Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Magnifying the passion for nature. Zeiss Victory Harpia 95. New!

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Does EMR harm living organisms?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 3.50 average.
Old Wednesday 21st February 2018, 05:19   #501
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,328
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ hwinbermuda I see what you mean about those comments. The authors of this study do footnote, in their conclusions section, (8,9,10,11 and 19--but looking at the references I think they must mean 20) other studies that have looked at the same issue. One would have to read those studies, I think, and the peer review comments might also be illuminating if one could find them. I wish I could find out more about Gateshead--I think I said earlier that still births and miscarriages are being reported there. One personal experience--my sister used to live directly opposite an antenna park in Athens. She had her first child without any problem (she was living elsewhere then) but had a lot of trouble carrying the second baby to term and was on all kinds of medications to stop a miscarriage. Looking back (obviously neither of us made any association of the antenna park with her troubles at the time)I think what might have saved her pregnancy--and my niece--was the fact that she spent the middle 3 months away from Athens. Of course this is not proof, merely an indication why I think there may in fact be an association between miscarriage and EMR.
No one can say that a particular case will turn out one way or the another because of EMR. Research conclusions, such as the Kaiser study, simply inform us of the percentage change in probability that a miscarriage will occur beyond its base level. So the value of the research, essentially, is to quantify the increase in risk, and if the change is statistically significant we have that degree of confidence in the conclusion. Of course, this doesn't preclude unknown factors from contaminating the results, so replications are needed. It's a probability game.

Ed
__________________
Understanding optics is child's play compared to understanding child's play.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts." Richard Feynman
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 21st February 2018, 09:13   #502
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
@ Gordon I did say my sister's experience wasn't proof, didn't I? But reading that study did make me wonder. Ed's comment following yours is very much to the point.

I very much like the quote by Feynman that Ed posts at the bottom of his comments "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" because that sums up nicely what this thread is all about. The so-called experts have been telling us for years that wireless technologies are safe, and I challenge that view, based both on personal observation and the opinion/work of opposing scientists.

If you stop to think about it, all scientific progress is the result of challenging what the experts of the time believed to be immutable fact: the sun goes around the earth; the earth is flat; here be dragons; witches float. In medieval times, the authority was the Catholic church. A very narrow interpretation of Holy Writ by self-proclaimed ecclesiastical "experts" led to the centuries-long Dark Ages where no scientific progress was made at all. And things would in all likelihood have gone on this way but for two significant events, interrelated: the fall of Byzantium in 1453, where the move westwards by the scholars fleeing the Turks brought with them the results of centuries of scientific discoveries, and the Crusades, in which Europeans came into contact with the Arab world. Not only were the Arabs superb mathematicians in their own right, but they had also built their scientific base on the knowledge of the ancient world, which had not been lost as in Europe. Even after these events, scientific progress in Europe was greatly hampered by trying to reconcile the precepts of the church with scientific discovery, and early scientists had to do some very fancy footwork to avoid saying that what they were learning about the physical universe meant that the church was wrong. If you want to read some good examples of this, try the novel "An Instance of the Fingerpost" by Iain Pears. Truly fascinating.

Today we no longer have the church as the ultimate authority in all things scientific, but we do have other, equally dangerous challenges to the spirit of open scientific enquiry. The military-industrial complex perceives the world in the same narrow way as the medieval church, and today's gods are money and power. (Not much changes: money and power were at the heart of the medieval church's supremacy as well.) But all questioning of accepted scientific views begins with an observation that seems to challenge them. Someone--not I--first wondered if exposure to EMR could lead to miscarriage. Did he have a sister, a neighbor or a wife who lost a baby while living near a source of EMR? Did he then notice a pattern of women who lived near sources of EMR and also had miscarriages? Did he then think, "I should do a study about this and see if there's anything to my theory that EMR might cause miscarriage?" Of course this study should be replicated to see if the results are confirmed. But someone had to notice a correlation in the first place.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 21st February 2018, 09:41   #503
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
New, major Italian study confirms results of NTP study

It looks as if the NTP study results were not a fluke. A major new study done in Italy also found malignant schwannomas of the heart in male rats, and this confirms results of an earlier study done by the same authors in 2016 finding malignant schwannomas as a result of power-line EMR (see link in text). This new study, due to be published within the week, is reviewed here: http://microwavenews.com/news-center/more-coincidence

Also of interest is an article titled "Celll Tower Radiation Facts and 5G Unknowns" at https://www.activistpost.com/2018/02...-unknowns.html
Ignore the really weird stuff (advertisements?) on the same page; it's a good article and has links to a number of studies about cancer incidence near cell towers/base stations. The author asks what 5G will do to the environment. I'd like to know if anybody cares what it will do to the environment.

There is also a link to a talk about 5G weaponized frequencies (I mentioned this a couple of days ago) given by Barbara Johnson, an electrical engineer and star wars technician. 55 minutes long, scary stuff. If you use EMR as a weapon on human populations, what do you think that will do to insects, birds and small mammals? Here's the link: https://level9news.com/5g-ground-based-web-system/
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 22nd February 2018, 09:54   #504
Borjam
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Algorta Spain
Posts: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Also of interest is an article titled "Celll Tower Radiation Facts and 5G Unknowns" at https://www.activistpost.com/2018/02...-unknowns.html
Ignore the really weird stuff (advertisements?) on the same page; it's a good article and has links to a number of studies about cancer incidence near cell towers/base stations. The author asks what 5G will do to the environment. I'd like to know if anybody cares what it will do to the environment.
No, you can not ignore the really weird stuff, not at all, because if gives a clue about the kind of website you are visiting.


Quote:
There is also a link to a talk about 5G weaponized frequencies (I mentioned this a couple of days ago) given by Barbara Johnson, an electrical engineer and star wars technician. 55 minutes long, scary stuff. If you use EMR as a weapon on human populations, what do you think that will do to insects, birds and small mammals? Here's the link: https://level9news.com/5g-ground-based-web-system/
On another "conspiranoid" website.

Meanwhile last weekend I went to Urdaibai again. This time I saw a white stork nest on a large cell phone antenna tower. Yes, white stork are considered a real pest by telecommunication and energy engineeers in Spain. From Madrid southwards you will notice that power line towers and antenna towers have long pointy spikes to prevent storks from nesting.
Borjam is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 22nd February 2018, 12:27   #505
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
@ Borjam I know that most of the anti-wireless information is carried on alternative websites. That particular one had some very odd stuff on it. However the article had a good list of links to studies, which was why I posted it. It was also a good interview, if a bit slow to get going.

It is a shame that the mainstream media is not doing its job of informing the public about the hazards of EMR properly. If it were, there would be no need for the alternative media to do its job for them. The proliferation of alternative sites for all kinds of news speaks volumes about public lack of trust in the mainstream media, as does the fact that readership figures for mainstream publications is consistently declining. This is what happens when you have no responsible and impartial forums for public debate. EMR is hardly the only issue which the mainstream media fails to cover fairly or even adequately. A whole range of issues, from finance and monetary policy to immigration and Middle Eastern wars, tends to be presented as if there were only one point of view. The role of the media is not, or should not be, the role of Orwell's Ministry of Truth.

The proliferation of alternative media sites in all kinds of areas speaks volumes about public trust in government and the mainstream media. This is the same media, by the way, that claimed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, till it turned out he didn't. The same media that laughed at the idea of human activity driving climate change until it decided that climate change was responsible for just about everything that goes wrong. The same media that now wants to blame Russia for every election result and the Brexit vote.

This is why I keep saying, read the studies. And it says something, I think, that the alternative media is willing to publish those studies (or links to them) to support their case, while the mainstream media pretends they don't exist, and won't give air time to people with knowledge and experience like Barbara Johnson.

It's a pity you are so unhappy about storks trying to roost or nest on top of cell towers and antennas. Be glad you have them. At the rate we're going, it won't be for much longer. You'll miss them when they're gone.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 23rd February 2018, 11:05   #506
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
EMR causes behavioral and cognitive problems

In his Mt. Nardi Wildlife Report, Mark Broomhall mentions that birds affected by cell tower radiation exhibit unusual behaviors. It's a pity he doesn't go into this in detail but he is clearly more concerned with population declines and disappearances. So was I, initially. However, I am starting to notice changes in avian behavioral patterns as well. The most striking is the lack of birdsong. Spring is on its way here--we saw the first martins days before yesterday, and the spring flowers are blooming, with anemones already on their way out again along with the earliest wild orchids.

The birds, though, very rarely sing. We have a very few small flocks of chaffinches, but they never sing. The last time I heard a chaffinch sing--actually sing, as opposed to the odd tweet or twitter--was in northern Greece last spring. So while we do hear birds chirp, cheep, tweet and twitter, there is little or no full-fledged song. And there ought to be. We're nearly into March and they should be building nests, or getting ready to.

One of the many problems with cell tower radiation/EMR is that it causes cognitive changes/dysfunction as well as behavioral changes. The attached letter to the FCC gives some fairly graphic case histories of how EMR affects children. What EMR does to children, it also does to birds. When the birds stop singing, they stop attracting mates, they don't nest or their nesting behavior changes, and they raise fewer chicks or perhaps none at all. This is in addition to their possibly becoming sterile or DNA damage which will show up in future generations.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf 13-84 11-18-2013 Toril H. Jelter MD.pdf (46.2 KB, 11 views)
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 24th February 2018, 09:55   #507
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
5G from space will happen soon

If you are worried about the ozone layer and climate change, what is coming is very bad indeed. If you think EMR is affecting all life on the planet, what is coming is the earth's death-warrant.

A week ago, Elon Musk announced plans to launch 12,000 low-orbit satellites to beam 5G at every square inch of the earth's surface. The first two satellites were launched on a Falcon 9 rocket yesterday. Of Musk's 12,000 satellites, 4,425 will operate at an altitude of 700 miles, and 7,518 will operate at an altitude of 210 miles.

Remember that Musk's SpaceX (the program itself is called Starlink) is only one of ten companies that want to beam 5G down from space and the upper atmosphere. To put these numbers in perspective, in September 2017, there were 1,738 satellites in total orbiting the earth, none of them closer to the earth than 400 miles. Of these, 208 low-flying satellites were used for communications, of which 125 (Iridium and Globalstar) and were for cell phones. None of them provided high speed data or used phased arrays. So 12,000 new satellites is a big deal, and SpaceX is one in ten companies. Even if Musk can launch 100 satellites at a time, that's 120 rocket launches. Another company, OneWeb, plans to launch the first 10 of its 2,400 satellites in May.

The earth's ozone layer is still being depleted, even though it was thought the problem had been solved with the Montreal Protocol. So all these rocket launches to beam 5G from space and the upper atmosphere will have a major impact. And that's before we talk about the effect of 5G.

I attach a letter written to the FCC requesting that Google be denied permission to operate their own 5G from space program. I'm sure there have been other letters (one for each company that wants to do this) and that the FCC is not listening. But you should read it, because it touches on all kinds of issues from health to civil rights to insurance to nature--the latter on page 7.

This is going to go ahead. I have written my own letter of protest, which I sent to the EU yesterday by email and registered mail--attached. But I don't expect it to make much difference because to really make any difference there ought to be millions of protests--millions and millions. I can't see how anyone who loves nature can let this happen--especially the 5G from all those satellites--but I think it will. I think we're about to blast our own planet out of existence and I am really furious because I love it. It is my home, and I can do nothing to protect it.

I don't know if any of you ever read a Neville Shute book called "On the Beach". It describes a family's last few months on earth as they wait for the radiation from a nuclear war to reach them in Australia. The whole earth has been wiped out, the Australians are the only ones left, and soon the radiation will reach them too. The chilling inevitability of that book haunted me for months after I read it. I feel like that now.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf document.pdf (685.4 KB, 14 views)
File Type: pdf EU Wireless Complaint.sent.pdf (328.0 KB, 19 views)
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 24th February 2018, 12:16   #508
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
Here's a link to the Washington Post article about SpaceX's planned launch of all those 5G satellites: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ow-itll-start/

Note that there is no discussion whatsoever of what all these rocket launches will do to our atmosphere or the ozone layer, and no discussion of how this might affect people or nature. But one no longer expects such discussion from the mainstream media. They're too busy selling 5G as an unalloyed good.

Last edited by Purple Heron : Saturday 24th February 2018 at 12:21.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 24th February 2018, 12:39   #509
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
i read most of this thread and some of the articles quite open mindedly. neither or any of the 'sides' particularly convinced me. simply because i do not have enough background and do not just react to fear.

however i will add a true anecdote. a relative of mine is a highly qualified and experienced telecomms engineer. he started as an opponent to any view of radiation harm from microwave or telecomms frequencies but as a solid and pragmatic individual he did his research including internal reports from a major telecomms provider. subsequently he became a vegan, left his job and moved his family to country Australia with poor coverage.
his feelings were that it is not one cause but an accumulation of factors that are causing ill health amongst humans not just insects and birds. he refuses tin foil hats or underwear but has dumped the tv and most electrical and plastics based goods and uses a landline phone and that rarely.

we are all of us involved in very complex technical society and the background includes war and death of many species. it is good to have threads like this that remind us to at least examine our culture and the parameters within which we live. always a balance such as good comms, medicines etc save lives but the cost may be fatal elsewhere. do not expect governments or businesses to respond or care, the motivations are not altruistic or simple. as a species we know we do harm, anyone can see that, but weighing it up relies on these types of thread and importantly, the debate. time will tell, it always does. if too late, well, it is a big universe and solipsism in the face of that seems petty. keep exploring and arguing, sometimes we learn in time.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 25th February 2018, 07:30   #510
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
@ jape Thank you for that. You should ask your relative what he thinks of 5G from space and wireless electricity (see my next post).
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 25th February 2018, 08:17   #511
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Note that there is no discussion whatsoever of what all these rocket launches will do to our atmosphere or the ozone layer, and no discussion of how this might affect people or nature. But one no longer expects such discussion from the mainstream media. They're too busy selling 5G as an unalloyed good.
In your opinion, what accounts for the mainstream medias failure to engage in such discussion?
__________________
Bird photos (Flickr): http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugl/
". . .Let them be left, O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."

--Gerard Manley Hopkins
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Sunday 25th February 2018, 08:42   #512
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
The Jolly Green Giants

All my life, people have been suspicious of mega-corporations and government ties with them. Petrochemical companies. Big Pharma. Arms manufacturers. Pesticide giants like Monsanto. A lot of the pushback against these corporate monsters has typically come from people who are fairly young, and often very committed, who see themselves as battling for human rights and a greener, more sustainable way of living. This is as it should be: the illusions tend to get knocked out of people as they get older, and life's realities grind them down, so they lose hope. Winston Churchill once said words to the effect of, "If a man is not a socialist when he is twenty, he has no heart. If he is still a socialist at forty, he has no brains." People tend to grow more conservative with age, and more prone to taking the world as it is, saying, "I may not like the way things are, but what can I do about it?" Society needs youth to fight for social and planetary justice.

This makes what is happening now in the world--the wireless revolution--all the more disturbing. Because the very age group, the very constituency that should be opposing the rapacious giant mega-corporations, tech and telecoms, is all signed on to the wireless revolution with their tongues hanging out for the next app and the next upgrade. When youth is subverted, all is lost. Today's youth seems to have forgotten that Big Business is the enemy.

The giant tech and telecoms companies of the wireless industry--the Jolly Green Giants--have learned from the mistakes of their predecessors and have branded themselves as jolly and green. They have worked very hard to create a "green" image of themselves in all sorts of ways. They partner with nature NGOs, sponsoring environmental good works where these do not conflict with their own goals. They design apps the NGOs can use--apps to identify bees or beetles or birds, or apps to help you find them. They work extraordinarily hard to persuade you to take their devices out into the countryside. "Think outside the box" proclaims IBM, showing you an image of a man working on his laptop while he surveys the view. Somehow these corporations have managed to persuade an entire generation that wireless is clean and harmless. Their campaign to seduce youth has been extraordinarily effective. Youth is on board, with very few dissenters. Steve Jobs was a hero. Elon Musk is a hero. But the Jolly Green giants are neither jolly nor green. They're just giants, and their products are planet-killers.

I had been wondering why we need 5G from space. Having already covered most of the earth with cell towers, why do we need it beamed at us from satellites as well? What's going on here? Well, I think I just found out. Maybe some of you have already heard about this one, but it was new to me. Have you heard about wireless electricity? It's the newest thing. It's the future. It's sci-fi on steroids.

Words fail me at this point, so watch this video: https://tinyurl.com/y7dnjzof
It won't take you long to get the point. Another jolly green technology to kill the insects and the birds and the trees and us.

Long ago I had a student, Agis whose last name I no longer recall (apologies). He wrote a brilliant story which has always haunted me. It takes place in the aftermath of a nuclear war. The last man alive on earth is wandering around in search of something, anything else which is also alive. Eventually he finds a spiny cactus growing in the desert. It is the only other thing that still survives. So the man embraces the cactus, hugging its spines into his chest.

When Agis wrote that story, wireless hadn't been invented. We could imagine no other technology that could reduce the world to a barren planet. Now we have one. And all the youth think it's a jolly good thing.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 25th February 2018, 09:46   #513
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
purple heron, you are right. our youth as a whole are lost in a world of short-term facebook memes, superficial ownership of credit, alienation from nature and a society with warring, literally, factional cultures that represent the evil side of human nature; but they also travel the world, intermarry and communicate internationally daily. it is a wavefront of exploding, remarkable possibilities supported by the fact that 2/3 of human beings are hungry, 1/3 baseline survival and children still die of famine every minute.
half of the world's wealth belongs to the top 1%,
top 10% of adults hold 85%, while the bottom 90% hold the remaining 15% of the world's total wealth,
top 30% of adults hold 97% of the total wealth.

those figures may be disputed to an extent on definitions but serve as examples for argument.
we, you and I, use the technologies for this discussion. we may spend $1000 on binoculars while that is the total expenditure of 2/3 of world for a year.

so we know this, and our children know it even if not consciously recognised. the crucial consequences are not a barren world, the infrastructure will probably break long before that, nor the damage we have done already. nor is it the governments and companies you condemn. they represent us and are what we have created and wanted. they give some of us longer life, greater wealth and security. you see the falsity behind that in the incidence of insect, bird and human deaths, i show we are still murderous uncaring fools living off chattel slavery and exploitation. these are not answers. nor is world revolution or the slowing of progress in any form including 5G telecomms. the next technological breakthrough may be cheap power from string theory, it may be nanotech. anything is possible.
badly stated by me but my point is it is a continuing tension of creation and evolution against the cost and consequence that has existed since the first tribes entered conflict over territory. it is human nature in its glory and its foulness, both running together as always. the very technology that may be killing nature may be the answer. it is too late to turn back and most of the world are too hungry, too envious, too poor and uninformed to care. they want what we have, survival not greed is the motivation.
and answer the problems if food and water for many and they will simply breed and aspire to want more.
there is no going back, there is risk of total breakdown. there is also always some hope, little but real.
it comes from these discussions, small factors that add to awareness, that educate. and that needs 5G to promulgate and spread. your voice is necessary and part of positive hope but will never be more than that. the factors are far larger and include consciousness, purpose and evolution and even what we call physics of which electronic data is a minor form on the very electronic winds you decry. information is becoming the currency.
personal choice is your tool. take the iphone from your kids and they will fight you. show them dying birds and they will cry. until that last stops, there is hope.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Sunday 25th February 2018, 10:07   #514
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
@ fugi Money and power. Corruption. Power bought by money. The need to keep the stock markets pumped up or the world economy is going to crash. It will crash anyway because the people disenfranchised by the robots will not have the money to buy the products of the brave new world unless you pay everyone a universal basic income and keep him/her hooked on the magic box where the entertainment flows free 24/7. When the older generation dies there will be nobody to remember a world where there were once birds. Or civil rights.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 26th February 2018, 10:00   #515
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
@ jape You talk of "small factors that add to awareness, that educate, and that needs 5G to promulgate and spread". Although I don't, in the main, disagree with your analysis, I seriously wonder if the Internet has done any good at all in raising awareness, really. Oh, yes, lots of information is out there. Masses and masses of it. But what the Internet has really achieved is to reduce every voice to a whisper in Babel. How do you distinguish a single voice in all the competing clutter? And for every voice that says "this" another voice says "that". So in my view, all 5G will do is add to the clutter. The main achievement of the Internet, in making all voices heard. is to make none of them heard. Sanity and insanity share a level playing-field. The ultimate democracy is to give everyone a voice and then ignore them all.

To that end, they are making a mistake in trying to censor the Internet. Let everyone howl online all they like, because no voice can rise above the maelstrom unless the authorities call attention to it. Then it becomes news, and gets in the mainstream media, and everybody learns about it. Because at the end of the day, the mainstream media is still the only voice that people really hear. If it isn't in the mainstream, it isn't news. If it is in the mainstream, it can be total bollocks, but it's "true" and people believe it. The best way to de-legitimize opposition is to ignore it, not dispute it. And this, fugi, is why the mainstream media is completely ignoring the harmful effects of EMR. Because to dispute these effects would make people think about the issue, and they don't want you to wonder if your cell phone is making children sick or killing birds. Even to say that it isn't would raise the question. So they stay mum, and distract you with the sexual exploits of Harvey Weinstein and the heads of various charitable organizations.

And this strategy of never putting the question into people's heads really works. I've never been one to spend a lot of time reading the news, more a quick scan of the headlines because life's too short and most of the "news" is unutterably tedious. Give me a book any day. So, although people have been warning about the dangers of cell towers and cell phones and EMR for years, I never saw any of it. It didn't occur to me to look, either, till I realized the birds were vanishing. How many of you who read this thread ever thought about it? How many of you ever looked it up?

Even looking it up wasn't easy. People are always saying "google this" or "google that" for information, but in fact Google has the same agenda as the mainstream media, so when my husband "googled" cell towers + harm (or whatever search parameters he used) he got 13 pages of articles saying cell towers and cell phones were safe before he hit the first article that suggested maybe they weren't so safe after all. We've since switched to DuckDuckGo, which doesn't seem to have an agenda. But Google does, and Wikipedia does. They have the same agenda as the mainstream media. Caveat emptor.

W live in a world of white noise, where too many voices create only a background hum. 5G won't change that. There will only be more distractions.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 26th February 2018, 10:41   #516
Jos Stratford
Beast from the East
 
Jos Stratford's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Exile in Eastern Europe
Posts: 15,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Money and power. Corruption. Power bought by money.
...
And this, fugi, is why the mainstream media is completely ignoring the harmful effects of EMR. Because to dispute these effects would make people think about the issue, and they don't want you to wonder if your cell phone is making children sick or killing birds. Even to say that it isn't would raise the question. So they stay mum, and distract you with the sexual exploits of Harvey Weinstein and the heads of various charitable organizations.
...
We've since switched to DuckDuckGo, which doesn't seem to have an agenda. But Google does, and Wikipedia does. They have the same agenda as the mainstream media. Caveat emptor.

Yeah right, everybody who holds or reports a different opinion must have an agenda. Your arguments have evolved into pure conspiracy theory, dismissing opponents and media that don't support your view as corrupt.

Only came back to this thread as I came across information which again directly contradicts your findings - you began this thread with your observations that suggested catastrophic declines across Samos and northern Greece (the latter based on a trip to the Evros Delta and other sites in spring 2017, then comparing with your recollections of some years earlier). Further you have been adamant that nothing else has changed in the environment except the arrival of cell towers, thus concluding they must be responsible.

I presume you know of Steve Mills and his connection with the Evros Delta - he also publishes books on northern Greece and has a website with monthly updates on the Evros. He highlights factors directly affecting bird numbers that you decided to overlook.

With reference to your trip, of particular interest are a couple of his reports from last spring:

Evros February '17

The beginning of the month saw the delta littered with dead birds following a harsh and prolonged freeze, many of these being Flamingos and Mute swans, particularly immatures. Large numbers of swans sought refuge fom the frozen conditions on the delta, with 5742 Mute, 1248 Whooper and 8240 Bewick's. Almost 200 Dalmatian Pelicans and 1032 Flamingos joined the huge number of duck which included a record 84 000 Mallard as areas of open water froze. Geese numbers rose to include 2400 White-fronts, 800 Greylags, 28 Red-breasted and 2 Lesser White-fronts. Spotted Eagle numbers rose to 22 in January before falling to 10 by early February.

Evros April/May '17

The exceptionally dry year of 2016 has continued into the first half of this year, with disastrous consequences for several wetlands. Much of the normally gloriously wet Anthia marshes have failed to fill this spring resulting in severely restricted habitat for both passage and breeding waterbirds. Elsewhere on the delta the first Rollers arrived on April 30th when a lingering Hen Harrier was still present along with several Montagu’s and some 40 Collared Pratincoles came in off the sea. All four shrikes were to be seen by the 1st May, with two pairs of Masked prospecting around Loutros. Plenty of Calandra and Short-toed Larks are in residence around Calandra Fields, along with Tawny Pipit and Black-headed Buntings and a Quail was calling there in early May.


Of course, you failed to mention these major weather related factors. No big surprise, as you had already dismissed a paper that pointed to the changing climate of Samos over recent years as irrelevant, saying something like it had rained that winter, so climate couldn't be responsible. You also dismissed that a bird tour company visited Samos in 2017 (as it had in previous years) and still saw plenty of birds. You also dismissed that another birding report visited the Evros delta shortly after you and seemed to have a quite different experience to you.

Talk about agendas ...Purple Heron, it is most clearly you.

Now have two trips planned for Greece this year, northern Greece next month for early butterflies and birds, the south of the country in June for early summer butterfly specialities ...will let you know if I hit the ecological deserts that you report. Somehow think I will not.
__________________
For photographs and articles, Lithuania and beyond, click here for my website

Last edited by Jos Stratford : Monday 26th February 2018 at 11:04.
Jos Stratford is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 26th February 2018, 12:28   #517
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
@ Jos I can only report what I observed. Yes, I do know who Steve Mills is, and his reports generally accentuate the positive (except for dead birds in freezing conditions)--fair enough, but that doesn't tell the whole story. I did say it had been a dry year following a cold winter, so I didn't overlook those factors. I merely didn't think that those factors adequately explained the lck of birds, and I still don't. That said, Mills' descriptions of which birds there are is hardly inclusive and there are a great many species he doesn't mention one way or the other, so I would hardly say that his description of the Evros in April/May is a stark contrast to mine. Birdwing promotes birding tourism to Greece and bird conservation (a laudable goal) and you don't want to put the punters off.

And yes, I did rather dismiss your paper announcing the imminent desertification of Samos. Weather goes in cycles. This year it has rained a lot. It's raining now. Water use is a different issue. As for your bird tour company, I told you at the time they probably were on a different part of the island, which is quite large. They might find fewer birds this year because a great many more cell towers have gone up. Naturally, I tend to spend a lot more time on the end of the island where I live, and bird numbers are way down here.

To give you a recent example, walked up to a chapel of Prophet Elijah above the village of Palaiocastro a couple of days ago. No road, just a footpath. At the bottom of the path, which is kind of a shadow area as far as cell towers are concerned, you do get a few small birds, mostly great tits, and the odd sparrowhawk. At the top, we used to see lots of birds--various raptors, black storks migrating north, plenty of small birds, chukars, partridges. This should be a good area for birds, but it isn't any more. Cell towers all around, in every direction--6 major towers, lots of boosters/repeaters, cell towers in Turkey, major military radar outpost just opposite in Turkey, major Greek military outpost on the mountains to the west. Over the past 5 years the bird numbers have declined as the number of cell towers/radar installations have increased. Day before yesterday there were no birds at all at the top of the mountain. Zero. Zip. Nada. Nothing. And that isn't right, you know. So I do call that a catastrophic decline. And so would you if you lived here and had seen what it used to be like. But you don't live here so it seems you think I'm a liar.

As for agendas, everybody has one. Tour companies want customers, so they don't advertise that things aren't what they used to be. My agenda--clearly stated at the outset--is to try to save birds from cell tower radiation/EMR. The mainstream media's agenda is to promote wireless technologies because governments want it and big business wants it. They used to advertise cigarettes, too--what was that if not pressure from big business, in this case the tobacco industry?

I have two questions for you. 1. Do you believe everything you read in the mainstream media, and distrust everything that isn't in the mainstream media? Or do you have some other criterion for deciding what's true and what isn't?
2. How happy are you about the fact that various companies will be broadcasting 5G frequencies at your acres of land that you are keeping as a nature reserve? Are you happy to wait and see what happens (i.e. do you trust them to have your best interests at heart), or do you think we ought to be sure that these frequencies don't affect wildlife before we allow private companies to do such a thing?

Think about that second question. I too have land that I keep as a nature reserve, and it's got a lot less on it these days than it used to have. And since I think that cell tower radiation is affecting the birds on my land, I am not happy to wait and see if 5G from space wipes everything out. See post # 508 for the Washington Post article on what is going to happen re those satellites. Tell me if you discern any indication that anyone is concerned about what it might do to birds. How do you think migration will be affected when 5G blankets the planet, preventing birds from reading the earth's geomagnetic fields?

What's your agenda, Jos?
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 26th February 2018, 12:47   #518
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ Nohatch I find no problems with your analysis of Bh. and Roy. It wasn't a bad idea for a study, though, and could be redone by people who can at least identify the birds.
One of the things that came up repeatedly at the Eklipse web conference was the lack of observational studies, and the dire need for more of them. There are a few you have missed out on: Balmori did one on storks and one on sparrows, which can both be found on Researchgate, and there is also an Indian study on sparrows, which I will attach. Also there is the Mount Nardi document which I will re-attach.
PH thanks for the references, I’ve been a little busy lately hence the slow response. But I’ve had time to go through the two Balmori papers, the other House Sparrow paper, and the Mt Nardi document. Here are my thoughts on the first, and I’ll try to post on the other ones later this week.

Balmori 2005 in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine (IF 1.30) is an observational study on White Storks in downtown Valladolid. It is based on the a priori assumption that EMF will affect wild birds “in a similar way to laboratory studies”. What the expected effects might be is not specified, and the author has given a whole range of possibilities to choose from in the introduction. However, based on the things that were actually measured there appear to be two hypotheses: A) EMF affects the breeding success of White Storks; and B) EMF affects the behaviour of nesting White Storks and their offspring. These are valid hypotheses in their own right, but only very loosely related to any of the cited lab studies. Whilst this is a common problem in lab-to-field translation of research (think of linking results from cancer cell line manipulations to human population studies), the way to bridge this gap is to have a very clearly defined hypothesis framed around a proposed mechanism of action. In my very crude cancer example, if I observe in the lab that my cells proliferate less vigorously if a certain nutrient is present, then I could do a cross-sectional study of a large number of people who have different levels of routine intake of that same nutrient (btw a correlation still wouldn't prove anything, but it would be a good cue to do a mechanistic study).
The Balmori observational study has no proposed mechanism of action, or rather an abundance of proposed (but unverified) ones, and that is a real problem. If it can be ‘any of the negative influences I’ve selected above’, then it can be any negative influence at all. And that leads to the second (and third) weakness of the study: confounding factors, and how to account for them. Balmori assumes that EMF exposure has a negative effect on White Stork breeding success, but there are lots of factors that influence this. [I’m gonna say it…..] Just do a quick Google search and you’ll find half a dozen papers discussing stork breeding biology. I particularly like this little study from Turkey (https://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12607791/index.pdf), but there are many others. While Balmori acknowledges the problem in his Materials and Methods section, his experimental design for excluding as many confounders as possible is woefully inadequate. For example, arrival at the nest site has been shown to be an important factor in determining breeding success, as has the age/experience of the nesting pairs. Neither was recorded or even considered to be a factor, and thus the study was highly biased. You could say this is not necessarily a problem if the study sampling was done blinded, as Microwave “News” made such a fuss of in their NTP article – but this cuts both ways people: Balmori was the only author on this and did all the work and selecting himself, so what we have is unblinded sampling with a biased hypothesis, hmmm.
The study would have been more credible if the sample size had been (much) bigger than 2x30 because this gives you the numbers to look for patterns in the data, as I’ve pointed out in an earlier post. And while we’re at it, there is no control group, the stork population was only sampled during one year (despite there being significant inter-annual variation in breeding success), and it is unclear why a less stringent non-parametric test was used to compare the two groups. Add to this that the EMF field strength was not actually done at the nesting site, but “in their vicinity under similar conditions”, and…do you want me to go on?
And don’t get me started on the ‘behavioural study’ – the MSc study I linked to above is a much more thorough example of how that is done. The remark that stork pairs allegedly “impacted directly [by the main beam]” “remained passively in front of cellsite antennae” made me smile – maybe they were too busy watching telly inside their head to decorate the place and have sex? :)

So yeah, what do I make of this…it’s poor. Very, very poor. And very biased. If it had come to me as a reviewer I would have ripped it to pieces and sent a grumpy letter to the editor. I have no idea why this paper is cited so much as an observational basis for the ‘EMF environmental damage’ theory, but maybe I’m missing the good points PH?
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Monday 26th February 2018 at 12:54.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 26th February 2018, 13:22   #519
Mono
Hi!
 
Mono's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lake District,UK
Posts: 1,878
This is surely the way forward https://www.smart-safe.com/
Mono is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 26th February 2018, 13:24   #520
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Another thing that came up at the conference was the need to tap into knowledge of local communities, who have often observed phenomena (such as the disappearance of birds around cell towers) that are unknown to scientists, who may visit an area once in a blue moon or never. I touched on this subject in my own paper on northern Greece. There is a vast amount of useful observation going on daily by people who spend their lives outdoors and are keenly aware of what is going on around them, but they often have no way to communicate this information and are not asked what they know. Scientists "discover" information as if it did not exist prior to their discovery, but of course it did--they just didn't know about it. A good example is the recent discovery of an ant-sized chameleon (in Madagascar, I think). Science may not have known about it, but I'll bet local communities did. This little chameleon did not come into being when these particular scientists set foot in that bit of jungle. So, if you want observational information, there is a vast untapped resource that could be accessed without much difficulty other than creating an instrument for asking the questions so that you get consistent and comparable results. Particularly useful, in the case of cell towers, are older people who can remember areas before there were any cell towers. They will also be able to tell you what other changes have occurred locally--whether forests have been cut down, how land use has changed, what pesticides were used then compared to now, etc. As an additional observation, I should say that the less literate people often make better observers, because they spend more time using their eyes and often have phenomenal memories. Men are better than women at this. A shepherd may spend all day watching a hawk; a shepherdess is more likely to get on with her knitting (or these days, talking on her cell phone). I would add that I think this sort of research should be done, and soon, because we have no other way to go back in time to the pre-cell-tower age except through accessing community memories, particularly in countries where there is no long tradition of keeping records of bird numbers.
So-called 'citizen science' can be incredibly valuable and is already widely used by scientists. Have you seen the spatio-temporal models on eBird for example? https://ebird.org/science/modeling
Great stuff. However, I would argue against your idea that 'less literate people often make better observers' - talent goes a long way but nothing beats practice and training if you want consistent and comprehensive information. Yet another reason scientific methodology has been so incredibly successful, because it is a systematic mechanism for removing observer bias.
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Monday 26th February 2018 at 18:49.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 26th February 2018, 13:36   #521
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
A sensible people, the ancient Greeks knew when not to develop a bad idea. An early model of steam train was found in Alexandria, in the form of a child's toy. Presumably the Alexandrians recognized that developing a rail network would lead either to massive deforestation or to vast pollution from burning dirtier fuels like coal and lignite. Hasn't stopped us, though. Now we burn coal to power wireless communications. Kind of makes me yearn for the stone age.
You mean this thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeolipile?
An amazing invention, well ahead of its time. However, can I point out that this was developed during the 1st century AD, i.e. when Ptolemaic Egypt was a Roman province, and that the Roman period was accompanied by massive deforestation around the Mediterranean (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defore...e_Roman_period).

Also there is this nice quote from Plato (though I don't know how authentic it is) about ancient Greece: "Contemporary Attica may accurately be described as a mere relic of the original country. There has been a constant movement of soil away from the high altitudes and what remains of her substance is like the skeleton of a body emaciated by disease. All the rich soil has melted away, leaving a country of skin and bone. When Attica was intact, her mountains were heavily forested and the country produced boundless pasture for cattle. The annual supply of rainfall was not lost as at present through being allowed to flow over the denuded surface into the sea, and so was received by the country in all its abundance into her bosom where she stored it in impervious potters' earth and so was able to discharge the drainage of the heights into the hollows in the form of springs and rivers with an abundant volume and a wide territorial distribution."

My point is that ancient civilisations did not have the means and information available to properly assess the impacts of their actions (let alone model future outcomes). We now do, thanks in no small part to this incredible tool for information storage, sharing, analysis and communication on a global scale. Yes there's a lot of noise on the Internet, but with a bit of training and effort it's not hard to spot and avoid
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Monday 26th February 2018 at 18:50.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 26th February 2018, 21:18   #522
Borjam
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Algorta Spain
Posts: 310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Winston Churchill once said words to the effect of, "If a man is not a socialist when he is twenty, he has no heart. If he is still a socialist at forty, he has no brains." People tend to grow more conservative with age, and more prone to taking the world as it is, saying, "I may not like the way things are, but what can I do about it?" Society needs youth to fight for social and planetary justice.
A bit unrelated, but you are quoting one of the main endorsers of wireless technology in human History. And I am not kidding at all.

Quote:
I had been wondering why we need 5G from space. Having already covered most of the earth with cell towers, why do we need it beamed at us from satellites as well? What's going on here?
Maybe, just maybe, some equal opportunity so that people who is not in a privileged situation like yourself can at least choose wether to use these services or not, rather than longing for them?

Which brings the question that you have chosen to use them.


(like it or not you are using the products and services of the mega corporations

Quote:
Words fail me at this point, so watch this video: https://tinyurl.com/y7dnjzof
It won't take you long to get the point. Another jolly green technology to kill the insects and the birds and the trees and us.
This video is really amusing and I really hope it will help lower the drama. Looks like some really resourceful woodpecker has braved the enormous amount of radiation in front of a parabolic antenna turning the antenna into something useful... for him!!!

http://twistedsifter.com/videos/look...-this-antenna/

Quote:
When Agis wrote that story, wireless hadn't been invented. We could imagine no other technology that could reduce the world to a barren planet. Now we have one. And all the youth think it's a jolly good thing.
Excuse me? If you are curious about sophisticated uses of wireless technology in WWII you can watch "The Battle of the Beams" on YouTube. It's an excellent documentary by the BBC (who else!)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jape View Post
so we know this, and our children know it even if not consciously recognised. the crucial consequences are not a barren world, the infrastructure will probably break long before that, nor the damage we have done already. nor is it the governments and companies you condemn. they represent us and are what we have created and wanted.
Have you ever thought that only in the last 40 years or so Humanity has really wondered about the environment?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nohatch View Post
However, I would argue against your idea that 'less literate people often make better observers
That reminds me of the somewhat superstitions notion that "simple" people make great jurys because they are "clean" and free of prejudices.

Quote:
My point is that ancient civilisations did not have the means and information available to properly assess the impacts of their actions (let alone model future outcomes). We now do, thanks in no small part to this incredible tool for information storage, sharing, analysis and communication on a global scale. Yes there's a lot of noise on the Internet, but with a bit of training and effort it's not hard to spot and avoid
Indeed. Related to that I can recommend two excellent books:

First: "Collapse" by Jared Diamond, about the collapse of several societies in the past due to climatic, environmental, and other issues.

Second: "The Human Web: A Bird's-Eye View of World History" by J. R. McNeill and William H. Mcneill about the role surprising role of communication even in ancient history.

As David Attenborough said in one of his documentaries (I think it was "Life of Mammals") we can be accurately described as "compulsive communicators".

Now, back to "studies". I am going to pick on my favourite one. The "tadpole" study.

So, the author decides to place two tanks full of tadpoles on a roof. He "shields" one of them with a Faraday cage. It's not rocket science, but the manufacturer is indeed colourful.

I presume it's one of these.

http://www.martech-systems.de/no_cac...ng-foiles.html

No mentions of technical data beyond "good shielding properties for electromagnetic fields up to 10 GHz" Nor a complete description of the setup. They even sell EMC proof underwear!

Suprisingly they use a real spectrum analyzer (the Advantest one with the R&S antenna) but they are unable to interpret the results. Table 1 mentions such crazy things like "frequencies that exist in reality and do not correspond with the frequencies contained in the database official(sic)"

Indeed. The database lists mobile phone base stations. Not FM broadcast stations like those on 88.5 MHz, 93.1 MHz, 98.1 MHz and 104.5 MHz. What's on 487.25 MHz, 671.25 MHz, 727.25 MHz and 751.25 MHz? Digital television broadcasts. Notice utterly improper "decibel" levels. I say improper because a Decibel is always related to a reference level. In the radio world the most frequently used "decibels" are the decibels related to a V (dBV) or related to a milliwatt (dBm).

I guess the levels are dBV because they have a positive sign although they might have forgotten the signs. dBm measured on a receiver are generally negative because the signal picked up by the antenna is much weaker than one milliwatt.

After the discussion of the measured "levels" there is no record of the received dose of radiation. It's easy with broadcasts, the transmissions are continuous. But mobile phone base stations are not continuous transmitters. So the article goes on with subjective observations with no hint of a double blind method, something quite easy to do in this case.

And, of course, if one wants to perform a study such as this one it must be done in a laboratory, with known and controlled radio sources, not in the wild.

Also, did they measure the levels on both tanks, or just "on the same roof"? If the tanks were close high frequencies can show surprising differences on received signal levels just by moving an antenna some centimeters because of multi path attenuation.

The author doesn't really understand how mobile phones work. GSM transmissions (the old digital mode) are indeed pulsed because it's based on time division. But the newer technologies rely on more sophisticated techniques to share the frequency spectrum.

I'm just picking on the obvious faults of course. There is also the implicit assumption that the "antennas" are the cause of the decline of amphibians. And, curiously, they admit that they didn't examine the dead specimens.

And, interestingly, they mention that the specimens of Rana temporaria were obtained from an anonymous supplier. Interesting, I say, because it's a protected species in Spain.
Borjam is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 26th February 2018, 21:32   #523
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nohatch View Post
So-called 'citizen science' can be incredibly valuable and is already widely used by scientists. Have you seen the spatio-temporal models on eBird for example? https://ebird.org/science/modeling
Great stuff. However, I would argue against your idea that 'less literate people often make better observers' - talent goes a long way but nothing beats practice and training if you want consistent and comprehensive information. Yet another reason scientific methodology has been so incredibly successful, because it is a systematic mechanism for removing observer bias.
Tut, tut, Nohatch, like a moth to the flame. . ..
__________________
Bird photos (Flickr): http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugl/
". . .Let them be left, O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."

--Gerard Manley Hopkins
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 27th February 2018, 12:06   #524
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 725
OK let’s do another one.

Balmori & Hallberg 2007, again in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine (IF 1.30), is an multi-year observational study of House Sparrow numbers in downtown Valladolid. It shares the same basic assumption with the 2005 White Stork study, namely that EMF will negatively affect bird numbers. No specific mechanism is proposed this time, but the justification for doing the study is based on ‘anecdotal evidence’ and earlier preliminary work by Balmori himself. I read through his 2002 piece on the h.e.s.e. website; it’s very short and these are the Experimental section and Results:

My study was carried out in the park of Campo Grande in the centre of Valladolid during 1996, 1997 and 1998, when there were just a few Telecommunication Masts in Valladolid, and the results have been compared with those for the current year 2002, when the city has been covered in its totality. Now there are, at least, 5 Base Stations of three telecommunication operators in the vicinity of this park. There are several places in Valladolid where birds have disappeared with levels of radiation between 2 and 10 V/m. In recent years, lots of carrier pigeons got lost because of the electromagnetic fields coming from the Telecommunication Masts and Base Stations.
Birds tend to avoid places with high levels of electromagnetic contamination. Some “silence areas” clearly exists where there are no song males. 11% of the species of breed have disappeared slowly from the park (2 of 17). The number of song males of several species have decreased.


The piece also mentions the following in the Introduction (worth repeating as it was used as an argument a while back in this thread):

Telecommunication Masts usually are installed in high places in order to achieve more coverage for the signal. For this reason there is lower density power in lower places. These waves impact to the species in different ways depending on the breeding height, the height of singing, feeding, nest location, kind of nest etc. This is the reason for the decline of species that frequent roofs, aerials, phone wires or those with higher breeding height such us House Sparrows (Passer domesticus), Starlings (Sturnus vulgaris), Magpies (Pica pica), but not those that live near the ground and vegetation like Blackbirds (Turdus merula), Robins (Erithacus rubecula), Wrens (Troglodytes troglodytes), or those that breed in cavities where they are more protected like the Blue Tit (Parus caeruleus), Great Tit (Parus major), Coal Tit (Parus ater). Apart from that, it is likely that each species will show different susceptibility to these radiations.

In Europe, House Sparrow populations have of course crashed as we all know, as have those of Starlings. However, the decline of the latter started in the early 1980s, so how this is supporting evidence for the EMF theory is unclear to me. Oh, and Magpie numbers in Europe are stable. But whatever. Note the language used though: “This is the reason for…”, not “This may be the reason for…” or even better “To test if this is a reason for…”. Scientific indeed.

One more aside before we go back to the actual paper: the second author O. Hallberg of “Hallberg Independent Research” was a former manager at Sony-Ericsson before (http://home.swipnet.se/~w-78067/) going independent in 2003. Despite lacking any formal qualifications, he cast himself as a biomedical expert in the field or radiation and cancer, and published a bunch of papers of questionable quality (including this beauty: https://www.improbable.com/2010/07/0...de-get-cancer/). What his contribution is to the Sparrow paper, beyond being in the anti-EMF camp, is unclear.

So, let’s start with the Introduction: it’s a bit better than the one in the Stork paper, but that’s not saying much. Some balance is provided in that the authors mention declines have predominately been in urban areas, and that there are many suggested causes for the decline in House Sparrow populations. However, the same mistake is then repeated in that no confounding factors to the hypothesis were examined. In that scenario the best we can hope for is a correlation between two data sets, which may not be causal even if statistically significant (more on that in a sec). I simply don’t understand this approach. Why didn’t they use a control (low exposure) sparrow population, measure more variables, do parallel observations on a couple of other bird species etc? This is basic stuff you know.

Then the actual measurements. Borjam has already pointed out the weaknesses of measuring field strength using a portable device. Balmori used this to get a mean electric field strength [for each counting area]. I suspect the error range on this will have been pretty big, but someone more qualified than me should comment on that. Then he simply counted the total number of House Sparrows in each area (n=30). Again, site selection was not blinded and at the discretion of the author. Counts were done roughly once a month over a near 4 year period.
The first figure plots all the raw data: sparrow density (counts/ha) versus mean area field strength (V/m). Looks sort of convincing doesn’t it? Until you realise that that trendline corresponds neatly with observation density (i.e. most data points at 0-0.5 V/m and only five observations at >1.5 V/m). Figure 2 is a close-up of the 0-1.5 V/m plot and if you look at the mean values there is barely a trend. Figure 6 is a repeat of Figs. 1 and 2 but with mean sparrow densities; again not corrected for observation density. Note as well that all three observations >3 V/m were made at a single site during a 3-month period. What also struck me is that there are 20 data points in the plot, even though there were allegedly 30 field sites – what happened to the other 10? It’s possible they grouped sites by field strength categories (i.e. 0.1 V/m increments) – in that case I take my hat off to the authors for finding sites with similar sparrow habitat in a busy city that are perfectly spaced by 0.1 V/m over 15 consecutive increments, and have a stable field strength for four consecutive years! My guess is they didn’t though and that instead the data were grouped post hoc, which makes more sense. But if that is the way it was done then the data should have also been corrected for the seasonal variation in sparrow density (Fig. 3). See what I mean PH? You can’t just chuck a bunch of data together and ignore the underlying (multi)variability.

The Discussion is mostly concerned with citing studies supporting their cause, so doesn’t add much value. They conclude by saying “The apparently strong dependence between bird density and field strength according to this study…”. Sorry guys, but it really isn’t, and any reviewer worth their salt should have pointed that out to you.
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Tuesday 27th February 2018 at 12:27.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 27th February 2018, 13:17   #525
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 398
@ mono These things don't help the birds, any, do they? And they aren't going to help anyone when they start beaming 5G from space and the upper atmosphere.

@ Borjam I wonder what I've ever said that gives you the impression I am "in a privileged situation". Actually, I think we are all living in a society where privilege, along with basic human rights, is being eroded very quickly. It is certainly not a privilege to be irradiated against one's will; rather it is a violation of one's basic human rights. I question your assumption that people everywhere are "longing for" these services. They are not a basic human need; the "need" and "longing" for mobile technology is being artificially created through subsidizing mobile phones and advertising (just, by the way, as was the case with cigarettes). Nor are people who supposedly long for this technology being given full information on how this technology may affect their health and the health of the planet; their so-called "longing" is not the product of a free and informed decision.

So don't make me laugh. I am hardly proposing that man should cease to communicate. Your premise that getting rid of mobile technology would return us to the stone age is ridiculous and you know it. The dubious benefits of wireless technology are far outweighed by the harm it causes: harm to human health, harm to societal health, harm to nature. And if we cannot do better than that as a society, shame on us--we have made no real progress in the last two millenia. Addiction is not need. Wireless technology does not fulfill any real need; it is the true opium of the masses, and the best I can say for it is that it's one of the slickest con jobs ever perpetuated on the human race.

If you want a good book by Jared Diamond, try "Guns, Germs and Steel"--there's a good example of the benefits of civilization for you. I have always been fascinated by man's persistence in manufacturing and using guns, which were so very slow and inaccurate for so long after they were invented compared to the extremely accurate and efficient bow and arrow. Now children have fast and accurate guns, and use them to kill other children. Hooray for progress!

@ Nohatch I don't have time to properly respond to everything you said today, but a couple of questions to be getting on with. Why do you think Balmori's stork study is so widely quoted? Is it possible that you are in fact missing the good points? You say you would have torn his study to shreds on peer review. Yet it did pass peer review and get published. Assuming peer review to be a reasonably rigorous process, how do you account for this?

When I say that less literate people often make better observers, I do not mean that these people are stupid or naive. Clearly one can be trained to observe in certain ways, and that is a useful skill. However, people who spend little or no time reading spend more time observing, because they don't use reading as a way to pass the time. Also, there are times when a lack of education is an advantage. All schooling teaches perceptual patterns, which are often more important than the information per se; those patterns become the lens through which we view the world. Truly original thought, which is rare, goes beyond the bounds of those patterns. Have you never noticed how children come up with astonishingly original observations? This is largely because they have not yet acquired the perceptual patterns and so are not constricted by them. Perceptual patterns are form of bias.

Next question. If we have the tools to model future outcomes of our activities, do you think we are employing these tools to model the probable outcome of flooding the entire planet with 5G wavelengths, given what we already know about the effects of EMR on human populations, geomagnetic orientation of insects, birds and other vertebrates, etc? Or that we have used these tools to model the probable impact of all those rocket exhaust fumes from sending all those satellites into orbit?
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Google - this site may harm your computer ?? Kits Computers, Birding Software And The Internet 7 Saturday 31st January 2009 17:09
What birds can harm humans scuba0095 Birds & Birding 40 Friday 26th May 2006 18:09
Do feeders do more harm or good? cavan wood Garden Birds, Bird Feeding & Nestboxes 14 Tuesday 17th May 2005 14:19
The Living House, The Living Garden George Ordish Richard D Books, Magazines, Publications, Video & DVD 3 Tuesday 5th October 2004 13:59

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.31518602 seconds with 38 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 04:52.