? Confusing me now. The data is incomplete and can never be any other way. All that happens is that as time goes on then the chance of "no harm" being correct increases, it is never proven.
The statement above says :- It has been proven that there is no proof that any harm is done by RF emmissions from a cell phone.
or, another way:- As yet it has not been proven whether or not harm is done by radio emmissions from cell phones.
Have you tried it? I think that at least half the people that read this group will be supriosed by the outcome of an unbiased test as outlined.
I do have soem strange friends, I'll grant you that. I am the only normal person I know.
Nothing, aren't newsgroups wonderful. :)
call
ft
Yes, no effect. I said that.
Apparently not.
If there is no evidence of harm, and we have many years of observation, then it is proven that low levels of RF such as used in a Cell Phone is not harmful.
Your rephrasing the line doesn't change what I said.
So claiming the data is incomplete is 'only' YOUR view, not the generally accepted view.
way.
being
then it
harmful.
(a)
I obviously have problems understanding the English what you writ. Or you didn't writ wat you wanted to speak
Anyway, whatever.
a
active.
from 6
normal
If you don't like them then why do you post in them? This also has nothing to do with Unique material for detecting RF.
I didn't say I didn't like them, only your annoying lack of reasonable behavior. Into the Kill File with you!
You ask a question and answer it? Normally I do not encounter people who are so hard to talk to. Not so dense.
I was clear, But I agree, you don't get it. Also, you can't spell either! BYE-BYE
Before we go too far down this particular path - exactly how have you determined this?
Bob M.
Except that what you have outlined is not an "unbiased test." To truly demonstrate the effect you're describing would require a more carefully- designed test, one which is truly double-blind.
Bob M.
It is fairly easy just get a friend with a mobile phone who is 20 feet away to walk towards you several times with the phone turned off and on one occason to do it with a phone active, ie making a call. I can't believe that there is anything special in detecting it, it is so obvious, you really do feel it inside your head. If there are several switched on mobile phones about it won't work you just have to have the one.
I have one particular friend who will say "your phone is going to ring" before it makes any noise and I carry it in my pocket, it is not visible to him and more often than not he doesn't even know it is in my pocket. He can do this totally reliably.
This is not a double-blind test and therefore does not constitute useful evidence.
Tim
-- Guns Don?t Kill People, Rappers Do.
I wasn't submitting evidence I was just suggesting a way you can try it. It really isn't that important to me. I know I can detect them and I know that I have friends that can. I don't need convincing and I don't want to design tests to prove or disprove it. If anyone is that interested then try it yourself either with a "double blind" test or just try it.
And I was pointing out that it is a worse-than-useless way of trying it.
Tim
-- Guns Don?t Kill People, Rappers Do.
A strip of liquid crystal simular to the stripes taht they install on LPG tanks with a 1/4 wavelength thim piece of wire taped to the back migh do the trick.
away
that
But again, you do NOT know from this test that it is the detection of transmitted RF energy from the phone, and not some other cue (something that your friend is doing subconsciously to indicate the active phone, or possibly low-level audio cues generated by the phone itself). In fact, you should NOT be able to reliably distinguish which phone is "making a call" in this manner, since even a phone which is NOT in the process of making a call will regularly emit RF energy just to "keep in touch" with the cell site.
to
can
But once again, there's nothing particularly special from an RF emissions standpoint, with respect to the phone in question, at the moment the phone is GOING to ring. It does this when it RECEIVES the incoming call signal from the cell site, but that signal is blanketing the area - it is not localized to the phone in question. Further, again all other phones in the area are regularly emitting RF energy, whether they are "going to ring" or not - it is not possible that your friend is somehow isolating the phone which is going to ring based on RF signals alone, and you have made no effort to consider and remove the possibility of other unrelated cues.
It would be fairly easy to design an experiment which actually WOULD test for this sort of detection, but to date nothing you have described comes close to being valid as that sort of a test.
Bob M.
It
that
And it is indisputable that many, many people "know" things in just this manner which on closer examination turn out not to be true. You sound, in fact, exactly like those people who defend astrology, telepathy, "remote viewing," etc. - all sorts of pseudoscientific notions which utterly fail when someone tries to actually find evidence for them under controlled conditions. With critical thinking skills like that, I sure hope you don't come across anyone trying to sell you a bridge today...
Bob M.
:)
Apologies for that. I am not trying to persuade anyone, I am only reporting what I believe I have seen.
It may be an audio thing that is being detected. I cannot tell a phone that is on but the beaconing signals are infrequent anyway as opposed to almost constant transmit when a phone is making a call. I cannot distinguise which phone is making a call if there are several.
I would like someone to try it, I don't believe anyone has. Anyway enough, I am not a crazy (I don't think) the sun is nearly set and I have to go and worship it.
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.