Bioelectromagnetics
- Thread starter cogreslab
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bioelectromagnetics
- Status
Mr Larsen you are being overly pedantic, and of course infants and humans are mammals, since they suck the breast, (mamma). You know very well what I meant, but persist in trying to denigrate me by putting into my words such things simply to draw attention away from the main issues. mammals is a generic term and often used separately from primates, but please let us get back to bioelectromagnetics and stop your conspicuously detractive tomfoolery.
cogreslab said:
Can I have the name please?
Cleopatra you risk losing my previous respect. If you have little regard for people who make their living by their knowledge and less respect for people who display their expertise in a topic they are discussing, who is left for you to believe in?
cogreslab said:
Mr. Coghill.
I think that you understand very well which is my point. Of course you will have to rely on my word for what I will say but I am willing to listen to everything and discuss everything but once somebody attempts to talk to me appealing to morals I have to move the discussion to another level.
cogreslab said:
Sure. Let's forget about your lack of scientific knowledge. Not.
Plants breathe, Roger. Care to comment?
cogreslab said:
My bullsh1t detector just went off. Big time!
You use this professor as an example of just how dangerous it can be to speak against the establishment, and you won't tell us who he is?
You expect us to believe your word, Roger? That's not very scientific, is it?
cogreslab said:
You stated that: The Prof of physics at Bristol has just lost his MRC funding for being outspoken on the EMF issue, by the way. and also dept for radiation effects in humans at Bristol University
According to the university's website (http://www.phy.bris.ac.uk/research/staff.html) there is only one Professor at the Dept you mention and that is Professor D L Henshaw.
Can you confirm that the person you have stated has had his MRC funding withdrawn is Professor D L Henshaw?
I am not confident about the rules of this forum, but perhaps someone would tell me whether by naming the gentleman I would thereby be infringing your libel rules. I will ask the person if it's OK to do so before naming him. If you want other examples, Dr Gerard Hyland a former physics lecturer at Warwick University was more or less kicked out for his outspokenness on the EMF issue too. Then ther is the case f professor Michel Coleman at London school of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine who has just received similar treatment for complaining about the way UK cancer stats were being distorted. Then there was the earlier case of Dr Leslie Hawkins at Surrey who nearly lost his tenure for working in the field of subtle energy and negative ions.
One fundee reseacher under the Stewart initiative who had some claim to being impartial had his research protocol savagely curtailed so it could not find any strong effects with nematode worms exposed to RF/MW. I refer to David de Pomerai at Nottingham.
The UK academia is riddled with such examples. That's why I have an independent lab not at the mercy of this kind of pressure.
I joined this forium to see just how skeptical people might be about the UK establishment's science. After all, you have BSE, asbestos, tobacco, and now EMF as examples. Yet I am astonished to see the majority of posts take a line supporting the establishment.
Per contra, those who recieve EMF related research funding are on record as disbeleivers, - see my article in the Ecologist last year.
One fundee reseacher under the Stewart initiative who had some claim to being impartial had his research protocol savagely curtailed so it could not find any strong effects with nematode worms exposed to RF/MW. I refer to David de Pomerai at Nottingham.
The UK academia is riddled with such examples. That's why I have an independent lab not at the mercy of this kind of pressure.
I joined this forium to see just how skeptical people might be about the UK establishment's science. After all, you have BSE, asbestos, tobacco, and now EMF as examples. Yet I am astonished to see the majority of posts take a line supporting the establishment.
Per contra, those who recieve EMF related research funding are on record as disbeleivers, - see my article in the Ecologist last year.
cogreslab said:
I cannot speak on behalf of the JREF but I cannot see how libel could have anything to do with this matter.
You stated that "...The Prof of physics at Bristol has just lost his MRC funding for being outspoken on the EMF issue..." who could you possibly be libeling (apart from perhaps the MRC)? (See http://www.swarb.co.uk/lawb/defTrueLibel.html for a concise guide to defamation and libel in the UK.)
You seem to have given the following information:
Physics Professor at Bristol University
Professor in the "dept for radiation effects in humans"
Using this information I could using the University's publicly accessible site find a name, email address and telephone number.
Out of courtesy to you I will refrain from any attempt at contacting Professor Henshaw until tomorrow (Weds).
If I hear nothing substantial from you I will contact him tomorrow.
If anyone is interested in why I want to contact the Professor that allegedly has had his funding withdrawn because of advocating a "non-mainstream" view it is because of “who” it has been alleged withdrew that funding.
"MRC" is the Medical Research Council. And from their website:
As you can see this is a government appointed, tax funded organisation and if this serious allegation is true then I want to pursue it further.
As one of the people who fund the MRC I would like to think it uses objective and rational thinking (and evidence) to come to its decisions and if it isn’t I would want to help to ensure it is changed so that it does so in future.
(Edited for evidence sake.)
"MRC" is the Medical Research Council. And from their website:
As you can see this is a government appointed, tax funded organisation and if this serious allegation is true then I want to pursue it further.
As one of the people who fund the MRC I would like to think it uses objective and rational thinking (and evidence) to come to its decisions and if it isn’t I would want to help to ensure it is changed so that it does so in future.
(Edited for evidence sake.)
Lucianarchy
Banned
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2001
- Messages
- 2,105
I don't think any real sceptic doubts that chronic EM exposure cause harm.
The problem lies with the scientific establishment and their links to commercial enterprises.
Homeopathy would have been accepted a lot earlier if the establishment hadn't been so dependant on the real drugs cartel.
The problem lies with the scientific establishment and their links to commercial enterprises.
Homeopathy would have been accepted a lot earlier if the establishment hadn't been so dependant on the real drugs cartel.
RamblingOnwards
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Mar 21, 2004
- Messages
- 417
Lucianarchy said:
This sentence makes it sound as if homeopathy is accepted now, which we've all established is in contention.
Actually, of the people I've spoken to, most believe that 'homeopathic' is the same thing as 'herbal'. Since 'herbal' is simply unregulated and unpurified allopathic medication, I'm surprised that the homeopathy community isn't doing more to correct this misapprehension.
Please provide evidence for the existence of these commercial enterprises in Hahnemann's time.Lucianarchy said:
Please provide evidence for the existence of a scientific establishment in Hahnemann's time.
Please provide evidence for the existence of (presumably medical) "drug cartels" in Hahnemann's time.
Please provide evidence for the scientific acceptance of homeopathy in our time.
But please also take this discussion elsewhere, as the topics here center around this advocator of infanticide, his claims and, of course, his product lines.
From: http://www.cogreslab.co.uk/cogchall.htm
I'd like to see those studies, where were they published?
I'd like to see those studies, where were they published?
- Status