Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

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 Monday 5th March 2018, 14:01   #576
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
i read 'on the beach' yesterday. a calm, upper middle class British behaviour emulated or similar by US and Australian Military Officer class with a nod to a couple of lower class eccentrics. Completely unreal especially with female characters. Not likely behaviour even 60/70 years ago. There would have been massive social and structural breakdown, panic, refugee movement and so on with all the worst aspects of murder, rape, military and police intervention. The story is a surreal invention and little more. Modern apocalyptic fiction is far bleaker and violent even without zombies and far more realistic i believe.

If your projections about EMR disaster come true, it will not take scientific studies to trigger it. A couple of reports by BBC in UK backed by facebook escalation or a tweet or two by a celebrity and links to Oprah or Letterman (or whoever, i dont keep in touch with tv) and there would be riots. It is unlikely that landlines, couriers and pieces of paper would handle modern business systems and distribution either locally or worldwide. I hope you are wrong is all i can say.

We had reports on extinction of beetles on here, and intensive farming causing harm. People, including some of your antagonists are reporting and watching sanely. Too little too late perhaps.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 5th March 2018, 15:53   #577
Borjam
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Algorta Spain
Posts: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Can you compare bird numbers now with bird numbers 10 years ago? 20 years ago? Pre-cell towers?
I can make lots of casual observations about bird abundancy and the presence of different kinds of aerials. I dare to say I am blessed with two key abilities for that because:

1- I like nature, so I pay attention to species I see around me.

2- I am an amateur radio operator and since I was 12 I *do* pay attention to all kinds of antennas I see around. Moreover in many cases I can tell you what it's likely to be its purpose.

I live in a very humanized area (Northern Spain, Greater Bilbao metropolitan area) and, amusingly enough, bird diversity has increased a lot around me together with the proliferation of "wireless technologies".

I don't have a scientific explanation for that, but I think there are two simple and obvious factors.

1- Pollution. With the demise of heavy industry together with much tougher regulation and the installation of residual water purification systems some kinds of pollution have plummetted. Rivers are much cleaner now.

2- Respect for the environment. When I was a kid it was a common pastime (not for me!) to "hunt". Usual victims were small lizards, frogs, toads... and of course birds. Last Wednesday, when we had problems with snow in the morning, I remembered that during the last "great snow" we had here in 1985 or 1986 I saw kids hunting birds with small carbines. Know what? Thanks to the obsession with videogames you won't see kids "hunting" nor torturing toads, frogs, lizards or even kittens (yes, it happened as well).

Where in the past I only saw sparrows now I see sparrows, great tits and, surprisingly, magpies. I say surprised because I think I mentioned that they were really rare here. When I was a kid I had to travel 100 Km to the South to see one.

Quote:
Plus a lot of the birds you mention are great tits, and as far as I can tell, great tits seem to be one of the species that minds EMR the least, perhaps because they nest in holes in trees so the eggs/embryos/hatchlings aren't exposed to much EMR. As do woodpeckers.
What's special with great tits? What about the other tit species?

The "wooden hole" explanation doesn't make sense, sorry. The wavelengths of mobile phone communications, especially the longest (between 30 cm and 12 cm) penetrate trees and walls without much trouble. Direct penetration is not the only way of course, indirect reflections can end up "entering" through the opening.

And what about the population explosion of magpies here? Magpies don't nest in cavities. Moreover they use to choose high spots which make them really exposed to EMR.

Quote:
Tell me, Jos, are you not in the least uneasy at the prospect of all those frequencies being beamed down on your bird reserves? Or are you just keeping your fingers crossed that it will all be okay?
Doana (Spain) has video cameras and wireless links, which turns out to be much better for the environment than digging trenches and burying cables or fibers.

The real problem in Doana is the proliferation of clandestine strawberry plantations around the protected aerea and of course that insane Spring celebration.
Borjam is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 5th March 2018, 19:45   #578
hwinbermuda
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
hwinbermuda's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Dereham, Norfolk
Posts: 378
Quote:
Originally Posted by jape View Post
i read 'on the beach' yesterday. a calm, upper middle class British behaviour emulated or similar by US and Australian Military Officer class with a nod to a couple of lower class eccentrics. Completely unreal especially with female characters. Not likely behaviour even 60/70 years ago. There would have been massive social and structural breakdown, panic, refugee movement and so on with all the worst aspects of murder, rape, military and police intervention. The story is a surreal invention and little more. Modern apocalyptic fiction is far bleaker and violent even without zombies and far more realistic i believe.

If your projections about EMR disaster come true, it will not take scientific studies to trigger it. A couple of reports by BBC in UK backed by facebook escalation or a tweet or two by a celebrity and links to Oprah or Letterman (or whoever, i dont keep in touch with tv) and there would be riots. It is unlikely that landlines, couriers and pieces of paper would handle modern business systems and distribution either locally or worldwide. I hope you are wrong is all i can say.

We had reports on extinction of beetles on here, and intensive farming causing harm. People, including some of your antagonists are reporting and watching sanely. Too little too late perhaps.
damn, and I thought we may agree, but hey!
hwinbermuda is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 5th March 2018, 20:01   #579
Jos Stratford
Beast from the East
 
Jos Stratford's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Exile in Eastern Europe
Posts: 15,919
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Jos, you're really sore at me for not rewriting my paper on northern Greece to reflect your input.
I do not think you should be rewriting to reflect my input, you should be rewriting to make it a paper worthy of supporting an argument. Personally I think your 'paper' on northern Greece at present is little short of meaningless - a trip around the country with non-systematic observations, then a comparison with recollections of how it 'used to be'. No mention of other possible factors (that we know did affect numbers in 2017), no mention of methodology, no consideration of observations of other persons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
How many years have you had your land in Lithuania? Can you compare bird numbers now with bird numbers 10 years ago? 20 years ago? Pre-cell towers? Plus a lot of the birds you mention are great tits, and as far as I can tell, great tits seem to be one of the species that minds EMR the least, perhaps because they nest in holes in trees so the eggs/embryos/hatchlings aren't exposed to much EMR. As do woodpeckers. So I can't say that the information you supplied makes too much difference to my case.
Clearly you don't read posts very much either - mentioned Great Tits only on the basis that I had ringing data, but also mentioned observations more widely, about breeding species on my land and in Lithuania in general, plus the doubling of the White Stork population, etc. Do they all nest on holes too? Quite a number of other species are doing well. 20 years is the answer to your question above.

In your typical fashion, you found a report that said a number of species were declining in Lithuania and decided to link this to cell towers, categorically saying that EMR was partly responsible for these declines in Lithuania. Still waiting for the answer to the question I asked you - do you even know which species are declining? Do you have any evidence to support your categorical claim that EMR is responsible for the decline in these species in Lithuania? I think no. Just another claim.
__________________
For photographs and articles, Lithuania and beyond, click here for my website

Last edited by Jos Stratford : Monday 5th March 2018 at 21:53.
Jos Stratford is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Monday 5th March 2018, 20:18   #580
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by hwinbermuda View Post
damn, and I thought we may agree, but hey!
lol i enjoyed it as fiction. bit too contrived though and as a post apocalyptic novel, rather reflects the unreality of that time when Britain had an Empire, the world map was dominated by it and sound common-sense with a touch of restraint and a raised eyebrow sufficed to calm the unruly masses. it was a bloody lie then based on slavery and power. i went to a 'good school' and it was a cesspit of horror, corruption and bigotry where priests and masters buggered boys, used violence to control and educated little meaningful beyond hypocrisy. little has changed except the superficial. the masses have cars and communications and entertainment. and credit ratings.
and 4G.going on 3.5G and 4.5G let alone 5G.
i shall read more of his Australian stuff but not as an answer to anything just because i had 30 great years there and admire the buggers. they are doomed as well though, China owns them.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Monday 5th March 2018, 21:40   #581
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ jape Although I am in general pessimistic, I wouldn't be doing this here if I didn't have hope. There IS hope, but it requires action. You know, I am sure, the quote (I forget who said it) that for evil to prosper it is only necessary for good men to remain silent. Therefore we who can see an evil thing happening must not remain silent.
That quote has a difficult history of attribution:
https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/12/04/good-men-do/

You are quite correct in your implied meaning, I happen to agree.

I would suggest this is a theme also explored by the song The Sounds of Silence by Simon & Garfunkel (of course open to interpretation). This song is also modernized and covered (quite excellently, if you don't mind heavy metal music) by Disturbed. Both of which are songs I enjoy both musically and thematically.

Back on topic however: "saying something" and "saying something useful" are two different things.

Let me give you an example: I'm going to go out on a limb that "climate change being human caused" is real and demonstrable with enough patience for the math involved, and can even be expressed in a simple fashion.

However, because there were a number of reputable scientists that fudged their numbers, took shortcuts, or otherwise made errors that could be construed as intentional, it has diluted and confused the entire argument and certain portions of the population now have counter-arguments that while tenuous given the entire body of evidence, are a basis to be skeptical.

So the lesson is: keep it factual, keep it demonstrable, never fake it, never dilute it, never stretch it. Eventually those against your argument will use it against you. It's a good example of the adverse affects of lying, being in a rush, and doing flawed studies.

So instead of the "hundreds of flawed studies" you'd be better served harping on a small subset of ones done in reputable journals that have been super-thorough, over a period of time, and really full of details and edge cases.

And...avoid "meta studies" (studies that simply aggregate other studies). Those are a statistical landmine that at best explore very coarse trends but are not "studies" insofar as actionable data (except the action of "this proves nothing but does need a better study"). Meta studies also suffer from the same problem you're having...one bad choice of a study to include will make the entire exercise a waste.

Which brings us back to, no doubt, that you don't want to wait and wished (because it won't happen) everyone would stop now and do it correctly. You'll be able to be smug when your birdpocalypse happens and say "I told you so," but unfortunately that's small solace.

As for the "stop using cell phones" and all that...I wish. But honestly I'd be out of a job. It's a modern expectation, period. I'd love to go do the "live off the grid, etc., etc."...I've contemplated it more than once. But the irony, is that takes money I don't have (land, home, grid to properly go off-grid, etc.). My what a world we live in where only people with money can successfully get off-grid, eh?

Yeah, I fall into the "we're f*cked, I'm just going to do the best I can given the circumstances." Chances are, I silently rage more than most, but am not as vocal as folks like you would prefer. You're welcome to think ill of me for that, but you'll have to get in line behind my own self-deprecation on the matter.

Part of me gives you kudos for your determination, but the part we are arguing here is your methods and evidence. It is currently a bit like tipping at windmills.
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 20152018
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 6th March 2018, 10:25   #582
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 411
EMR -- A Thalidomide in the Making

I'm attaching three pieces that look at the effects of EMR. Two are quite short and relatively easy (emf-117 and COMMENTS) while the third is very long--but worth it.

The "Comments" by Dr. Ronald Kostoff, whose academic credentials are superb, (Ph.D. from Princeton, etc.) makes the point that not only should EMR be considered an environmental toxin, but that it works in combination with other toxins which exist in the environment. When we test for EMR effects on laboratory animals, those animals tend to be raised in a pristine environment where they are not exposed, as we are in real life, to all manner of toxic substances. We don't just have EMR to cope with. We have EMR plus automobile exhaust fumes, pesticides and a host of other toxins that could make us ill. These toxins act synergistically with EMR, which makes bad outcomes more likely. Also, the effects of exposure to EMR are cumulative. Dr. Kostoff is strongly opposed to beaming 5G from space, which he likens to putting passengers onto a newly-designed jet which has never had a trial flight.

I should make one thing clear about 5G. 5G is not a single frequency. 5G is a generic term that includes high Gigahertz frequencies along with low Megahertz frequencies. So 5G is a spectrum of frequencies, as you can see if you look at the list of satellites and the frequencies that they will emit, which I posted a couple of days ago.

The second piece, emf-117, is by Dr. Barrie Trower, who worked on microwave weapons for the British military for many years and has devoted his time since then to warning people about the dangers of EMR. This piece I got from the EU's own website (see http://ec.europa.eu/health/scientifi...cs/emf_117.pdf ) He calls Wi-Fi "A Thalidomide in the Making" because irradiating young children will lead to sterility and DNA damage that will be passed down from one generation to the next until the human race is sterile. He echoes Kostoff in pointing out that EMR does not necessarily affect everyone in quite the same way, and it acts synergistically with other environmental factors. Exposing young, developing beings to Wi-Fi at home or at school is a very, very bad idea. We are in fact experimenting on children, and the generation we are experimenting on hasn't grown up yet. If you have children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews, brothers or sisters you should read this piece. Then think about birds and whether they will be able to reproduce in the high-EMR environment they are proposing to unleash on the world.

Wi-Fi in schools may be one of the reasons that the US is seeing so many incidences of school shootings. The topic of EMR and aggression has not been much studied, but incidences of children taking a gun to school and killing other children are rising sharply. The paper by Dr, Neil Cherry examines the proposition that EMR may contribute to such violent behaviour, through several mechanisms. EMR interrupts sleep and causes cognitive dysfunction. It inhibits melatonin production. This can lead to depression, which in turn can lead to violence. At 65 pages, this paper is far too long to summarize in this post, but it is worth the time. It also summarizes a lot of the findings about EMR with respect to DNA damage and miscarriage.

If Wi-Fi in schools is in fact a contributory factor to mass school shootings, imagine the effect of 5G from space on the general population. The prospect of mass violence is unpleasant to contemplate, and would probably not be limited to human populations. Balmori notes, in his "Effects on Wildlife", that he has observed increased aggression in dogs as well as humans as a result of EMR. This interested me because we encountered some very mad and aggressive dogs in Northern Greece last spring, mostly along the Greek-Turkish border where EMR levels are very high due to a combination of military and civilian sources from both sides. So imagine not only a madly aggressive human world, but also an aggressive animal world. It could happen.

For Borjam, especially, I recommend reading section 1.3 of Cherry's paper, called "Biological Context" which begins of page 3. Cherry says, "For too long the RF/MW debate has been dominated by physics and physical concepts and arguments." I believe, Borjam, that you said there wasn't a debate between physicists and biologists? There is. Physicists have been the ones saying EMR can't cause biological harm. Biologists have maintained that EMR does cause biological harm. The trouble is, the fluid-filled plastic head used to model the effects of EMR on the human brain just doesn't cut it. The human head is not a water-filled bit of plastic, and damage is being caused at non-thermal levels.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 6th March 2018, 11:19   #583
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 411
@ Kevin, jape I really, really, really hope I am wrong, and I really, really don't think I am. If I am right, I certainly won't be crowing or "told-you-so"ing. What would be the point? I know I am having difficulty in getting my message across, but I can't see why the simple proposition "We should demand a moratorium on 5G/wi-fi from space until we are absolutely sure it is harmless" generates so much argument.

We've already got 2G. 3G. 4G and 4G+. So the cell phones and smart phones and all the rest are already working. And I accept that most people can't just not own one in the modern world, that there are times when you can't function in your job or earn a living without it, and going off the grid is just a fantasy for most people. (We could keep these things away from children and keep cell towers out of nature reserves, though--at least till all the evidence is in.) But they're already here, and in one sense we can take some time about arguing the health and environmental effects.

5G s a different issue, though. We've got a very short period of time before they blast an untested technology which is NOT vital at us, and they haven't tested it at all for biological effects. 5G and the IOT are not about saving the world, they're about making money for that .0001 percent who already have too much to begin with. So what is wrong with demanding a moratorium until they do some proper studies on a bunch of new, totally untested frequencies? That's the main question. I don't think you have to be 100% convinced that EMR at current levels/generations is harmful to say, "Wait a minute, let's test this for harmful effects before we unleash it on every square centimeter of the globe." It is enough to say, "We need to do more studies on the effects of current levels of EMR before we go on to the next generation of this technology, and then we need to test the hell out of that too."

Some people, like me, believe that all EMR is harmful, and I protest the imposition of a technology that I believe harms people and nature. But this is a worldwide, potentially disastrous technology that hasn't even been studied. This does not need to happen RIGHT NOW. It isn't going to cure the world of a pandemic; there is no urgency. And there is a potential for disaster. So I think people should protest that. I think we should be calling for a moratorium on 5G.

As for the studies I've posted, I've said all along that someone else could probably do a better job. But I'm the one doing it, and I do my best for what it's worth. At least it raises an issue that hasn't been much discussed, if at all. At least you and others have now heard about it and thought about it, and I've posted loads of sites that carry studies I haven't posted here. So people could do their own research and come to their own conclusions independent of mine, though most won't bother. I'm not God. I'm a birdwatcher living on an island where most of the birds have disappeared and a lot of trees are dying.

I do wish people would at least demand a moratorium on 5G. But I don't have a magic wand and no genie from a bottle has grated me any wishes lately. So I think we're f****d, but I too am doing the best I can under the circumstances. Because we still have a little time, and I'll keep hoping till it runs out.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 6th March 2018, 11:33   #584
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ Kevin, jape

We've already got 2G. 3G. 4G and 4G+. a moratorium on 5G. have a little time, and I'll keep hoping till it runs out.
my tech friends on forums i attend about antennas and routers and modems etc. seem to think that 5G is just a pick up on small cells in cities and the satellites are just an idea. so i will look into this a little more, just what is intended to be 'rolled out' and when. i wont be around much longer myself but i do quite like some of my children ...

i shall ask around the techies who get to do the actual engineering and testing just what is lined up and despite the risk of thrown bricks and laughter i will ask about reports and effects they may know of. they are not, mostly, stupid and some are helpful and even altruistic.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 6th March 2018, 13:02   #585
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 411
@ jape According to the Washington Post article I posted, and info from other sources, the satellites are more than an idea--they are going to happen unless the FCC changes course sharply. I would actually be quite interested in what the techies know about this.

@ Borjam. Regarding magpies, the fact that you are now getting them is, to me, a sign that EMR is influencing the environment where you live. I have remarked several times that members of the crow family (jays, magpies, crows, jackdaws) seem to thrive with EMR. In Soufli, northern Greece, jackdaws have driven the pigeons away. Here on Samos we have a lot more crows and jays than we used to (in Greece at least, you tend not to get both magpies and jays), I don't know why this is, but other people besides me have noticed this. Also pigeons, great tits and blackbirds seem to do better with EMR, also wagtails. I can only guess at some reasons, and they might not be the same for every bird species, I just know that some seem to do better than others in an EMR environment. Also, as these birds take over, other species diminish in numbers--not all at once. It took several years for the public wi-fi to drive all the sparrows and other small birds from the town square, and now there are only pigeons. I don't think this is an entirely clear-cut issue with a single answer as to why these things happen, and I don't think there have been any studies on it. I just know from personal observation that certain species thrive and others don't, and I have heard similar observations.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 6th March 2018, 14:50   #586
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ Kevin, jape I really, really, really hope I am wrong, and I really, really don't think I am. If I am right, I certainly won't be crowing or "told-you-so"ing. What would be the point? I know I am having difficulty in getting my message across, but I can't see why the simple proposition "We should demand a moratorium on 5G/wi-fi from space until we are absolutely sure it is harmless" generates so much argument.
It's not so much as "argument" as "that is just the way the world works."

I'm sure many of us here wouldn't particularly care, I know I'm not pining-away for 5G or space WiFi (been served very amicably without it). But there are other huge forces that aren't going to budge. The die has been cast, so to speak, and the masses aren't going to budge.

You might convince one person, or a dozen, or even 100. But for those tens of thousands; hundreds of thousands?

Yeah, not going to happen, sorry. It's been my experiencing that getting one person to change their mind on what I consider a fairly straightforward issue is nearly impossible; they have to find their own epiphany. Getting a corporation to change their mind? An order of magnitude more difficult (work for one of those). A government...this can be truly a near lost-cause (and I have a little experience trying to pass a bill at the state level).


Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
But I don't have a magic wand and no genie from a bottle has grated me any wishes lately. So I think we're f****d, but I too am doing the best I can under the circumstances. Because we still have a little time, and I'll keep hoping till it runs out.
I feel like that about alot of things, have for a long time. Our president has me thinking about it alot more, depressingly, of late.
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 20152018
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Tuesday 6th March 2018, 17:03   #587
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
how would a scientist run good studies anyway? volunteer aged mother for various brain and organ cell extraction multiplied by what number in which populations? and then do that for eggs and foetus sampling and dna extraction weekly for ever? with control populations in different frequency/pollution/dietary regions... never going to happen except as retroactive 'ooops' if even provable. that is why they use plastic test heads.
the human race is its own testbed and has been forever. it is what we do and moratoriums ... nah. not on, sorry, they thought 15mph+ would kill us without any impact (citation lost sorry). and it was never a good idea to pick up a hot coal either. i would like to see 'how' anyone can study this. yet i agree emotionally if not intellectually it is time to slow down and catch up with other revolutionary ideas, empathy, peace, morality, commonsense ...
how would you net , ring, count birds worldwide let alone insects, habitat recording? what kind of budget? it woukd cost the trillians that go into the pentagon, can't have that.

Last edited by jape : Tuesday 6th March 2018 at 17:13.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Tuesday 6th March 2018, 17:14   #588
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by jape View Post
i would like to see 'how' anyone can study this.
Scientists are a clever bunch.

If EMR is harming the animals in some way (e.g, causing their death or severe injury) then testing even small samples of a wide variety of the plentiful species in the lab might be warranted. Various ages, and various "other variables" I may not be aware of (you don't want me to set this up, obviously). Very simple cause-and-effect.

If the symptoms are more subtle is where the problem lies. Multi-cause causes are also tough to study (think: Colony Collapse Disorder); though in multi-cause you can sometimes get enough data to at least prove certain synergies. But, bees give hoards of data when they die by the hundreds and thousands; birds don't generally die like that (and by the time they do, it is even more urgent than the bee problem).

If you're trying to prove birds are just "going elsewhere" (is it possible birds aren't dying but just moving elsewhere?) then that is a huge issue. That is alot of tagging and alot of observation over time.

Just a few thoughts from an amateur...imagine what somehow who knows this stuff inside-out could come-up with?
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 20152018
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 7th March 2018, 05:46   #589
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,420
5G—the international dimension. . ..

https://nyti.ms/2FljYim
__________________
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

Last edited by fugl : Wednesday 7th March 2018 at 08:00.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

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

Old Wednesday 7th March 2018, 11:05   #590
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 411
@ fugl As I've been saying, it's the military-industrial complex that wants this technology--this article confirms this. And they do not care if it kills all the birds.

@ Kevin, jape If one person can convince five others, who in turn convince five others, etc. it is possible to reach those hundreds of thousands necessary to change the course of events. A short letter of protest against 5G/Wi-Fi from space to the NGO of your choice (preferably one you donate to) would make a difference. If everyone did one small thing it would make a difference. In the 12 labors of Heracles, ants cleared the Augean stables--tiny bit by tiny bit. There is a moral lesson there.

The most insidious and soul-destroying aspects of new technologies, in which I include the Internet, the PC and the smartphone, is firstly, they dumb everyone down. They weren't meant to, but they do. You don't retain information you read on a computer screen the way you do the printed word. You don't read it properly in the first place (if at all) when you reduce the screen size to a few square inches. And the Internet is too big--theoretically you can reach everybody, but in practical terms what it really achieves is Babel or ghettoization. And this removes hope--small wonder that everyone says they are depressed about the direction the world is going in, with the young especially pessimistic. And no wonder that no one feels he can as an individual influence the course of events. That little glowing screen is the Soma of the masses, and boy are they addicted to it. It quiets them and stifles protest. Worse, the constant distraction is perfect for inducing the state of fear that allows manipulation. Give up a chunk of your liberties so the state can protect you against terrorism. Today's threat warning level is orange. Give up another chunk so the state can protect you against the Russian menace, the Chinese menace, the North Korean menace. There are spies everywhere, but if we monitor what everybody says all the time we'll find them. Etc. End result, whole populations end up as wee cowering beasties afraid to protest anything. Ever read Stephen King's "The Running Man"? The freevee is on in all homes all the time, by law. Perfect population control. The smartphone achieves the same end. Small wonder they want everyone to have one.

One of the effects of EMR has been to dim the stars. I remember in 1980, central Turkey, on top of Mount Nimrod one summer night, no human light anywhere, stars so big they hung like scintillating crystal fruits just out of reach. One clear winter night on Samos years ago, I saw five of Jupiter's fourteen moons with a pair of ten-power binoculars. No longer. The stars are growing dimmer because radio waves transform information into light. From Leonard Shlain's "Art and Physics" (1991) "Since the dawn of the age of radio astronomy in the 1960s, we have been able to detect all kinds of hitherto unseen objects in space...Of course, in the short span of ninety years, we have become a hot spot in space ourselves. As radio and TV transmitters continue to proliferate around the globe, Earth has started to twinkle as a new item in the intergalactic TV Guide."

Shlain's book was published just before the cellphone took hold. He is entranced by the possibilities of physics, by other worlds receiving signals from ours. But we're not going to those other worlds, because the universe is expanding away from us at the speed of light, and warp speed is just sci-fi. Ours is perfectly nice. It may literally be the best of all possible worlds in the universe. In any case it's the only one we can be sure of, which is why I think we shouldn't be jumping the gun with 5G. Will we see the stars at all with all those satellites, all those wavelengths?

Asking for a moratorium on 5G is a plea for time for scientists to properly study the effects of EMR. From everything I have read, EMR effects are both direct and synergistic, probably more synergistic than direct. I don't think the birds are "going elsewhere" because a lot of birds are resident and territorial--migratory birds might have some latitude but not if their needs are very specific. I am sure it is possible to design and do really good studies, but there needs to be proper funding and protocols. The problem is that, to date, funding for such projects has been very thin on the ground. Internet giants and telecoms and private industry are not going to fund projects proving that their products harm nature, nor will the governments they lobby. And it's all about funding in a publish-or-perish world.

We could demand that funding be made available by the governments we pay taxes to. But first we need to enact the precautionary principle and we need a moratorium on 5G. Write a letter. Influence one other person. The birds cannot speak, but we can.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 7th March 2018, 11:44   #591
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
from my quick and limited research 5G is going to be higher frequency and mainly lots of local cells on power poles etc. in suburbs and cities. still not good but not satellites beaming! although that could be next. also they are using bits of freed up frequency from ex military and so on. i also saw there are two other concerns, FCC cutting back on environmental impact studies and local areas losing control of pole siting. only one tech responded so far and he thinks the concern is 'bvllsh*t'. at quite some length and says how they do not do maintenance if birds nesting on towers etc. and that worst power levels would not affect anything. i await more.

other statements from techs related to this seem to be that habitat loss is the biggest problem and most are very anti 'green' as 'hypocritical city dwellers driving around in expensive recreationsl 4WD vehicles with full on mobile and data use, very few living in bark huts with no phones' ... i see their point. i will continue to prod and poke and keep awareness up.

Last edited by jape : Wednesday 7th March 2018 at 11:50.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 7th March 2018, 12:44   #592
Borjam
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Algorta Spain
Posts: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Wi-Fi in schools may be one of the reasons that the US is seeing so many incidences of school shootings. The topic of EMR and aggression has not been much studied, but incidences of children taking a gun to school and killing other children are rising sharply. The paper by Dr, Neil Cherry examines the proposition that EMR may contribute to such violent behaviour, through several mechanisms. EMR interrupts sleep and causes cognitive dysfunction. It inhibits melatonin production. This can lead to depression, which in turn can lead to violence. At 65 pages, this paper is far too long to summarize in this post, but it is worth the time. It also summarizes a lot of the findings about EMR with respect to DNA damage and miscarriage.
Sorry, no. I have been reasonably civil (except for my usual sarcasm) but this is really stupid. The paper itself is rather crazy starting with "I had to find an explanation for these sad events...".

Of course we can blame WiFi for the serious problem of sports violence although, curiously, it seems to be marginal with sports such as Rugby. Might be that the oval shapped balls affects microwaves in some way, offering an unexpected protection?

Come on!

Quote:
Balmori notes, in his "Effects on Wildlife", that he has observed increased aggression in dogs as well as humans as a result of EMR.
So, wasn't it clear enough that Balmori's studies are utterly clueless, hence useless?

Quote:
For Borjam, especially, I recommend reading section 1.3 of Cherry's paper, called "Biological Context" which begins of page 3. Cherry says, "For too long the RF/MW debate has been dominated by physics and physical concepts and arguments." I believe, Borjam, that you said there wasn't a debate between physicists and biologists? There is. Physicists have been the ones saying EMR can't cause biological harm. Biologists have maintained that EMR does cause biological harm. The trouble is, the fluid-filled plastic head used to model the effects of EMR on the human brain just doesn't cut it. The human head is not a water-filled bit of plastic, and damage is being caused at non-thermal levels.
I don't see a debate between biologists and physicists. I see some biologists making extraordinary claims, which is really different.

Anyway, this is going nowhere.
Borjam is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 7th March 2018, 15:30   #593
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
The most insidious and soul-destroying aspects of new technologies, in which I include the Internet, the PC and the smartphone, is firstly, they dumb everyone down. They weren't meant to, but they do.
Not entirely true, but requires moderation, like anything else. The actual problem is most people don't self-moderate well. Think Dom DeLuise as the crow in Secret of Nym (shiney!) or "Squirrel!" (was that from Up!, not sure)

Quote:
And this removes hope--small wonder that everyone says they are depressed about the direction the world is going in, with the young especially pessimistic. And no wonder that no one feels he can as an individual influence the course of events.
Also not entirely true. Hell, I've been dismayed at the world since before 300 baud modems. ;-p All it took before the internet was being in a marginalized group.

The internet simultaneously made things more depressing in some ways, and less depressing in others. Really is a bit of a wash. The internet can make you smarter, and you can have reading comprehension on-screen similar to books. Granted, not the case for everyone, and I agree that the small screen of a phone isn't the place for it. I use my big screen 90% of the time, small screen 10% of the time for that reason.

But I can't really say if I'm an outlying case or not. I certainly see the effect of "SOMA for the masses," as you put it. It's a bit of a part-time sport with me.

One of the reasons I unplug so much is to force myself to pay attention to the natural world. I haven't owned a car in 20+ years (full-time motorcyclist for the last 18 or so, now I bicycle). Don't get me started on Facebook. Facebook and cellular phones have been accurately (IMHO) described as "the best worst inventions of our time."

My depression about the world extends longer and wider than most people I've come across and first-hand experience taught me the near-futility and waste of time that comes from even simple change at the government level.

Look at the history of complex items in the USA (healthcare reform, gun reform) and even something as scientifically simple as legalizing domestic ferret ownership (California). I mean really, really look at the history of these things like you do this EMR stuff. That is what you're up against.

Frankly, I envy Buddhists...I can't quite let go, but I do try.

It's been a long time since I've been activistic and generally I tend to join once the ball has visible momentum to try and help since I'm more an "improver" than a "starter."

But I do keep a Guy Fawkes mask handy on the shelf...something may yet cause me to want to march in protest...and I suspect it'll be Trump that starts it.

Now after all that background on my empathy out of the way, back to the subject at hand:

Again, I applaud your efforts, and were your efforts backed-up by better science then: a) there would be alot more screaming scientists, and b) alot more screaming public, and c) alot more people in this thread up in arms.

Am I calling you a liar? Certainly not! Nave? Probably. Do I admire your energy? Certainly. But if you can't convince a bunch of bird lovers with various amounts and types of scientific knowledge surpassing your own your only choice is trying to do it via the political popularism route or taking a page from the online viral playbook. Could you really live with yourself using such "alt-right" and "tin foil hat" tactics? Step back a minute, seriously.

Again...think of this thread as peer review. Acknowledge that they are actually peers and in many case might or probably do exceed your own abilities and knowledge. Learn from the holes they are shooting in your arguments. Don't keep up the same barrage of tactics, actually learn and do better next time. There are people who are actually trying to help you fine-tune your ammunition, you just don't seem to realize it.
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 20152018
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Wednesday 7th March 2018, 16:08   #594
Mono
Hi!
 
Mono's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lake District,UK
Posts: 1,888
The hundreds of planned satellite launches are simply because the price of Low Earth Orbit launches has fallen much faster than the cost of launches to Geostationary Orbit. It is cheaper to provide a global service with 200+ LEO satellites than 4 Geostationary satellites.
Mono is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Wednesday 7th March 2018, 16:55   #595
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,420
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ fugl As I've been saying, it's the military-industrial complex that wants this technology--this article confirms this. And they do not care if it kills all the birds,
Its not just birds that will suffer but all other life forms as well, including people. Thats your contention, is it not?
__________________
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 Thursday 8th March 2018, 10:43   #596
Gordon
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 773
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugl View Post
Its not just birds that will suffer but all other life forms as well, including people. Thats your contention, is it not?
That's right. It really is a brilliant plan - I think I will kill myself.
Gordon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 11:37   #597
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 411
@ fugl You are correct. I think everything will suffer, and already is, but that it will get worse. Am I wrong? Wait and see.

@ Borjam It has not been demonstrated that Balmori is utterly clueless, but I think you are. Physics does not adequately address the issue of biological consequences of physical phenomena, and physicists get things wrong sometimes. Remember the concept of "ether"? That was physicists--and they got it very wrong for what, a couple of hundred years? So yes, there is a debate.

@ Kevin Thanks for the empathy, and I may indeed be naive, though that may be an effect of my diffidence of presentation rather than representing my world view. I dislike social media partly because so many people seem to take off the mask of courtesy they wear in public. I try not to do the same, but I feel it has not served me well and there are times when I ought to have been more assertive. A case in point is Nohatch's criticisms of several of the studies which he decided were worth demolishing because in some ways they were fairly easy targets. He declined to review other studies which were less easy to pick apart (e.g. Everett and Bauwens on sparrows) as well as a whole long list of other studies I have recommended, thus leaving the unfortunately indelible impression that the entire body of work finding biological effects of EMR is pseudoscience, which it is not. I correspond fairly regularly with a lot of the scientists who work on EMR and they are, on average, better qualified than Nohatch, whose surname I do not know and whose published papers I have never seen. So much for peer review on this site. The trouble with social media is that anyone can say he is anything.

I would have hoped that anyone who thinks there might be truth in the proposition that EMR damages nature would do his own research and assess the science for himself. The one real advantage of the Internet is that all the research is available online. There are lots of sites and lots of groups that publish the research, many of them doctors and scientists, just as there are many qualified medical professionals who think EMR should be reclassified as definitely carcinogenic--something I think will happen in time. So I don't think anyone should necessarily take my word for anything, but I don't think they should take Nohatch's either. I think they should look things up for themselves, and assess the research for themselves. If they are interested. I assume that if people are as well-qualified as they claim, they are capable of doing that.

Like you, I have flirted with Buddhism. But Buddha just shows the way. Everyone travels his own path--of observation,of research, of making connections, of coming to conclusions.

@ jape. Thanks for that. Let me know if you learn more.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 12:28   #598
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 726
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
A case in point is Nohatch's criticisms of several of the studies which he decided were worth demolishing because in some ways they were fairly easy targets. He declined to review other studies which were less easy to pick apart (e.g. Everett and Bauwens on sparrows) as well as a whole long list of other studies I have recommended, thus leaving the unfortunately indelible impression that the entire body of work finding biological effects of EMR is pseudoscience, which it is not. I correspond fairly regularly with a lot of the scientists who work on EMR and they are, on average, better qualified than Nohatch, whose surname I do not know and whose published papers I have never seen. So much for peer review on this site. The trouble with social media is that anyone can say he is anything.
What a nice post to come back to :)

I have been completely open about my background, much more so than anybody else in this thread including yourself. I dislike usernames and tend to sign off with my own name, which you've categorically ignored. So be it, it doesn't matter, but now you're essentially calling me a liar about my credentials, which is not on. I said a while back that I'm happy to send anyone my CV and posted a link to my LinkedIn profile, did you bother to check out either? Nah.
Or, hey, just an idea, you could have taken 5 seconds to google me! I tell you what, here, we'll do it together:
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=jo...hrome&ie=UTF-8
Et voila, the first 5 links are all me - you're very welcome!

[That sexual appeal of war heroes study wasn't me, clearly...]

And then accusation number two: I haven't "declined to review" any of the other studies. I've simply been too busy to post anything for the last week or two, and I haven't had time to go through more material. I said I would and I intend to, in time. You've either not read what I said, or chose to twist my brief spell of absence for your own purposes. Nice.

I have to also agree with others that you appear incapable of taking any dispassionate criticism on board: you wouldn't recognise peer review if it hit you in the face. I went through the effort of reviewing the Balmori papers, and all I got back is "well I still think he is right and you're wrong". That lacks any kind of substance, you're simply running away from the argument. But hey, that's just what dogmatics do - all you're doing is proving Fugl right. I recommend you fight your corner with proper arguments, otherwise no-one will have any reason to take you seriously.
So will you (and not anyone else) now, in all honesty, give me assurances that you're interested in a rational, scientific discussion about this topic? Using logic, arguments not opinions, and proper methodology and all that. Because if not, then why should I waste my time with any of this?

Joost (you can even see my picture if you use the right search terms!)
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Thursday 8th March 2018 at 16:04.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 14:31   #599
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 726
As always, there's a dedicated scientist somewhere who's done the (ground)work for you
For everyone's benefit, here is a fairly recent review of the potential environmental impact of EMF - it's pretty comprehensive in scope and has loads of specific criticisms for Ms Kordas (or any of her academic contacts) to try to refute.

The abstract:
"This review examines the potential environmental impact of radiofrequency (RF) fields emitted by mobile phone base station antennas and other sources of RF radiation. Overall, many alarming investigations were found but most are characterised by severe methodological shortcomings. For this reason these studies do not provide any evidence that observed biological effects are associated with exposure to the electromagnetic fields. So far, the studies do not prove that environmental exposures to mobile phone base station radiation (and other environmental RF exposures) are harmful to wildlife."

And the final section is worth repeating as the whole document is a bit of a long read:
"An overview of the investigations is given in Table 4, which gives an indication of the exposure levels (as reported by the authors), the study design, results and comments. Besides the above-mentioned investigation, some other papers were devoted to the effects of RF radiation on fauna and flora in the environment. These papers were review papers that should be seen more as position papers than that they add much more to the discussion (Balmori, 2006, 2009, 2010b; Panagopoulos and Margaritis, 2008). Therefore we will not review them here although the interested reader may like to refer them. We consider them “position papers” because they are often selective and only mention investigations that show adverse effects, ignoring those studies that do not. The authors did not provide a rationale for this selection. This is not surprising as they were also authors of many of the investigations that we reviewed in the present paper and that were all "positive". They of course did not criticise their own studies the way we did.

Overall, we learned from the above review that:
• Many of the papers do have shortcomings that may in some cases be very important, therefore minimising the significance of the findings;
• Especially shortcomings in the technical aspects (dosimetry) were obvious. For this reason, correlations between exposure and effect are often of no or reduced significance;
• Alarming results were often ascribed to thermal effects, and in many cases where non-thermal effects were assumed critical evaluations do show that this is probably not the case;
• Confounders and biases may often also weaken the importance of the findings. Often such confounders and biases could not be avoided;
• Many investigations yielded results that were insufficiently robust from a statistical point of view;
• In many studies, ELF and RF-EMF were mixed and confounded;
• Many alarming studies were published in scientific journals which lack any or a serious peer review process;
• Some of the most convincing negative studies had authors who were linked to the involved industry or were published in journals from the sector (Joos et al., 1988; Stager, 1989; Schmutz et al., 1996; Urech et al., 1996);
• We particularly criticised a number of alarming investigations because they are the most important when one wants to see if effects from RF radiation from mobile phone masts indeed occur. This does not mean that all negative” studies are free of shortcomings. We nevertheless could not find shortcomings in many of the negative studies that we critically approached. Some of the negative studies however concerned very weak RF exposures;
• Most studies reported experiments involving short term exposures. Data on long term exposures (in terms of decades) are totally missing;
• Effects on fertility are puzzling in this sense that also environmental RF exposures seem to be effective in altering normal reproduction. But these studies are in contradiction with most data from laboratory investigations that convincingly show that such effects can only occur following a thermal insult (e.g. NRPB, 2004; Juutilainen et al., 2009). Endocrine disruptors may also impair reproduction and development but there are no indications that may justify the classification of RF radiation among the endocrine disrupting agents;
• When we assume that field measurements were correct, no dose-effect relationship was found when all investigations were considered. Effects (or absence of effects) were found for as well high as low exposure levels. The size of the effects also varied greatly;
• Although environmental electromagnetic fields were in individual studies very often associated with biological effects from mobile phone masts it should be realized that effects might be caused by the simultaneous exposure to multiple fields strengths and frequencies and by other environmental confounding variables;
• Not all observed effects are harmful. They can often be seen as a normal biological process without any consequence;
• It should be realized that RF-bioeffect studies should be multidisciplinary, and hence need to be conducted by RF-radiation experts (engineers) and biological or medical researchers. This was clearly not always the case. Ideally, the peer review process should also be conducted by experts who cover all important aspects of the science. However, this was not always the case either. Not all peer reviewed papers are of a high quality.

With above considerations in mind, we should conclude that overall, many alarming investigations exist but that their interpretation is very difficult. To start with, it should be noted that “a long list of reports of positive results yielded by inadequate experiments may appear impressive and yet mean little” (Beers, 1989). Many of the experiments are inadequate, especially with regard to the field measurements. The present investigations therefore prevent any reliable assessment of the relationship between exposure levels and a biological effect. Biological observations are often ‘what they are’ but the experiments were in many cases also deficient for a number of reasons (e.g., too small sample size, inadequate controls, over-interpretation of the results, etc.). Furthermore, one should also be aware of possible shortcomings that can only be detected by the people actually present during the experiment.
Therefore, the studies so far do not prove or even do not strongly suggest that environmental exposures to mobile phone base station radiation (and other environmental RF-exposures) are harmful to wildlife. The many positive studies only indicate that additional investigations need to be undertaken. However, to be valuable, such studies should be as rigorous as possible and comprise a complete description of correct experimental conditions and dosimetry."


From what I've seen so far this is a pretty accurate summary (and it saves me a heck of a lot of work). As always, I'm happy to discuss specifics....when I have the time lol.

Take care,
Joost
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Thursday 8th March 2018 at 16:40.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 14:51   #600
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,557
Nohatch,

One item jumped-out at me that seems extremely important, that last bullet point:

"It should be realized that RF-bioeffect studies should be multidisciplinary, and hence need to be conducted by RF-radiation experts (engineers) and biological or medical researchers. This was clearly not always the case. Ideally, the peer review process should also be conducted by experts who cover all important aspects of the science. However, this was not always the case either."

It's not a big stretch that science has been (and maybe still is to great extent?) very silo'd, as the business world likes to say. Unfortunately this approach has meant we've been missing out on synergistic disciplinary studies of our world.

I really think the EMR issues is one of those areas where it's been studied in too much isolation between interested parties. Need experts, non-industry ones at that (which was pointed out above), from every discipline involved, to make the information rigorous.

I work in an industry (technically two industries I guess) where I see the scary side of what happens when you break down the barriers between experts in different fields. The results are incredible, if sometimes a little frightening.

I appreciate all the time an energy you've put into this discussion!
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 20152018
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

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 18:09
What birds can harm humans scuba0095 Birds & Birding 40 Friday 26th May 2006 19:09
Do feeders do more harm or good? cavan wood Garden Birds, Bird Feeding & Nestboxes 14 Tuesday 17th May 2005 15:19
The Living House, The Living Garden George Ordish Richard D Books, Magazines, Publications, Video & DVD 3 Tuesday 5th October 2004 14:59

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.36895299 seconds with 36 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 14:54.