Richard Clark wrote:

Did you read the material you offered yesterday? Science reveals all
results observed without going into a study mining for expectations as
you rightly offer here.

Not all of it yet. I confess to skimming the oncological studies -
although I did notice the tumor reduction outcome. Interesting.



Your link, like the data of the original post, offers enough data to
warrant informed discussion. The original post's data reveals a
howler of invention. That cast aside, it allowed a cascade of
spiritualism to dominate. Let me kick off the next side-thread of
belly-button contemplation and ask: "Why don't we see this data
discussed?"

A very good question indeed! I might speculate a bit here.

It is a big complicated world, and so many people are intellectually
lazy. It is easier to say "RF exposure is bad" than it is to actually
find out if it is. It is easier to say "liberals are the cause of all
life's problems" than it is to investigate and find that the last
liberal died in 1985.

So many people are capable of great suspension of disbelief. There are
people who protest vigorously against a cell phone tower in their
neighborhood because of "RF exposure", yet I don't doubt some of them
use cell phones. It's just a little thing - it can't be bad....

Look at radioactivity for instance. While people are scared spitless
over it, these same folks would put that granite in their houses,
sometimes tons of it, and can't even figure out that the granite comes
from a volcanic process that is mixing all sorts of minerals, including
hot ones.

But they are too busy watching "Beauty and the Geek or some other trash
on television. I dunno why, many of these folk are intelligent, yet
stupid at the same time.

It is apparently hard to get at the truth.

Let's not forget the propaganda effect. The tobacky industry for years
fought off the fact that tobacco is a cause of a whole lot of problems,
from cancer to emphasyma and more. Just as there is a whole lot of money
involved in both Cell phones and tobacco, there is a lot of reason to
discount any problems caused by them.

Now that being said, the "other side" can use those same examples to say
that the Cell phone industry equates with the tobacco industry. It does
not. Different industries, and just maybe the same tactics.

Sometimes I think it just boils down to some people want them to be
harmless, and nothing will convince them otherwise.

Another group wants them to be dangerous, and nothing will convince them
otherwise.

A third group wants actual facts, and probably ****es all of the others
off..

- 73 de Mike N3LI -

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 12:01:17 -0400, Michael Coslo
wrote:

Your link, like the data of the original post, offers enough data to
warrant informed discussion. The original post's data reveals a
howler of invention. That cast aside, it allowed a cascade of
spiritualism to dominate. Let me kick off the next side-thread of
belly-button contemplation and ask: "Why don't we see this data
discussed?"

A very good question indeed! I might speculate a bit here.

Hi Mike,

But that is still only the fixated gaze at the belly button. Fully
anticipated and fulfilled. The problem is how to turn off this fire
hydrant.

I would like to see some numbers from data offered - its all there to
give us a temperature rise from KNOWNS! Even Brett's three function
calculator (one function is not approved by creation scienz) might be
able to come close. Unfortunately, for many others it is obviously
more comforting to enjoy gazing upon an approaching asteroid than to
find it is nothing more than a mote in the eye.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

Richard Clark wrote:

Hi Mike,

But that is still only the fixated gaze at the belly button. Fully
anticipated and fulfilled. The problem is how to turn off this fire
hydrant.

I would like to see some numbers from data offered - its all there to
give us a temperature rise from KNOWNS! Even Brett's three function
calculator (one function is not approved by creation scienz) might be
able to come close. Unfortunately, for many others it is obviously
more comforting to enjoy gazing upon an approaching asteroid than to
find it is nothing more than a mote in the eye.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

You "play the odds." You bet that all which is knowledge/in-print is
correct--you counsel others to only walk well worn paths. Of course,
the odds will bear this out ... it is only that rare event which will
produce something revolutionary, useful or provides a path for further
exploration, etc. In all your posts, this is the ONE fact which always
proves true.

You attempt to "look smart" by poking fun at others attempts to further
and refine that which already exists, their
speculations/logic/experiments/etc. You find safety in other mens
endeavors which have born fruit ...

You have a low self-opinion of yourself (perhaps a correct one!) You,
long ago, gave up on the ability of your mind/thinking/experiments to
produce anything usable (again, perhaps correct.) You have absolutely
nothing to offer except those things
thought-of/discovered/experimented-with/documented-by other men, you
must protect your ego at all costs--this implies you must NEVER be
wrong, at any cost(s) ... you recognize this deficiency in yourself and
attempt to convert it into an asset rather than a liability. The
energy/stealth and deception/deceit afford you a modicum of success--the
general public is easily confused and fooled ...

You think I am the only one to notice these things about you, and much
more? I think not, most just don't like arguing with children. Your
glass house not only exhibits holes/fractures/breaks, whole panes are
missing!

Now, on about your business -- I will be watching and recording, long
past all others have grown bored and moved on. There is something
morbid and fascinating about such self-inflicted punishment(s) which
grabs a minds attention, and pity ... the size of your shoe-box has been
seen and duly noted ...

You attempt to make words suggesting caution a directly conflict to some
chosen point(s) of yours, a slight-of-hand fitting a grade school
student ... as you were soldier, carry on ...

Regards,
JS