Bioelectromagnetics

Major Rog-Dodge Alert!!

cogreslab said:
Prag pointed to:

"The change of an oncogene from normal to cancerous function can be caused by a simple point
Click to expand...

NO, I DIDN'T!!! I repeat - I have NEVER discussed biology with you! It seems you will use any trick to avoid the pertinent questions so here they are again:

cogreslab said:
Oh I forgot:
to answer the point about qualifications, in case it is relevant, after completing part One of the Classical Tripos as an Open Scholar I continued as a Senior Exhibitioner in Biological Sciences and received an honours degree in that subject from Cambridge University in 1962. I regard the level of biology incorporated in the Environmental Management MA from UWCN as a relevant discipline. Perhaps the prospectus is available on the UW website?

Cambridge did not award BSc degrees when I was there, since all the first degrees are BA, whether natural sciences or arts. I seem to remember having been awarded an M. Phil from Surrey University too, but I never took it up.
Click to expand...

Pragmatist said:
Another external link to relevant information. This is from an email posted by Roger.

From: http://www.wave-guide.org/archives/...ing-in-the-air-(fwd).html

Whilst writing, a little about me and the laboratory. I have a Masters from
Emmanuel College, Cambridge where I was an Open Scholar in Biology, and
another MA in Environmental Management from the University of Wales. I am a
Chartered Biologist and a Member of the Bioielectromagnetics Society, the
European Bioelectromagnetics Association and the UK Institute of Biology.


Roger, clever wording above. Typically evasive, to make it appear that you have a Masters degree in Biology, no?

This is getting interesting. Why won't you give me a straight, simple, unambiguous answer as to what your actual scientific qualifications are?

Do you, or do you not, have an independent qualification in biology or biological sciences or whatever (please specify) from Cambridge? What is the PRECISE title of that qualification? It's a real simple question. Strange that it's so difficult to get an equally simple answer....

Oh, and why on your paper that I quoted, which is an article written by YOU, does it say DRS
Tamara Galonja-Coghill and Roger Coghill? I mean why is DRS in PLURAL? I don't know about your wife (and don't care), but what doctorate do YOU hold?
Click to expand...

WHEN are you going to answer the question? You told me you were a "Senior Exhibitioner in Biological Sciences', yet you told that list you were "an Open Scholar in Biology". I admit I don't know what the difference is between "Exhibitioner" (by the way I never heard of a SENIOR Exhibitioner before) and an "Open Scholar". Maybe someone more reliable on here can inform me what's what there.

You have NOT answered my question as to what your actual PRECISE scientific qualification is. And you are passing yourself off as a Doctor to boot.


ANSWER THE QUESTIONS ROG!
 
Oh dear, back to one of your old tricks, I see: finding someone else's website misinterpretation and then blaming me for it. Let me make this entirely clear I do not have a PhD awarded to me, nor have I ever claimed so. As some have uncharitably said on this thread qualifications and white coats do not necessarily mean the owner is qualified in the field they claim expertise for, so it shouild n't matter anyway if you are at all consistent with your opinions.

Yet another sneering red herring trying to acheive nothing else than attack my credibility when you cannot attack my science. You can see my qualifications (and a complete absence of the acronym PhD) every time I post on this thread. Now you are insinuating that I am a poseur, and demanding the minute details of the qualificatin I do have, and which are relevant. Are there no depths to which you people will not descend to defend your screwed up and almost entirely unsupported "logic"?

I wish someone would count up the number of scientific references I have placed in this thread in support of my hypotheses, and compare them with the totality on this thread. You would find my specific references outnumber all the rest put together, I suspect. By contrast all I seem to get from you lot is a link to some enormous website, and I find that in fact it does not support your argument in the slightest, even I find the reverse.

The fact is, you really know little about this subject, only a load of outdated physics and outdated ideas about cancer. My hypotheses work, on the other hand, as exampled by clinical trials on parabenzoquinone, as well as clinical and other evidence from world class scientists stretching stretching back nearly a century. Your ideas about carcinogenesis, by contrast, poison, slash and burn your victims, so that we are losing the battle against cancer globally with that approach. The time has come for a change.



|
 
cogreslab said:
Oh dear, back to one of your old tricks, I see: finding someone else's website misinterpretation and then blaming me for it. Let me make this entirely clear I do not have a PhD awarded to me, nor have I ever claimed so.
Click to expand...

Gee, Roger, website after website, in all languages, somehow mistaking you for "Dr."

I can't imagine how that might happen.



http://www.goaegis.com/articles/coghill_013199_X5G7.html]

http://www.rfsafe.com/articles/january_june1999.htm

http://www.christian-ecology.org.uk/masts.htm

http://nifatt.8m.com/case.htm

http://www.uranmunition.de/rrupp.htm

http://www.rfsafe.com/articles/daily_mail_080800.htm

http://www.rense.com/health/cellphonebrain.htm



Do let us know of your progress in getting all these source to correct their mistakes. What is your timeframe for this?
 
cogreslab said:
Oh dear, back to one of your old tricks, I see: finding someone else's website misinterpretation and then blaming me for it. Let me make this entirely clear I do not have a PhD awarded to me, nor have I ever claimed so. As some have uncharitably said on this thread qualifications and white coats do not necessarily mean the owner is qualified in the field they claim expertise for.

Yet another sneering red herring trying to nothing else that attack my credibilty when you cannot attack the science. You can see my qualifications (and a complete absence of the acronym PhD)every time I post on this thread. Now youb are insinuating that I am a poseur.

Black mark.
Click to expand...

Oh ho! It seems I REALLY have the worm on the hook now! (My apologies for any unintentional offence to annelids by association).

What are you HIDING Rog? Why won't you come clean? Because maybe here is yet another proof that you are nothing but a fraud? And I'm not INSINUATING that you're a poseur, I'm saying you ARE a poseur! :)

By the way I found something HILARIOUS on the UWCN (University of Wales, College Newport), it's the course outline for an MA in Environmental Management. Here it is (my emphasis):

http://www.newport.ac.uk/hum/pt/maem.htm

MA Environmental Management

This course is designed to provide the necessary skills and critical awareness of underpinning knowledge to those already involved in, or wishing to assume, environmental management roles in industry, commerce or other organisations. The course examines current and proposed approaches to managing the human impact on the environment with an emphasis on industrial and commercial activities. It provides a balance of theoretical and practical approaches to understanding, communicating and solving environmental problems.

STRUCTURE & CONTENT

Taught Modules

Students take one compulsory module - Environmental Law Policy.

In addition three optional modules are selected from the following:

* Managing Waste and Resources
* Managing Risk
* Environmental Management: Systems and Approaches
* Independent Study module or Communicating Environmental Ideas.

Dissertation

Students complete a research project of 20,000 words.

Credit Accumulation Transfer Scheme (CATS)

This award operates within the Credit Accumulation and Transfer Framework. This means you gain 30 credit points for successfully completing each taught module and 60 credits for the dissertation.

If you are unable, or do not wish, to complete a full MA award (180 credits in total), interim awards are available within all pathways. Awards may be gained as follows:

Postgraduate Certificate: two taught modules (60 credits)
Postgraduate Diploma: four taught modules (120 credits)

Wow Rog, if only I had known you had a degree in....GARBAGE COLLECTION!!!!!!!

:dl:

Finally, on a more serious note, its funny how just about EVERYONE goes around misrepresenting you on their web sites isn't it? Every time you type something, somebody anonymous just sneaks right in there and changes it. Weird that. You seem to have really bad luck.

Strange though, that the text that YOU typed and submitted was apparently re-typed by this web site, haven't they heard of cut and paste?

Well, there's one way to settle this. Let's see if we can track down the OTHER copies of your papers.
 
This is an opportune time to state that I submitted an electronic attempt to contact Roger Coghill through the Cambridge Alumni website. That was submitted wednesday morning, 19 May. Absolutely no response from the alumni office. Nary a peep from Roger, either, that might indicate they forwarded the message.

Perhaps they are having difficulty finding records on Roger? Maybe he attended by Remote Viewing?

I shall attempt to stifle yawns while I wait.
 
Aaaaargh! Yet another UVJ!

Finally, on a more serious note, its funny how just about EVERYONE goes around misrepresenting you on their web sites isn't it?

Number of pages referring to Roger Coghill on Google: 10,500

Number of sites misrepresenting my degree status: 8 (including mirrors)

Skeptometer reading now 92.
 
LOL Mr Coghill, you take a drug with known anti cancer properties, test it, say my gosh, this has anti cancer properties, my theories are correct.

The problem with Cancer therapy Mr Coghill, is that despite their differences, cancerous cells are still very much like normal cells. This is why anti cancer agents have bad side effects. There is no magic bullet for cancer Mr Coghill. All the wishing in the world won't change that.

You refuse to even talk about the all the evidence that confirms cancer is mediated by genetic defects. ROUS SARCOMA VIRUS. You nit pick away at statements without addressing any of the actual issues. ROUS SARCOMA VIRUS.

For all the trappings of science you adorn yourself with, you are not a scientist Mr Coghill. Your understanding of Carcinogenesis is fundamentally flawed. I suspect you know it too but are unwilling or unable to change your position i the face of overwhelming evidence.

ROUS SARCOMA VIRUS- See earlier link!



http://edcenter.med.cornell.edu/CUMC_PathNotes/Neoplasia/Neoplasia_04.html

Most chemical carcinogens are , or are metabolically converted into, electrophilic reactants (electron-attracting chemicals) that cause their biological effects by covalent binding with cellular proteins and nucleic acids, particularly chromosomal DNA. The most frequent reaction sites in DNA are with guanine.
Click to expand...
 
cogreslab said:
Whilst writing, a little about me and the laboratory. I have a Masters from
Emmanuel College, Cambridge where I was an Open Scholar in Biology,
Click to expand...

I continued as a Senior Exhibitioner in Biological Sciences and received an honours degree in that subject from Cambridge University in 1962.
Click to expand...

From there I gained an Open Scholarship to Emmanuel College, Cambridge and was awarded an Upper Second Honours in Classics before taking Honours in Natural Sciences as a Senior Exhibitioner in 1962
Click to expand...

THREE DIRECT QUOTES, ALL FROM YOU, THE LAST ON YOUR WEB SITE. NO OTHER THIRD PARTIES INVOLVED IN RETYPING ANY OF THEM.

FRAUD, SIR! FRAUD! SHAME ON YOU!!!!
 
Cogrelab said:

The time has come for a change.
Click to expand...

Ahh, hear that, its' the call to arms of the woo-woos. Bring out your crystals, your homepathic remedies, your dowsing rods, the time has come to change the world!
 
Dear PJ: I am quite happy to explain how viral infections can fit into my schema. With all the other noise and rubbish to sweep away (remember I have a degree in it now, thanks to BB!) it has taken me a little while to get around to it.

I will set the issues out in a word doc and copy it into the thread, since I fear it too long to try typing this in before expiry.
 
Excuse me Prag, but have I missed somehting? The statements you list are all correct.

Whilst writing, a little about me and the laboratory. I have a Masters from
Emmanuel College, Cambridge where I was an Open Scholar in Biology,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I continued as a Senior Exhibitioner in Biological Sciences and received an honours degree in that subject from Cambridge University in 1962.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From there I gained an Open Scholarship to Emmanuel College, Cambridge and was awarded an Upper Second Honours in Classics before taking Honours in Natural Sciences as a Senior Exhibitioner in 1962
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



THREE DIRECT QUOTES, ALL FROM YOU, THE LAST ON YOUR WEB SITE. NO OTHER THIRD PARTIES INVOLVED IN RETYPING ANY OF THEM.

All you seem to have done is to put them in the wrong chronological order.

For the avoidance of doubt:

1. Open Scholarship in Classics at Emmanuel College Cambridge(Upper Second Hons awarded in 1960)

2. Long Vac term. Sat entrance exam for Biological Sciences faculty. Awarded Senior Exhibitionership.

3. Senior Exhibitonership 1960 - 1962 (awarded Second class Hons ) in Biological Sciences, 1962

4. MA in 1965 (as indicated this is an honarary position at Cambridge provided you stay out of prison).

Now tell us about your Third at Paisley Academy, Prag!
 
cogreslab said:
Number of pages referring to Roger Coghill on Google: 10,500

Number of sites misrepresenting my degree status: 8 (including mirrors)

Skeptometer reading now 92.
Click to expand...
Roger, you really do need to learn a bit about scholarship. Your sloppy searches reflect your sloppy approach to all matters of fact.

Sir roger coghill, as a search criterion, yields every page that mentions a roger or a coghill. "roger cogill" restricts the search to your actual name.

The search results are now:

"roger coghill" : 1,980 pages returned
"dr roger coghill" : 107 pages returned.

Oops.
 
You'll include the transfection experiments i expect. Yes please do talk especially about Rous Sarcoma Virus, i like virology, quite a lot actually.

Radiation carcinogenesis

http://carcin.oupjournals.org/cgi/c...&stored_search=&FIRSTINDEX=125&resourcetype=1

It has long been known that radiation can induce a broad spectrum of DNA lesions including damage to nucleotide bases, cross-linking, and DNA single- and double-strand breaks (DSBs). DSBs were originally assumed to be the critical cytotoxic lesions, whereas base damage particularly thymine glycols were implicated in mutagenesis. It is now accepted, however, that misrepaired DSBs are the principle lesions of importance in the induction of both chromosomal abnormalities and gene mutations
Click to expand...
 
Copied this last few minutes from my Google search results:

Web Results 1 - 10 of about 3,950 for Dr Roger Coghill. (0.25 seconds)

Web Results 1 - 10 of about 10,600 for Roger Coghill. (0.26 seconds)

Another perjorative scam of yours? No one is listening to your patent lies, old chap.

And in your twisted scientific view the definition of "Nearly Everyone" is 8 out of 107 according to your very words?!

Get real, Bouncer Bill!

Skeptometer now reads 91.
 
cogreslab said:
Copied this last few minutes from my Google search results:

Web Results 1 - 10 of about 3,950 for Dr Roger Coghill. (0.25 seconds)

Web Results 1 - 10 of about 10,600 for Roger Coghill. (0.26 seconds)

Another perjorative scam of yours? No one is listening to your patent lies, old chap.

And in your twisted scientific view the definition of "Nearly Everyone" is 8 out of 107 according to your very words?!

Get real, Bouncer Bill!

Skeptometer now reads 91.
Click to expand...

Your scholarship and crediblity are reaching all-time lows. I told you you need the quotation marks around it. I never said "nearly everyone." Can't be my "very words" if I never wrote them. In fact, nowhere on this JREF site have I ever written that phrase. I'll leave it to you and your team of crack researchers to figure out how to confirm that.

:dl:
 
Before I start the issue of viral infection, let me make a point about DSBs and ELF exposure. Or rather let Henry Lai and his colleagues at Washington (Seattle) make it for me:

You quoted:

"It is now accepted, however, that misrepaired DSBs are the principle lesions of importance in the induction of both chromosomal abnormalities and gene mutations".

(Note the paper below is from another University and other personnel entirely from Blank and Goodman)

Environ Health Perspect. 2004 May;112(6):687-94. Related Articles, Links


Magnetic-field-induced DNA strand breaks in brain cells of the rat.

Lai H, Singh NP.

Bioelectromagnetics Research Laboratory, Department of Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.

In previous research, we found that rats acutely (2 hr) exposed to a 60-Hz sinusoidal magnetic field at intensities of 0.1-0.5 millitesla (mT) showed increases in DNA single- and double-strand breaks in their brain cells. Further research showed that these effects could be blocked by pretreating the rats with the free radical scavengers melatonin and N-tert-butyl-alpha-phenylnitrone, suggesting the involvement of free radicals. In the present study, effects of magnetic field exposure on brain cell DNA in the rat were further investigated. Exposure to a 60-Hz magnetic field at 0.01 mT for 24 hr caused a significant increase in DNA single- and double-strand breaks. Prolonging the exposure to 48 hr caused a larger increase. This indicates that the effect is cumulative. In addition, treatment with Trolox (a vitamin E analog) or 7-nitroindazole (a nitric oxide synthase inhibitor) blocked magnetic-field-induced DNA strand breaks. These data further support a role of free radicals on the effects of magnetic fields. Treatment with the iron chelator deferiprone also blocked the effects of magnetic fields on brain cell DNA, suggesting the involvement of iron. Acute magnetic field exposure increased apoptosis and necrosis of brain cells in the rat. We hypothesize that exposure to a 60-Hz magnetic field initiates an iron-mediated process (e.g., the Fenton reaction) that increases free radical formation in brain cells, leading to DNA strand breaks and cell death. This hypothesis could have an important implication for the possible health effects associated with exposure to extremely low-frequency magnetic fields in the public and occupational environments. Key words: apoptosis, DNA strand breaks, free radicals, iron, magnetic field, necrosis.
 
MRC_Hans said:


Uhh, Luci, I suppose all this is a bit over your head, and really, Mr. Coghill has all the problems he needs here, even without your "support".

Why don't you go back to predicting the future. You predictions are so much better than your logic. --- And as to your knowledge about electromagnetics, I don't suppose you could tell the difference between a near field and a repeller grid if it bit you in the nose :rolleyes:.
Click to expand...

Aye Carumba! I don't need to!. :rolleyes: All I need to know is that Mr Coghill is qualified in the area of expertise he is talking about, that his claims stand up to scrutiny with his peers; or, alternatively be provided with a qualified rebutall which also stands up to peer review. Mr Coghill has presented his evidence and his credentials. All I see in return is animated gifs, BIG RED BOLD TYPE, and the stamping of feet from a tiny* bunch of skepti-nerds who just haven't got the honour, integrity or humility to admit that they are wrong.

Now, talking of things sceptical, here's a thing..... there seem to be some striking similarities between Bill and Garbo. The ranting and pedantry is commonplace amongst kooks, but the use of BIG CoLOURFUL CAPS LOCKS, the strange sudden materialisation of a 'layman' and the propensity to to use 'sir' in the accusatory context suggest that Bill has a new suck-poppet. ;)

*Bill/Garbo
 
cogreslab said:
Excuse me Prag, but have I missed somehting? The statements you list are all correct.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Open Scholar in Biology,
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senior Exhibitioner in Biological Sciences and received an honours degree in that subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Honours in Natural Sciences
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Senior Exhibitonership 1960 - 1962 (awarded Second class Hons ) in Biological Sciences, 1962

Now tell us about your Third at Paisley Academy, Prag!
Click to expand...

I'll make it simple for you as you seem unable to grasp more than one simple idea at a time.

"BIOLOGY" is NOT equal to "BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES" is NOT equal to "NATURAL SCIENCES"

For example: geology is a "natural science", but it's not biology. Horticulture is a biological science, but it's not biology or geology.

So we've narrowed it to "biological sciences" (whatever that's supposed to mean) and we still don't know the actual qualification i.e. BA or whatever.

Is anybody on here in England prepared to call up or go to Cambridge and find the WHOLE truth? I don't believe what this weasel says for one instant.

And your MA in "Environmental Management" does not qualify you for one instant to go around passing yourself off as a doctor or doing tests on the blood of cancer patients etc.

After all the cr*p we've had to put up with from you about your fancy scientific qualifications we now find that you are barely qualified (if at all) in the areas you claim to be such an expert in. The mere fact that you STILL resist so strongly spelling out the actual level of your alleged biological qualification is proof in and of itself that you are ashamed of something and have something to hide.

Rolfe, you listening? What the h*ll is the IoB up to, certifying people like this?!
 
Pragmatist said:
Is anybody on here in England prepared to call up or go to Cambridge and find the WHOLE truth? I don't believe what this weasel says for one instant.
Click to expand...

+44 (0)1223 332288

Still no word via email from the alumni office at Cambridge.
 
Pragmatist said:


The mere fact that you STILL resist so strongly spelling out the actual level of your alleged biological qualification is proof in and of itself that you are ashamed of something and have something to hide.
Click to expand...

Garbo, that works both ways, no?

Does the fact that you STILL resist so strongly to spelling out your actual peer reviewed evidence against Mr Coghill's claims, is in and of itself that you are ashamed of something and have something to hide?

Or do you just invoke or dismiss standards as and when you need to?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom