It is a moral outrage. I have no idea about the UK. The US certainly has its share of loonies, but the US also has clear laws against inciting to commit crimes. Does the UK not have such a law? Can one prosecute such despicable behavior in the US since the challenge is international?Ed said:
Bioelectromagnetics
- Thread starter Beleth
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bioelectromagnetics
I don't understand something. This contention is an extremly easy thing to test. 5 groups of 100 rats each located at varying distances from the source. Clip their ears to that those whoopsies that seem to be attracted by out of the ordinary claims seem to attract. Flux meters with continuous recording with each cage.
With the appropriate safe guards in place to prevent tampering and histology on the dead guys, you'd have an experiment. I'd hypothesise that deaths would fall off as a function of 1 over the square of the distance from the sourse.
Like everything else in the less than normal world there is not a clear experiment, just hype and excuses.
With the appropriate safe guards in place to prevent tampering and histology on the dead guys, you'd have an experiment. I'd hypothesise that deaths would fall off as a function of 1 over the square of the distance from the sourse.
Like everything else in the less than normal world there is not a clear experiment, just hype and excuses.
a third possibility, presented only for the chance to explore the question...BillHoyt said:
3. This is an attempt at satire, not unlike Swift's "A Modest Proposal", though not as well written. It is meant to show in stark terms how ludicrous the claims are. The whole website, thus, is a LandoverBaptist.com for pseudoscience, and probably donates all its profits to JREF or CSICOP....
Geni why do you want to spoil the drama here? We are talking about kids. Mr. Coghill wants to inspire fear by hitting below the belt so, I am offering to pay him to provide us with a demo on his child since this is how much he estimates a child's life.
cogreslab said:
Yes I can. You would have to demonstrate why animal models don't work in this case.
That is a rather convenient out, if I do say so, so is the sanctimonious statement about not doing animal experiments. It is rough to take the moral high ground when you would endanger a human.
The lack of a direct test of your contentions suggests very strongly that you are engaged in a Public Relations stunt.
cogreslab said:
Sir, are you really serious? Are you suggesting that mylenization would increase the head size that much? In any event, even if you are correct the solution is simple: Use timed pregnant Rats, you might even examine the fall off in deaths depending on time in utero, if your hypothesis is correct. a 5 by 5 design, very neat.
Incedientially, there are a number of commisures. Why the CC and why does a nerve bundle "send" signals. You have evidence that nerves actually mediate the splitting of cells? How might that occur? You are surely aware that there is an incomplete decussation, are you not? How does this enter into it?
I think that I solved your experimental objection.
Cleopatra said:
Your feelthy, feelthy Greek marbles are all belong to us. Bwahahahahahahahahaha
Hey Cleo, you ever get to the Alexandria Armory? I understand that they have some nifty Crusader swords captured during the third crusade. Could you nick me one? Failing that, you might keep your eyes open for books on the subject.
It also seems to me that one could explore the effect of E-waves (I do love that construction!) on the cells that comprise the mylen sheath in vitreo. In any event a cellular or animal model could be used. I don't see the problem. Dead rats are not quite as evokitive as dead children but they are moreso than dead cells.
It does seem to me that a solid benchmark experiment could be designed and executed fairly cheaply.
It does seem to me that a solid benchmark experiment could be designed and executed fairly cheaply.
cogreslab said:
Whoa, me thinks you are contradicting yourself here.
cogreslab said:
So, you use earthworms, but not mammals. But you still claim to know what's going to happen to an infant.
You have never run experiments on this, yet you claim to know what will happen, if an infant - not your own, of course - is placed under the lines.
Don't you see just how weak your argument is?
cogreslab said:
I am not disputing volume enlargement, I am disputing that mylenization would increase head circumference to the extent that it would be a significant impediment to birth. In fact I do not know for a fact what the impact would be, you made the claim after all. Incidentially, please, for the sake of serious conversation, do not dare suggest sin in others when you propose infant research that could be fatal.
That is neither here nor there. The issue is animal experimentation. Why not do the benchmark study?
Please Mr. Coghill. Don't you think that it 's tad ridiculous for you to complain that we do not answer to questions and we do not provide evidence to support our claims.
I don't know what Ed does for a living ( apart from collecting medieval armoury and "stealing" antiquities...) but I am a simple consumer who is worreid about your claims and I am willing to sponsor your experiment if you perform it on your child.
Does somebody needs to be qualified in order you address his concerns? Your web-site is filled with products and price tags and with horror stories about issues of public health.
You came here today as if you were addressing a bunch of school kids and offered us a way to earn easily 5000 dollars and now you complain and make ironic remarks for the posters!
It's seems that courtesy has left the building.
I don't know what Ed does for a living ( apart from collecting medieval armoury and "stealing" antiquities...) but I am a simple consumer who is worreid about your claims and I am willing to sponsor your experiment if you perform it on your child.
Does somebody needs to be qualified in order you address his concerns? Your web-site is filled with products and price tags and with horror stories about issues of public health.
You came here today as if you were addressing a bunch of school kids and offered us a way to earn easily 5000 dollars and now you complain and make ironic remarks for the posters!
It's seems that courtesy has left the building.
cogreslab said:
Excellent. Now we are getting somewhere. Now, what does 150V/cm correspond to? That is to say, if I have a 50,000 volt powerline above my home what would the energy impinging on me be?
You see, you can actually communicate, it just takes will.
davefoc
Philosopher
Mr. Coghill,
I think it is almost impossible to respond intelligently to your various claims because there are just too many and when the discussion focuses on one of them you immediately make another even stranger claim.
In the two threads that I have seen you take part in you have made claims concerning a wide variety of notions that fall well outside mainstream scientific thought.
You say that there is evidence for your claims and yet when I read a report that you said supported your claims the report provided an almost complete rebuttal of what you were saying. You selectively quoted out of that report to find almost the only verbiage in the report that could be seen to support your view.
You have made statements concerning electrical theory that are completely inconsistent with standard electrical theory and yet you claim that your years of working with technical people has allowed you to absorb a certain amount of technical expertise. So far nothing in any of your posts has demonstrated that you have absorbed anything of a technical nature in those years except an ability to toss out some technical buzzwords.
As to your challenge, I am somewhat at odds with many of the posters. I would absolutely submit my baby to such a challenge (admittedly my wife might shoot me first). I do not know that you are wrong to a certainty, but to the degree that it is possible to know something I believe you are wrong. The drive to take the baby to a place where the appropriate electric fields existed for the test would pose a far greater risk than your test.
You appear to be making a living selling completely useless crap. The claims for many of the devices that you sell would easily qualify for the JREF million dollar prize if they could be proven. I presume that you have not submitted any of these claims for testing. Why not? The publicity for one successful test would bring enormous wealth and fame to your institute and the benefits to humanity in general might be huge. I think the answer is obvious, at some level you know that your claims are crap and you don't want to face the truth.
I think it is almost impossible to respond intelligently to your various claims because there are just too many and when the discussion focuses on one of them you immediately make another even stranger claim.
In the two threads that I have seen you take part in you have made claims concerning a wide variety of notions that fall well outside mainstream scientific thought.
You say that there is evidence for your claims and yet when I read a report that you said supported your claims the report provided an almost complete rebuttal of what you were saying. You selectively quoted out of that report to find almost the only verbiage in the report that could be seen to support your view.
You have made statements concerning electrical theory that are completely inconsistent with standard electrical theory and yet you claim that your years of working with technical people has allowed you to absorb a certain amount of technical expertise. So far nothing in any of your posts has demonstrated that you have absorbed anything of a technical nature in those years except an ability to toss out some technical buzzwords.
As to your challenge, I am somewhat at odds with many of the posters. I would absolutely submit my baby to such a challenge (admittedly my wife might shoot me first). I do not know that you are wrong to a certainty, but to the degree that it is possible to know something I believe you are wrong. The drive to take the baby to a place where the appropriate electric fields existed for the test would pose a far greater risk than your test.
You appear to be making a living selling completely useless crap. The claims for many of the devices that you sell would easily qualify for the JREF million dollar prize if they could be proven. I presume that you have not submitted any of these claims for testing. Why not? The publicity for one successful test would bring enormous wealth and fame to your institute and the benefits to humanity in general might be huge. I think the answer is obvious, at some level you know that your claims are crap and you don't want to face the truth.