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 Thursday 18th July 2019, 07:37   #1751
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 14,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borjam View Post
For example Spain where we eat an orders of magnitude healthier diet than the USA. I always wondered wether that "organic food" fever was mostly a US thing, reacting to poor quality food. In other parts of the world (here, for example) I can buy excellent fresh food within a 100 meter radius around my home.

Oh, and turns out even somewhat backwards Spain usually has much better wireless coverage than the USA. Which again is at odds with the electromagnetic armaggeddon thing.
Indeed, PH hasn’t provided a shred of credible evidence that EMR has the slightest deleterious real-world effect, just one phony-baloney “correlation” after another. Dto for her disciple and enabler, elkcub.

Poor diet (and its attendant health effects) is very much a class phenomenon in the States as I imagine it must be in many other parts of the world as well. In Nevada where I lived for a long time, this was most apparent in some of the small towns where the obesity rate had to be seen to be believed. I’ve walked into cafes in such places where virtually every chair was filled to bursting with bulging human flesh, whole families sometimes, men, women, children. . ..

But, we drift off topic. . ..
__________________
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 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 18th July 2019, 09:19   #1752
Bird_Bill
Registered User
 
Bird_Bill's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: St.Louis
Posts: 1,805
Just so happened that the New York Times ran an article yesterday tiltled The 5G Health Hazard That Isn’t

If you have your browser opened on a regular tab, should be able to read it, if youre interested.

Access may be disabled using a private or incognito tab.

After reading the article, memory of Gilda Radner's character Emily Litella, came to mind.

Oops...never mind


edit
Should be a working link below

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/s...ection=Science

Last edited by Bird_Bill : Thursday 18th July 2019 at 09:25.
Bird_Bill is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2012 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 18th July 2019, 14:06   #1753
CalvinFold
Registered User
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borjam View Post
For example Spain where we eat an orders of magnitude healthier diet than the USA. I always wondered wether that "organic food" fever was mostly a US thing, reacting to poor quality food. In other parts of the world (here, for example) I can buy excellent fresh food within a 100 meter radius around my home.
In the USA it's complicated. Part of it is we are overwhelmed with bad food choices, and bad food is cheaper. Our budgets are constrained so there are often shortcuts on the food budget; or for some people it's just bad priorities. "Corner markets" really don't exist for everyone, still have the same bad quality food, or cost more than we can afford on a regular basis.

I also think (and this is just me speaking) that we're more miserable than we think we are and eat bad food for comfort. I freely admit I do this, though am trying hard to get out of the habit. I'm not as round as many are, but far rounder than I should be.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Borjam View Post
Oh, and turns out even somewhat backwards Spain usually has much better wireless coverage than the USA. Which again is at odds with the electromagnetic armaggeddon thing.
Some parts of the world, land-line infrastructure was never that robust, so when wireless happened that became the default. In the USA, land lines are by far the default in many places because they have been for so long. Since we already had infrastructure, wireless took/takes longer because there is no hurry.

I can't say Spain falls into this category, usually places like Israel is where I've heard this commented on, where their cellular costs are less than a landline in the USA as one example.
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery • Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 2015–2018
CalvinFold is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 18th July 2019, 14:22   #1754
CalvinFold
Registered User
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,625
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borjam View Post
Nohatch wrote a very extensive criticism...
And then she essentially chased him off by attacking his professionalism and credentials. She still owes him and others an apology as far as I'm concerned.

As has been stated before, some people read her stuff, but why reply when PH will just make personal attacks and/or ignore you? Not much point.
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery • Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 2015–2018
CalvinFold is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 18th July 2019, 14:50   #1755
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
 
Chosun Juan's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central West NSW, Australia
Posts: 5,751
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by CalvinFold View Post
In the USA it's complicated. Part of it is we are overwhelmed with bad food choices, and bad food is cheaper. Our budgets are constrained so there are often shortcuts on the food budget; or for some people it's just bad priorities. "Corner markets" really don't exist for everyone, still have the same bad quality food, or cost more than we can afford on a regular basis.

I also think (and this is just me speaking) that we're more miserable than we think we are and eat bad food for comfort. I freely admit I do this, though am trying hard to get out of the habit. I'm not as round as many are, but far rounder than I should be....
It's worse than that - he's dead Jim !

The truth is actually far worse than that.

Despite the busyness of modern life (trying to adult), one of the best solutions is if you have local farmer's markets that you can get to at least once a month (yes you often have to make it a social activity or a date). This can help balance all the cr*p that passes for food these days (especially in America), and prove cost effective too.

The big issue with most mainstream modern processed food is that it is devoid of nutrition, and worse full of chemicals and other 'toxins'. You can be getting as soft as a marshmallow, as big as a whale, and as sluggish as a tortise, overeating and virtually 'starving' to death at the same time.

A large part of the 'comfort food' eating is just starvation --- starvation for the nutrients the body needs which can only come by consuming multiple times the really needed calories in this nutrionally devoid food. The modern processed diet is also full of highly combustible simple sugars and no real fibre. This compounds the problem. It is like throwing a match into a pan of petrol, rather than the slow controlled burn of a similar weight of coal or hardwood burnt in a slow combustion stove.

Eat the rainbow !

Food for thought ! ......... :)




Chosun
Chosun Juan is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 18th July 2019, 17:44   #1756
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 14,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bird_Bill View Post
Just so happened that the New York Times ran an article yesterday tiltled The 5G Health Hazard That Isn’t

If you have your browser opened on a regular tab, should be able to read it, if youre interested.

Access may be disabled using a private or incognito tab.

After reading the article, memory of Gilda Radner's character Emily Litella, came to mind.

Oops...never mind


edit
Should be a working link below

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/16/s...ection=Science
Missed that one—thanks for the link.

Edit—
“If human skin also blocks 5G signals, Dr. Carpenter acknowledged, “maybe it’s not that big a deal.” Well, yess. . .. Something that might have occurred to him earlier, I shiould have thought, blocking radiation of other kinds being a well-known (evolved) function of human skin!
__________________
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 : Thursday 18th July 2019 at 19:54.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 18th July 2019, 18:07   #1757
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 14,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalvinFold View Post
In the USA it's complicated. Part of it is we are overwhelmed with bad food choices, and bad food is cheaper. Our budgets are constrained so there are often shortcuts on the food budget; or for some people it's just bad priorities. "Corner markets" really don't exist for everyone, still have the same bad quality food, or cost more than we can afford on a regular basis.

I also think (and this is just me speaking) that we're more miserable than we think we are and eat bad food for comfort. I freely admit I do this, though am trying hard to get out of the habit. I'm not as round as many are, but far rounder than I should be.
Ah, the travails of the educated middle classes. . .. For some perspective, put yourself in the shoes of the “service” worker juggling 3 disgracefully underpaid jobs and still not able to make ends meet. Single mothers in this fix (of which there are legion)? I can’t imagine how they get through their days!
__________________
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 : Thursday 18th July 2019 at 18:11.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Yesterday, 04:35   #1758
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borjam View Post
So far none of the "evidence" is convincing. Moreover, when a well designed experiment fails to show dramatic effects turns out the cause is that signals were "artificial". Seems now it's become fashionable to suggest that mobile phones (artificial devices) have some unscrutable occult property that we fail to reproduce in experiments?
Borjam, you've clearly demonstrated, in your own words, how willing you are to disregard real-world evidence in favor of engineering model results. Talk about inscrutable. In a similar fashion, I'm confident you will disregard any adverse effects about 5G that emerge.

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

Last edited by elkcub : Yesterday at 06:13.
elkcub is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Yesterday, 08:26   #1759
Borjam
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Algorta Spain
Posts: 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
Borjam, you've clearly demonstrated, in your own words, how willing you are to disregard real-world evidence in favor of engineering model results. Talk about inscrutable. In a similar fashion, I'm confident you will disregard any adverse effects about 5G that emerge.
That's hillarious! You should submit a paper to "Annals of Improbable Research"!

What do you consider an "engineering model"?

We are not talking about an engineering model of a plant or an ant. We are talking about a human created piece of apparatus that generates electromagnetic signals with certain extremely well defined characteristics.

Your "engineering models" are other pieces of apparatus that, again, generate the same signals which are, I repeat, extremely well characterized.

What's the difference? Maybe a cell phone conversation about Flat Earth™*is more potent as a carcinogen than, say, a chess match over the phone? (*)

The attempts to discredit properly engineered tests are really stupid. It's fake news 101 and I'm really annoyed of it. Putting hapless tadpoles on a roof and "measuring" with toys and knowing absolutely nothing about measuring in the first place is great. Taking proper measurements with perfectly defined transmission characteristics is wrong.

Why? Nothing showed up, so it must be the experiment that didn't model the "complexity" properly. Pseudoscience thrives on confusing information. Accuracy pretty much kills most pseudoscientific claims. And the same happens in the real world with news on any subject. Confusion breeds suspicion, so any news source, no matter how trusted it can be, becomes infected and the victim becomes unable to choose one. I listened to Eastern Bloc propaganda on short wave as a hobby when I was a teen and I think I learned quite a lot.

Which complexity? Well, maybe our electronics have become so complex, cell phone base stations are actually evolving living things, so they have developed unknown behaviors. In that case, yes, we could talk about "engineering models".

Know what? Let's involve Sir David Attenborough to shoot a new series: Life of Photons.

Now, seriously. What are the differences?

(*) Actually the signals are identical, pretty elementary Information Theory.
Borjam is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Yesterday, 08:34   #1760
Borjam
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Algorta Spain
Posts: 352
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalvinFold View Post
In the USA it's complicated. Part of it is we are overwhelmed with bad food choices, and bad food is cheaper. Our budgets are constrained so there are often shortcuts on the food budget; or for some people it's just bad priorities. "Corner markets" really don't exist for everyone, still have the same bad quality food, or cost more than we can afford on a regular basis.

I also think (and this is just me speaking) that we're more miserable than we think we are and eat bad food for comfort. I freely admit I do this, though am trying hard to get out of the habit. I'm not as round as many are, but far rounder than I should be.
In Spain I can buy quality fresh food at large supermarket chains as well, not just the more expensive corner markets. There are obese and poorly fed people in Spain but the main factor is not the cost of food, but cultural factors.

Spain (or, in general, Mediterranean countries like France, Italy, Greece) can be an exception because we also have a strong culinary culture. As a kid you grow up with outstanding gourmet level food as your staple diet. That helps a lot, trust me

Quote:
Some parts of the world, land-line infrastructure was never that robust, so when wireless happened that became the default. In the USA, land lines are by far the default in many places because they have been for so long. Since we already had infrastructure, wireless took/takes longer because there is no hurry.
Actually your problem is, an oligopoly of land line carriers.

Quote:
I can't say Spain falls into this category, usually places like Israel is where I've heard this commented on, where their cellular costs are less than a landline in the USA as one example.
Well, I work for an ISP. I remember, maybe 15 years ago, when my colleagues in the USA, working for ISPs there, couldn't believe that Spanish companies offered high speed data for computers over cell phone connections. It's a well known fact that AT&T wanted certain features removed from the first iPhone because their networks were not up to par!

Here we have better service and far cheaper. My cell phone invoice is like $20 a month and it could be lower, just I am not chasing the lowest fee obsessively.
Borjam is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Yesterday, 10:22   #1761
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 477
@ all First of all, I didn't chase Nohatch off, just called him on things he'd written which he then chose to deny having said. I don't think that labeling everyone who has found effects from EMR a "pseudoscientist" is a productive way to have a discussion, and attacking the authors of papers rather than the work they do is distinctly below the belt and unworthy of a man who is a scientist himself. But the trouble is, what many of you remember is the fact that he attacked a number of studies (whatever the grounds) and not what he actually said about them and whether his criticisms were answerable or even valid. What Nohatch did not do, though he claimed to be the best qualified among us to do it, was discuss any of the studies showing DNA damage from EMR; I rather think this is because these studies are much less easy to attack than observational nature studies, where you can nit-pick the details more easily (e.g., it is not possible to measure the EMR in an actual stork's nest without disturbing the birds, so you just have to get as close as you can). There are a great many good studies done by highly qualified scientists which I have posted on this forum that Nohatch didn't touch, and which most of you probably haven't read: I can't help that but it is a pity because they are genuinely interesting and quite convincing. However, the fact that many, probably most, of you, simply do not want to believe EMR is damaging to us and nature means that you would rather have a Nohatch doing a hatchet job on a selected few studies than read the entire body of work for yourselves and come up with your own questions and criticisms. There is a huge body of work showing damage from EMR, and I seriously doubt that it is all bad.

For example, Borjam, you refuse to accept the results of either the NTP or the Ramazzini studies. Why? Because Nohatch criticised the number of controls? Do you not realize that the NTP, for instance, has protocols which must be followed in conducting such an expensive and long-term study, and that they adhered to those protocols in obtaining the results they had? Did you not read the piece by Ron Melnick, former head of the NTP, praising the study for being done properly? Do you think we are dealing with amateurs here, who would deliberately undermine the validity of their own work, done with public money, in order to make their results worthless? Or that the same would apply to the Ramazzini Institute? No, you simply want to believe what you want to believe, even if that means ignoring all evidence to the contrary. Or take the Balmori study of tadpoles. You refused to accept that the contents of the two tanks of tadpoles were identical; yet I reread it and he explicitly states that the contents were identical. So your criticism of that study is rubbish. Do you not think peer review would have spotted it if the contents of the two tanks weren't the same, or that Balmori is such a poor scientist that he would, for example, put river water in one tank and tap water in the other? What sort of experiment would that be?

The fact is, guys, you can not dismiss the evidence when you haven't bothered to look at it, and it is only the independent scientists who do not have a conflict of interest whose work is not tainted by the inherent desire to please the cash cows funding their research. The only papers on any subject worth reading are the ones that say at the bottom "Conflict of interest: none."

Next. fugl, if you think I don't read what I post, you are mistaken. But you are not mistaken in saying that I think many of the downward public health trends and declines in nature are all in some way or other related to EMR. In the AMA paper, many deaths may be caused by opioids, the use of which is epidemic, but this is itself a product of depression, which is caused by exposure to EMR (and probably to the whole experience of staring at a wireless gadget hour after hour, day after day, instead of going outdoors and doing something physical). I will attach (separately) a comment to the FCC regarding California firefighters: look at the list of symptoms they suffered and ask yourself how many people you know are suffering from those same symptoms (I would say most people, though not necessarily acutely as in the case of the firemen). Neurological/neuropsychiatric effects from EMR are common and increasing; they will be much worse with 5G, as will all the other health effects.

And finally, there is a very interesting talk (35 min) by Martin Pall that is well worth listening to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GqnAZHqBrY
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 10:42   #1762
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 477
The firefighter FCC comments is attached. I would personally say that most of the people I know are suffering some of these symptoms, and I find it very interesting that everyone I meet goes on about how exhausted they feel all the time (not surprising, given the EMR burden in our local town). I think that more people are affected by EMR than are not, but it is a question of recognizing what is causing the symptoms. The following piece from Bloomberg is interesting in this context; suicides are apparently soaring, and EMR does cause depression. Think they're unrelated? I don't. And I think addiction to wireless devices makes people lonely, isolated and miserable.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...-health-crisis

I also attach a study reviewing (in 2010) ten studies showing effects of living within 500 meters of a cell tower, for two reasons. One is that, taken with the firefighter comments, it really makes you think if you want 5G small cells on your street, maybe just outside your house--a small cell is a mini cell tower.
The other reason is that one of the study authors is Dr. Joris Everaert, one of the co-authors of a sparrow study I have posted, and who was (don't know if he still is) a member of BF. I have to say that reading his work helped to persuade me that EMR is dangerous, and he's been doing this a long time now.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf FCC Comments Firefighter Study 2013.pdf (120.9 KB, 0 views)
File Type: pdf Khurana+et+al+2010.pdf (182.3 KB, 0 views)
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 13:50   #1763
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 764
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ all First of all, I didn't chase Nohatch off, just called him on things he'd written which he then chose to deny having said.
For the record, as this has resurfaced again and concerns me in a professional capacity:
The OP (Ms. Kordas, Purple Heron) accused me a while back of being supported financially by the telecommunications industry. This was a fabrication specifically aimed at undermining my credibility and impartiality as a scientist, as well as my ability to objectively analyze some of the material that was presented. Despite being called out immediately and all the necessary evidence being freely accessible, the OP has persisted in this falsehood. It should be noted that throughout this thread the OP has leveled similar accusations at other forum members who didn't agree with her, and has thus far refused to retract or apologize for them.
It is disappointing that the moderators have decided not to call the OP out on her behavior, even though it directly contravenes forum rules and etiquette. But so be it. I no longer see any reason for engaging with this 'discussion', and would urge others to consider what may be gained by continuing to do so.

Regards,
Joost
__________________
IOC Life list: 1335 (latest: Pinyon Jay @ Yoshua Tree NP, CA, USA)
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:32   #1764
hwinbermuda
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
hwinbermuda's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Dereham, Norfolk
Posts: 605
Moderators

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nohatch View Post
For the record, as this has resurfaced again and concerns me in a professional capacity:
The OP (Ms. Kordas, Purple Heron) accused me a while back of being supported financially by the telecommunications industry. This was a fabrication specifically aimed at undermining my credibility and impartiality as a scientist, as well as my ability to objectively analyze some of the material that was presented. Despite being called out immediately and all the necessary evidence being freely accessible, the OP has persisted in this falsehood. It should be noted that throughout this thread the OP has leveled similar accusations at other forum members who didn't agree with her, and has thus far refused to retract or apologize for them.
It is disappointing that the moderators have decided not to call the OP out on her behavior, even though it directly contravenes forum rules and etiquette. But so be it. I no longer see any reason for engaging with this 'discussion', and would urge others to consider what may be gained by continuing to do so.

Regards,
Joost
Moderators, I would like to highlight the point so politely raised by Joost (Nohatch).
I personally stopped posting to the thread, when constantly called out by the OP on points that were not only untrue, but laughingly unable to be substantiated; she accused me of never reading any of the attachments, when I called them for scientific method issues.
I and others asked for this thread to be moved to RF as at times it is genuinely not a good advert for Bird Forum.
When Joost's integrity and ability has been maligned by (not just) the OP, as he coolly stated what was wrong with the method and why the papers posted did not stand scrutiny, I was astonished that the thread was not stopped, and the perpetrators at least warned about their behaviour.

Moderators
Please review and look at the forum's rules. Maybe then this nastiness will stop.

Harry
hwinbermuda is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Yesterday, 14:37   #1765
viator
Registered User
 
viator's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Singapore
Posts: 2,611
I also support the removal of this thread - it's become a complete joke.
__________________
Last Lifer: Barred Becard (#4161, Jun 22, 2019)
Top 3 Countries: Indonesia (685), Thailand (576), China (575)
Last 2019 Bird: Red-legged Crake (#792, Jun 30)
www.viatorphoto.com/wildlife_galleries/birds
viator is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 19:24   #1766
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borjam View Post
That's hillarious! You should submit a paper to "Annals of Improbable Research"!

What do you consider an "engineering model"?

We are not talking about an engineering model of a plant or an ant. We are talking about a human created piece of apparatus that generates electromagnetic signals with certain extremely well defined characteristics.

Your "engineering models" are other pieces of apparatus that, again, generate the same signals which are, I repeat, extremely well characterized.

What's the difference? Maybe a cell phone conversation about Flat Earth™*is more potent as a carcinogen than, say, a chess match over the phone? (*)

The attempts to discredit properly engineered tests are really stupid. It's fake news 101 and I'm really annoyed of it. Putting hapless tadpoles on a roof and "measuring" with toys and knowing absolutely nothing about measuring in the first place is great. Taking proper measurements with perfectly defined transmission characteristics is wrong.

Why? Nothing showed up, so it must be the experiment that didn't model the "complexity" properly. Pseudoscience thrives on confusing information. Accuracy pretty much kills most pseudoscientific claims. And the same happens in the real world with news on any subject. Confusion breeds suspicion, so any news source, no matter how trusted it can be, becomes infected and the victim becomes unable to choose one. I listened to Eastern Bloc propaganda on short wave as a hobby when I was a teen and I think I learned quite a lot.

Which complexity? Well, maybe our electronics have become so complex, cell phone base stations are actually evolving living things, so they have developed unknown behaviors. In that case, yes, we could talk about "engineering models".

Know what? Let's involve Sir David Attenborough to shoot a new series: Life of Photons.

Now, seriously. What are the differences?

(*) Actually the signals are identical, pretty elementary Information Theory.
Borjam,

As you may recall, Dimitris J. Panagopoulos, et al published a review article in 2015 entitled "Real versus Simulated Mobile Phone Exposures in Experimental Studies" that addresses this subject in technical detail. Feel free to comment, or profer published refutations to support your contention that it's all pseudo-science.

Thanks,
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 offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Yesterday, 21:07   #1767
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,474
Quote:
Originally Posted by hwinbermuda View Post
Moderators, I would like to highlight the point so politely raised by Joost (Nohatch).
I personally stopped posting to the thread, when constantly called out by the OP on points that were not only untrue, but laughingly unable to be substantiated; she accused me of never reading any of the attachments, when I called them for scientific method issues.
I and others asked for this thread to be moved to RF as at times it is genuinely not a good advert for Bird Forum.
When Joost's integrity and ability has been maligned by (not just) the OP, as he coolly stated what was wrong with the method and why the papers posted did not stand scrutiny, I was astonished that the thread was not stopped, and the perpetrators at least warned about their behaviour.

Moderators
Please review and look at the forum's rules. Maybe then this nastiness will stop.

Harry
Good grief! So you're saying there were multiple individuals who "maligned" Joost, not just the OP? Very interesting.

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 offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Yesterday, 21:19   #1768
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 14,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
Good grief! So you're saying there were multiple individuals who "maligned" Joost, not just the OP? Very interesting.
Really? Interesting how?
__________________
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 2019 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Today, 08:33   #1769
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 477
@ hwinbermuda You are quite right in saying there is no way I can know whether you have in fact read any of the attachments; on the other hand, unless you make detailed comments that indicate you have indeed read them, a blanket "I didn't find them convincing"(or words to that effect) is not useful in any way to the discussion. Unless you can tell me what you don't find convincing, why you don't find it convincing, and what you would need to know in order to be convinced, I can't answer you and you know it. And I can tell by the number of views per attachment that very few people have bothered to look at them, the probability that you have indeed read all of them is quite low.

Nearly all the materials presented here are from peer-reviewed journals, conducted by reputable independent scientists with excellent qualifications, and I am happy to discuss them. But I think it is fair to to assume that studies which are so poorly conducted that they are full of elementary mistakes would not make it past peer review and into those journals, so it is not clear to me what your objections are.

I know this subject makes many people uncomfortable, because if we give up wireless technologies (as I believe we must, to save ourselves and this planet) a great many things we now take for granted must change. On the other hand, we have lost 90% of the world's bees (see https://science-andinfo.blogspot.com...important.html) and 5G is predicted to be an extinction event for many species. I am seeing major declines in birds and insects where I live, they are ongoing, and in addition many people I know personally are unwell, dead or dying from cancers that may well be caused by the cell towers near their homes and all around us. Since no one looked at the firefighter comments I posted yesterday, let me point out that all of their symptoms were caused by EMR at 1/1000th to 1/500th of the allowable limit, and if this amount of EMR can affect large mammals such as humans, what do you think it is doing to nature?

I started this thread because I was concerned about bird declines; I am still very concerned, and I think it is about time we started to look at EMR as the major environmental pollutant that it is. I don't like the tone of the discussion, by and large, but that it has not gone the way I had hoped does not mean that I will give up posting new studies or new information that people concerned about this issue should be aware of. By requesting that this thread be shut down, you are requesting that information which should be shared by people who are concerned about the environment no longer be available on BF, unless someone else is willing to take over this task.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 09:01   #1770
Johann Sebastian Bach
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: hampshire, uk
Posts: 1,340
Quote:
Originally Posted by hwinbermuda View Post
Moderators, I would like to highlight the point so politely raised by Joost (Nohatch).
I personally stopped posting to the thread, when constantly called out by the OP on points that were not only untrue, but laughingly unable to be substantiated; she accused me of never reading any of the attachments, when I called them for scientific method issues.
I and others asked for this thread to be moved to RF as at times it is genuinely not a good advert for Bird Forum.
When Joost's integrity and ability has been maligned by (not just) the OP, as he coolly stated what was wrong with the method and why the papers posted did not stand scrutiny, I was astonished that the thread was not stopped, and the perpetrators at least warned about their behaviour.

Moderators
Please review and look at the forum's rules. Maybe then this nastiness will stop.

Harry
I have to agree with you entirely Harry (and others who make the same point).
I've raised the issue with the mods via the red triangle icon on each post.

Too many good people have been driven away by the OP's behaviour.

Peter
Johann Sebastian Bach is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old Today, 09:19   #1771
Chosun Juan
Given to Fly
 
Chosun Juan's Avatar

 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Central West NSW, Australia
Posts: 5,751
Unhappy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ hwinbermuda You are quite right in saying there is no way I can know whether you have in fact read any of the attachments; on the other hand, unless you make detailed comments that indicate you have indeed read them, a blanket "I didn't find them convincing"(or words to that effect) is not useful in any way to the discussion. Unless you can tell me what you don't find convincing, why you don't find it convincing, and what you would need to know in order to be convinced, I can't answer you and you know it. And I can tell by the number of views per attachment that very few people have bothered to look at them, the probability that you have indeed read all of them is quite low.

Nearly all the materials presented here are from peer-reviewed journals, conducted by reputable independent scientists with excellent qualifications, and I am happy to discuss them. But I think it is fair to to assume that studies which are so poorly conducted that they are full of elementary mistakes would not make it past peer review and into those journals, so it is not clear to me what your objections are.

I know this subject makes many people uncomfortable, because if we give up wireless technologies (as I believe we must, to save ourselves and this planet) a great many things we now take for granted must change. On the other hand, we have lost 90% of the world's bees (see https://science-andinfo.blogspot.com...important.html) and 5G is predicted to be an extinction event for many species. I am seeing major declines in birds and insects where I live, they are ongoing, and in addition many people I know personally are unwell, dead or dying from cancers that may well be caused by the cell towers near their homes and all around us. Since no one looked at the firefighter comments I posted yesterday, let me point out that all of their symptoms were caused by EMR at 1/1000th to 1/500th of the allowable limit, and if this amount of EMR can affect large mammals such as humans, what do you think it is doing to nature?

I started this thread because I was concerned about bird declines; I am still very concerned, and I think it is about time we started to look at EMR as the major environmental pollutant that it is. I don't like the tone of the discussion, by and large, but that it has not gone the way I had hoped does not mean that I will give up posting new studies or new information that people concerned about this issue should be aware of. By requesting that this thread be shut down, you are requesting that information which should be shared by people who are concerned about the environment no longer be available on BF, unless someone else is willing to take over this task.
Diana,

It could be worse .......

You could be Aboriginal .......





Chosun
Chosun Juan is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2016 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Today, 10:30   #1772
hwinbermuda
Registered User
BF Supporter 2019
 
hwinbermuda's Avatar

 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Dereham, Norfolk
Posts: 605
The thread had at its initial stage a valid discussion point.
It has moved from that, and has, at times, been used as a tool for inexcusable and unsupportable statements, regarding the integrity of posters.
My comment relates to this, not the subject matter.
If someone posted that they'd seen a genuinely wild emu in the UK, their error of judgement would be pointed out to them, and depending on their experience someone may take the time to explain why this could not really happen. A lot of readers may think them absurd for even considering it, but if anyone was as rude as some of the posts on this thread, the Mods would have stepped in.
It's the manner and tone that is the cause for moderation.
I don't give a flying fig if people do not want to believe or do want to believe in a particular published paper, but that does give anyone the right to publicly question their integrity without genuine evidence to back up the question.
Again, moderators, please close this thread and review the posters to see if they've broken forum rules.
hwinbermuda is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2018 2019 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 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 0.20557308 seconds with 36 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 14:00.