Richard Clark wrote:

...
73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

It should be noted, those without a cell phone, or too old to desire/use
one need not worry ... but then, you already knew that!

Regards,
Brett :-)

On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 10:53:27 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

but then, you already knew that!

No, I anticipate with 3 more follow-ons by you to the same posting,
and then 2 more in response to yourself, it still won't be sorted out.
.... not that anyone has ever confused that with an intellectual
aspiration.

Having said that, I will skip the bleeding obvious (sorry Reggie).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:

...
No, I anticipate with 3 more follow-ons by you to the same posting,
and then 2 more in response to yourself, it still won't be sorted out.
... not that anyone has ever confused that with an intellectual
aspiration.

Having said that, I will skip the bleeding obvious (sorry Reggie).

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Three or more follow-ups, by me, heck, with you around, it will, most
likely, take many more than that!

Some here are just "slow on the uptake", then some like you like tossing
suspicion to hard data around and disinformation (even though cloaked as
"cryptic comments.")

Pull up a chair, get a drink and relax--we may be in for that "ride" you
are threatening ... (i.e., clarifying/defensive posts.)

Did I mention the fact that, those with few/or-no friends are not in
danger, much, from cell phones either? grin

Regards,
JS

Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 10:53:27 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

but then, you already knew that!

No, I anticipate with 3 more follow-ons by you to the same posting,
...
73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

I am correcting an error from previous postings, I suspect this
to-be/might-be the "yellow journalism" you complain of ... I was in
error on the antennas' placement within the phone ...

I now consider the "clear and present danger" of the cell phone, to my
brain (frontal lobe(s) now), to be an equiv. to a 1.2288KW source at a
distance of 448cm/~176-inches/~14-ft. from my frontal lobes ... a
"distance error" of magnitudes!

But, IMHO, a still a REAL, CLEAR AND PRESENT, danger ... glad you made
me improve the accuracy of the data I was offering ... THANKS!

I did not compute the dangers to my eyes, from an equiv. source ... the
eyes are thought first to go, right? LOL!

However, the placement of the antenna has introduced a new high exposure
areas, my nose/cheek/lips/upper-gum/hand ... and the placement means the
phones antenna is completely engulfed in a "shield" of my body ...
undoubtedly lowering that antennas' efficiency and forcing it towards
max. power all the more quicker ...

If there are inaccuracies here, in this post, you will have to point
them out to me so I can see them ... and this is only one phone ...
where is the antenna in "all the others?"

Regards,
JS