the belly-voice, and the long record of people who took it seriously.
The word ventriloquism has been misapplied for two hundred years. It does not mean throwing a voice. It is Late Latin — ventriloquus, from venter, "belly," and loquī, "to speak" — and it was turned out of the Greek engastrimythos, "speaking in the belly."
It did not describe a performer. It described a rumbling internal speech, understood as a sign of inspiration or, more commonly, of possession. Something was in there. It was talking. The only question was who.
We hold that the ancients were correct about the phenomenon and mistaken about the cause. The belly does speak. It is not possessed. It is simply better informed than you are.
The record is unbroken. Roland of Hemingstone held a manor in Suffolk for it. The heppiri otoko of Edo Japan competed at it and were painted onto scrolls.
Nor was the practice confined to entertainers. In 1531 a professor of theology at Wittenberg, asked how he dealt with the adversary, replied that it was with a fart that he chased him away. He was not being merely coarse. Scatological speech was an established instrument in the monastic contest with the devil, and Martin Luther employed it as one — an argument delivered from the belly, at the highest stakes then available.
By the eighteenth century the word had been handed to stagecraft, and the field it named was abandoned for two hundred and fifty years.
We have resumed the work.
Sources. Late Latin ventriloquus from venter + loquī, patterned on Greek engastrimythos, "speaking in the belly"; originally a rumbling internal speech regarded as a sign of spiritual inspiration or demonic possession. Ventriloquy is attested from the 1580s, ventriloquism from 1773. Etymology per the Online Etymology Dictionary.
Roland of Hemingstone is recorded in the Book of Fees. Luther's remark is Table Talk no. 122 (1531), Luther's Works 54:16, cited in Eric W. Gritsch, "Martin Luther's Humor," Word & World 32:2 (2012), which notes that such language "was common among monks in their struggle with the devil."
You arrived here through a door that is not listed. The Bureau does not ask how.