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

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

Does EMR harm living organisms?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 3.50 average.
Old Thursday 16th August 2018, 00:40   #1101
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
I'd also urge anyone with an inquisitive mindset, particularly you and Chosun, but others too, to read a recent scholarly book by Bernie Lewin entitled: "Searching for the Catastrophe Signal: The Origins of the IPCC." I'm about halfway through it, but let me tell you it puts many disparate things in perspective that I had mostly forgotten about, and many that I didn't know about at all. A Kindle copy costs only $7.

https://www.amazon.com/Searching-Cat...ustomerReviews
“Puts many disparate things in perspective”. Of course it does, “putting disparate things in perspective” being the stock-in-trade of conspiracy theorists everywhere.

Here’s what 2 minutes googling turned up about Lewin (BA in “social science; “diploma” in “information management”) and the funding of his book (mostly “secret”—surprise, surprise—but with at least some from “fossil-fuel” interests).

https://www.desmog.co.uk/bernie-lewin
https://www.theguardian.com/environm...sation-funders

Where do you find these clowns?
__________________
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 16th August 2018 at 00:43.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

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

Old Thursday 16th August 2018, 04:37   #1102
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,285
For those interested, go to the first website Fugl listed, https://www.desmog.co.uk/bernie-lewin, and then scroll down to Background and click on "Enthusiasm, Scepticism, Science,"" which was Bernie Lewin's website. Read it and decide for yourself whether you wish to read his book. He's very well spoken in my opinion and has acquired an excellent grasp of the pertinent interactions between science and politics during the mid-twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. He admits to having his own perspective, so he's aware of it and that's a good thing. Personally, I draw my conclusions about a person's qualifications based on what they actually do, rather than their academic degrees or what someone has said about them. I've known many brilliant people in my life not having higher degrees and many with an advanced degree who had their greatest impact outside their original field. Creative people are like that, and fortunately, the aerospace community is replete with them.

Fugl, thank you for providing a fine introduction to the author, although I'm sure it wasn't your intention. Some days ya just can win.

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

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

Old Thursday 16th August 2018, 13:59   #1103
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 338
@ Ed That's a really good paper by Blank and Goodman. Much of it over my head, admittedly, having neither the physics nor chemistry background to fully appreciate it, but two things stand out: 1) they propose ways in which certain theories can be tested (I don't know if they have, but I have never come across anything rebutting this paper in what I have read and 2) they point out that the stress response can be induced BOTH by EM fields and by heat shock--but that they are separate things. This seems to me to clearly indicate a basis for a non-thermal mechanism.

As I do not know of any rebuttal to this paper and others like it, my guess is that this work has simply been ignored. I don't see how regulatory bodies like ICNIRP and SCENIHR can do this, but it is clear from looking at the report of the latest SCENIHR opinion that they do not consider every single paper that comes out on the subject of EMR; rather they make up a list of papers they do want to consider and then use them as the basis for their opinion. I would call this stacking the deck, since it is possible not to include pivotal works yet look as if you've tried really hard because the bibliography is so long. So they may have read/know of some of these studies but omit them because their inclusion would make the premise that EMR causes only thermal effects indefensible. I don't know if papers such as this one are then brought up during the public consultation; I read the transcript of the public consultation of the 2015 SCENIHR opinion, where there was a great deal of criticism, but the committee simply rejected it except for a few relatively minor points.

There's another ICNIRP opinion coming up, and the pubic is invited to give their input by October--you can read it (I haven't yet) and other details here: https://www.saferemr.com/2018/07/icn...for-radio.html The opinion of a cynical scientist I know is that ICNIRP want to know what they're up against and he will save his ammo for the public consultation.

I will look for "Searching for the Catastrophe Signal" but Amazon doesn't deliver to Greece and I only read books on paper, so it will likely be a while before I can get it.

Re my last comment to fugl, of course it is a double-edged sword. My motivation might be concern for human and planetary health, or I might simply wish to bring stock markets crashing. My point, however, is that whoever owns the media controls the narrative; indeed, that is why one would want to own the media in the first place.

@ fugl Governments and the media were certainly against the climate change argument for a long time; then something changed and suddenly they were all for it. Since then, "climate change" has become the byword to explain everything that is out of the ordinary, from hurricanes to species disappearance. This about-face certainly coincided with the massive growth of wireless telecoms, and became much more strident in recent years. Now we are at the point where 5G and "smart" everything is really being talked up and we're going to get rid of gasoline engines and sail into the all-electric wireless future. There's a definite narrative here, and I don't believe it's coincidental.

One reason I can see for this narrative is global financial instability; the economic problems that ensued in the wake of Lehman Brothers have not so much been fixed as papered over, with another crash predicted by the bears in the near future. Global financial markets need the "5G is going to be awesome" narrative to prop up financial markets that would otherwise go into freefall, and electricity is being touted as the "clean" energy of the future partly because crude oil prices are so high (always a harbinger of economic crisis). However, when examined, the all-electric future has to be powered by something, and in real life that means coal (dirty), petroleum products (also dirty) or nuclear (accident-prone and there is the problem of nuclear waste) in addition to which you need lots of batteries that aren't clean either. So there are a lot of problems.

Since I don't believe for a second that governments and the owners of the various media outlets are altogether unaware of the health and environmental issues associated with wireless technologies, I think the main reason for the current narrative is that everyone's financial eggs are in the 5G basket because nobody has any other ideas for reviving a moribund world economy. Follow the money.

@ Borjam Read the study Ed posted--it's really interesting!

@ all There is a one-hour, extremely interesting radio interview with Martin Pall at https://archives.kpfa.org/data/20180814-Tue1300.mp3
This is well worth a listen, a very scary section near the end where he is talking about cognitive function.

Also, the Centers for Disease Control has examined fairly recent data (to 2014) and found increasing brain, liver and thyroid cancers in US children. Brain and thyroid cancers are linked to EMR; I am not sure if liver cancers are. https://ehtrust.org/cdc-finds-brain-...ren-2001-2014/
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 16th August 2018, 14:28   #1104
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
. . .Fugl, thank you for providing a fine introduction to the author, although I'm sure it wasn't your intention. Some days ya just can win.
Ah, the gentle irony that turneth away wrath. . .. Good for you, Ed, didn’t think you had it in you!
__________________
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 16th August 2018, 18:40   #1105
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,285
Diana,

I believe you can get a hardcopy that ships to Greece here: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Searching-f...wj3BbZpz5#shId

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

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

Old Thursday 16th August 2018, 20:20   #1106
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
. . [email protected] fugl Governments and the media were certainly against the climate change argument for a long time; then something changed and suddenly they were all for it. Since then, "climate change" has become the byword to explain everything that is out of the ordinary, from hurricanes to species disappearance. This about-face certainly coincided with the massive growth of wireless telecoms, and became much more strident in recent years. Now we are at the point where 5G and "smart" everything is really being talked up and we're going to get rid of gasoline engines and sail into the all-electric wireless future. There's a definite narrative here, and I don't believe it's coincidental. . ..
My God, you actually do think it’s all one big conspiracy! Do you have any idea how loony this sounds to anyone not having drunk the Kool-Aid?
__________________
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 Friday 17th August 2018, 10:14   #1107
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 338
Thanks for the link, Ed.

@ fugl There is conspiracy, and there is cock-up, which is usually accompanied by cover-up (i.e., we're in a hole so we just keep digging). I tend to think with EMR this is a case of the latter, and that most things labelled as "conspiracy" usually are.

I'll give you an example. If I believed (which I don't) that wireless technologies were being inflicted upon us for the express purpose of making the human race sterile in order to deplete the population, that would be a conspiracy. But I don't think that.

What I do think is that wireless technologies were developed without due regard for earlier research that said they were likely to prove dangerous. However, they did prove popular, partly no doubt because designers of social media sites and makers of smartphones employed persuasive design techniques to keep the punters using them. The Internet became this portal that just about everyone uses, and wireless technology became THE growth industry in a world that is seeing very little growth in other sectors. At the same time, government recognized the potential for the Internet and wireless to track and monitor citizens' activity (very useful for paranoid governments in the era of the "war on terror"). However, I suspect that latter point is secondary in importance, as is military uses for advanced wireless technologies (the military definitely wants them).

The real issue, I think, is that over the past twenty years no one has thought of any way to revive a moribund global economy except for wireless technologies. There is no growth anywhere--none, and globalism has created huge dissatisfaction in western economies--hence the election of Trump. People are dissatisfied; you can see this in comments like Kevin's where he says he feels he is not nearly as well off as his parents' generation; most people I know would agree with that. So you have a bad economic situation exacerbated by the 2009 recession, and no one has thought of a single way to revive the economy, and the only real growth anywhere is wireless technologies, which promises to make a bunch of new products that governments, eventually, can force people to buy (with what money, I don't know, but they will try). In this economic climate (with peripheral benefits of social control and military hegemony) how are governments going to backtrack and admit that the very technologies they are promoting for economic growth have serious health and environmental consequences? If they do, the world economy crashes. If they don't, they will reap the whirlwind, but it will likely be on someone else's watch. Politicians are a venial bunch and they don't look too far ahead.

This is putting it quite simply, but it should serve as an example. I really do think this is a case of cock-up followed by cover-up (i.e., we don't know how to get off this road we're traveling on, so we're going to keep going; meanwhile admit nothing). That may count as a conspiracy by some definitions, but I don't think it set out to be one.

If you can think of any growth area that could replace wireless technologies in the global economy and keep the ball in the air without precipitating the mother of all depressions, do tell me. I can't. Furthermore, I don't think the much-hyped 5G is going to fix the global economy either. It will merely stave off the inevitable for a little while longer while doing immense damage to people and nature.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 17th August 2018, 17:22   #1108
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Thanks for the link, Ed.

@ fugl There is conspiracy, and there is cock-up, which is usually accompanied by cover-up (i.e., we're in a hole so we just keep digging). I tend to think with EMR this is a case of the latter, and that most things labelled as "conspiracy" usually are.

I'll give you an example. If I believed (which I don't) that wireless technologies were being inflicted upon us for the express purpose of making the human race sterile in order to deplete the population, that would be a conspiracy. But I don't think that.

What I do think is that wireless technologies were developed without due regard for earlier research that said they were likely to prove dangerous. However, they did prove popular, partly no doubt because designers of social media sites and makers of smartphones employed persuasive design techniques to keep the punters using them. The Internet became this portal that just about everyone uses, and wireless technology became THE growth industry in a world that is seeing very little growth in other sectors. At the same time, government recognized the potential for the Internet and wireless to track and monitor citizens' activity (very useful for paranoid governments in the era of the "war on terror"). However, I suspect that latter point is secondary in importance, as is military uses for advanced wireless technologies (the military definitely wants them).

The real issue, I think, is that over the past twenty years no one has thought of any way to revive a moribund global economy except for wireless technologies. There is no growth anywhere--none, and globalism has created huge dissatisfaction in western economies--hence the election of Trump. People are dissatisfied; you can see this in comments like Kevin's where he says he feels he is not nearly as well off as his parents' generation; most people I know would agree with that. So you have a bad economic situation exacerbated by the 2009 recession, and no one has thought of a single way to revive the economy, and the only real growth anywhere is wireless technologies, which promises to make a bunch of new products that governments, eventually, can force people to buy (with what money, I don't know, but they will try). In this economic climate (with peripheral benefits of social control and military hegemony) how are governments going to backtrack and admit that the very technologies they are promoting for economic growth have serious health and environmental consequences? If they do, the world economy crashes. If they don't, they will reap the whirlwind, but it will likely be on someone else's watch. Politicians are a venial bunch and they don't look too far ahead.

This is putting it quite simply, but it should serve as an example. I really do think this is a case of cock-up followed by cover-up (i.e., we don't know how to get off this road we're traveling on, so we're going to keep going; meanwhile admit nothing). That may count as a conspiracy by some definitions, but I don't think it set out to be one.

If you can think of any growth area that could replace wireless technologies in the global economy and keep the ball in the air without precipitating the mother of all depressions, do tell me. I can't. Furthermore, I don't think the much-hyped 5G is going to fix the global economy either. It will merely stave off the inevitable for a little while longer while doing immense damage to people and nature.
Well, no point in continuing the discussion, the main effect of which so far has been to drive you into taking increasingly extreme positions.

As an aside, some people in the affluent West are worse off than their parents but the majority of the world population is better off. Kevin’s a snowflake.
__________________
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 : Friday 17th August 2018 at 17:25.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

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

Old Friday 17th August 2018, 18:02   #1109
Borjam
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Algorta Spain
Posts: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ Borjam I was thinking about your billiard-ball analogy and it seems to me it rather resembles the mechanism in the Blank and Goodwin study I posted some days ago.
The analogy, albeit incomplete, illustrates what happens. "small" photons (ionizing radiation) have non thermal effects because they can interact just with some subatomic particles, not an entire molecule. They can behave similarly to billiar balls, kicking particles.

"Large" photons, on the other hand, are unable to interact just with one particle. They "hit" the whole molecule, heating it. That's why those effects are thermal. The energy of the photon is absorbed.

Unless someone discovers new Physics there is nothing else there. It would be terribly exciting if it was (believe me, I would be excited!) but it hasn't happened so far.
Borjam is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Yesterday, 13:52   #1110
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 338
@ fugl I don't see how I am being driven into "taking increasingly extreme positions". You're the one who thinks that I believe wireless technology and everything associated with it is a conspiracy, and I just told you at some length why I don't think so. Did you actually read what I wrote? And, incidentally, do you have any answer to the question I posed to you--whether you can think of any growth area that could replace wireless technologies in the global economy?


@ fugl, all I think you (and everyone) might be interested in the chapter of a recent book on EMR by Don Maisch which I have attached below. It's a history of industry involvement in telecommunications health research in Australia, and it shows how the telecommunications industry has tried to subvert the research showing EMR to be harmful. I think this illustrates my point quite well; a highly profitable industry trying to hang on to its profits by subverting independent research (not to mention health statistics). To be very clear, I don't think wireless technology was invented in order to make people sick or harm nature, but when bad effects started to occur, the industry tried to cover up in order to justify continuing to expand and develop wireless communications. It is a fascinating chapter, and it would no doubt be possible to write one just like it about the U.S., Canada, the EU and other places.

Did anyone listen to the Dr. Pall radio interview? The really frightening thing, I thought, was towards the end when he mentions the possibility that eventually everyone will begin to suffer from cognitive impairment due to exposure to EMR saturation in the environment. Because I really don't believe that this is a conspiracy, and because I also think that quite a lot of people in government have no idea that EMR is dangerous, it makes one wonder how compos mentis any of our leaders actually are. Trump tweets away at all hours of the day and night (as do many political leaders) various powerful people (John McCain comes to mind) have brain tumors, and undoubtedly every world leader, living as they do in capital cities, is saturated with cell tower radiation, Wi-Fi and device radiation. These are the people we rely on NOT to precipitate us into stupid wars, whose main job is the safety and security of the people they govern. Yet there are a fair few times when more than one of them has behaved irrationally, and the prospect of world leaders suffering cognitive impairment is literally too awful to contemplate.

One of the worst sources of EMR is Wi-Fi, a fact brought home to me again this morning as I sat in a village square that had no sparrows, no flies, and no cicadas. But it did have Wi-Fi, and all the tourists sat there communing with their smartphones. What I didn't realize until a couple of days ago is that 2.45 GHz, the frequency most commonly used for Wi-Fi, is the same frequency that is used for microwave ovens. So, this is a frequency that, given sufficient wattage, will boil a cup of water in a minute--yet it's okay to irradiate everyone with this same frequency as long as you keep the power low? Really? No wonder there are no sparrows or insects about.
Here's the article: https://www.saferemr.com/2018/07/int...on-health.html
And for more information and studies on the health effects of Wi-Fi, also check out http://www.emfsa.co.za/research-and-...-and-behavior/
If you still want the Wi-Fi on after reading that lot, all I can say is that you must already be suffering from cognitive impairment, or want to be.

As a final note, the blue light from the smartphone screens, tablet screens, computer screens and all the blue lighting from LED and other modern light bulbs is quite likely to send you blind, because it causes macular degeneration. Have a look at "Chemists discover how blue light speeds blindness", one of several articles that has come out recently on this subject. Here's the link: https://phys.org/news/2018-08-chemists-blue.html

@ Borjam Read the paper by Blank and Goodman (see post 1094) and you will be excited. Really.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Chap_16_updated_to_Aug_2018.pdf (507.2 KB, 0 views)

Last edited by Purple Heron : Yesterday at 14:03.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Yesterday, 14:27   #1111
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
. . .And, incidentally, do you have any answer to the question I posed to you--whether you can think of any growth area that could replace wireless technologies in the global economy?. . .
Sure I can—
AI
VR
Biotech
Clean energy
Terraforming
Etc., etc.
__________________
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 : Yesterday at 21:21.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

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

Old Yesterday, 21:29   #1112
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,285
Quote:
PH, #1110 ... Did anyone listen to the Dr. Pall radio interview? The really frightening thing, I thought, was towards the end when he mentions the possibility that eventually everyone will begin to suffer from cognitive impairment due to exposure to EMR saturation in the environment.
I did but had to do it over 3-4 listening sessions. Pall is particularly impressive to me because I've read some of his work and that of others, and concluded apriori that cell phone bio-damage does occur. One or two critical studies have been posted on this thread, but I've given up thinking that anyone will/can engage the scientific particulars contained therein. So, like you, I question whether this conversation isn't just two ships passing in the night.

In any event, for the broader viewing audience, I've attached a recent VU-graph presentation put together by the Australian Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association (ORSAA). (Can't recall where I found this; it may be from one of your earlier posts.)

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 21:32.
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

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

Old Yesterday, 22:01   #1113
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
I did but had to do it over 3-4 listening sessions. Pall is particularly impressive to me because I've read some of his work and that of others, and concluded apriori that cell phone bio-damage does occur.
A priori, surely not! Prima facie, maybe (though I don’t agree that even a convincing prima facie case has been made).
__________________
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 Yesterday, 22:36   #1114
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,285
Look at definition 2b
Science is not the business of building prima facie cases. It's in the business of verifying theories with observables.
Quote:
Science (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge")[2][3]:58 is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.[a]
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 : Today at 00:11.
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

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

Old Today, 00:00   #1115
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
Look at definition 2b
2b. “Formed or conceived beforehand”. My point exactly! Am at a loss to know why you think “2b” justifies your use of a priori in this context.
__________________
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 Today, 00:20   #1116
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
Science is not the business of building prima facie cases. It's in the business of verifying theories with observables.
Well duh, yes. . .. What has this got to do with your misuse of a priori in post #1112?
__________________
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 Today, 00:34   #1117
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,285
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugl View Post
2b. “Formed or conceived beforehand”. My point exactly! Am at a loss to know why you think “2b” justifies your use of a priori in this context.
This post makes a prima facie case that you're behaving like a pedantic nudnik. I'm at a loss to understand why.

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 : Today at 01:03.
elkcub is online now  
Reply With Quote

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

Old Today, 00:56   #1118
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
Quote:
Originally Posted by elkcub View Post
This post makes a prima facie case that you're behaving like a nudnik. I'm at a loss to understand why.
For shame, instead of owning up to your error, you resort to puerile insults. You have lost my respect.
__________________
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 Today, 01:20   #1119
elkcub
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
elkcub's Avatar

 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Northern California
Posts: 4,285
By direct substitution:

Quote:
... Pall is particularly impressive to me because I've read some of his work and that of others, and concluded apriori [i.e., 'conceived beforehand'] that cell phone bio-damage does occur.
Enough. Get thee hence!

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

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

Old Today, 02:01   #1120
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,105
What you should have said—as this appears to be what you meant—is that your respect “for some of” Pal’s work predisposed you to take his cell phone views seriously. Instead, you chose to misuse a technical philosophical term in order to impart a spurious gravitas to your words. Pomposity in language is never attractive and you would do well to avoid it in the future.

Begone, you scribbling wretch, begone!

P. s. I can keep this up as long as you can, longer maybe. . ..
__________________
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 : Today at 02:03.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 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 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 0.16517591 seconds with 32 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:36.