Yeah, because no multi-billion dollar industry has ever before considered the idea of polluting a knowledge pool with borderline personalities and general nonsense in order to give their flocks an excuse to blah blah blah blah....
lol. I see you need the helmet more than I do. Send me your address and I'll mail you one ASAP. Then we can team up, and figure out who left the deuce in the urinal. I'm getting a raging clue already!
have a way to fix the problem. Thanks, brave keyboard warrior! I feel safer already. And braver. And WAY less desperate. Can't wait for the warning labels to come out. Cheers!
1. You can accuse me of being "desperate" all you like - it automatically weakens your position because it's obvious to anyone with an IQ over 50 that you're talking out of your ass.
2. Accusing me of dodging, and then calling my comment foolish without bothering to explain what's foolish about it, makes you look like a hypocritical twit.
3. No, my computer does not connect to the internet via "cell phone tech". Unsurprisingly, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
4. The phrase "It includes the accepted realities of the world we live in" is meaningless fucking babble.
5. The only emotions I feel while speaking to you are amusement and pity. Those are a direct result of your inability to come up with anything even remotely resembling a coherent argument.
6. Your argument is ENTIRELY composed of logical fallacies. You have offered NOT ONE SHRED of actual evidence to support your contention that low-power RF emissions generated by cell-phones cause any harm whatsoever. You have used an argument from ignorance. You have used strawmen. You have implied conspiracies, and questioned the motives of everyone on the planet. You have done everything EXCEPT offer a rational explanation of your silly beliefs. If you're too blind to see that, don't worry - the rest of us can see it just fine.
Now, I'd say that, unless you can actually present some evidence or make a coherent argument, we're done here. Judging by the rest of your comments, I'm sure you'll come back and press ahead with a rant about how "Dr." Deepak Chopra has proved that low power modulated EM adversely affects the chromodynamic balance of inverted neurons by causing quantum tunneling fluctuations in the non-local strata and interrupting the locality of our consciousness, or some such pseudo-scientific drivel. That's fine. Feel free to babble on for as long as you like, but until you're able to present a solid argument backed by actual facts, don't expect a response.
The thing that surprises me is that - given the facts which your already pointed out - someone would actually bother to fake the data. I always figured that 90%+ of torrents were illegal, so why would anyone conduct a fraudulent study and run the risk of being exposed, just so they could get a few extra percentage points? It makes me question my basic premise - maybe there ARE more legitimate torrents than I'm aware of.
You're really arguing that non-ionizing radiation is safe because life expectancy (may have) gone up over the last 50 years?
Nope.
Infra Red radiation has been around forever, so our bodies have adapted to accept it. However, low power, modulated EM signals which have been shown time and again to communicate with cells and cause them to alter their behavior in a variety of odd ways is a brand new feature in our environment.
Well.... ignoring for a sec the fact that IR is part of the EM spectrum... I guess you're technically correct. I mean, we only invented sunlight a few decades ago. No time to adapt!
And when people try to explore this, the telecom companies launch into the same tactical response patterns the tobacco industry used when it was suggested that their products might be dangerous. That alone warrants curiosity.
Well there's a nice, logically sound argument. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not trying to get you, eh?
Basically, you like your cell phone tech, and so it's not allowed to be bad, and any logic or evidence to the contrary must be denied because your overriding imperative, (things you like can't be bad), must stand at all costs.
My cellphone spends 90% of it's time in my car. I'm on a pay-as-you-go plan, and spend about $6 a month on it. But yeah, I love my phone SOOOOO much that I want it to give me cancer. Sure. Is there ANY part of your argument that doesn't hinge on logical fallacies?
All the more reason to ban infrared! Have you SEEN the kinds of disasters it's caused in the past???
The bottom line is that we have environmental hazards which have not existed except for the last 50 years in a very long evolutionary history.
And yet, amazingly enough, general health and life expectancy keep getting better and better! Why, you'd almost think that the two were related somehow.
There's very little data one way or the other.
Ah, yes, the standard escape clause. Want to believe in Santa Claus? No problem! "There's very little data one way or the other." Works every time!
The fact that the cellphone companies are resisting even the tiniest concession to consumer demands for more information suggests that the cellphone companies are afraid of that information. Maybe they know something you don't.
No, they know exactly what I know: that most people are stupid easily frightened sheep, and that losing a large fraction of your customers because of an idiotic conspiracy theory is a very real hazard.
Of course, it would still be a straw man since besides Wakefield's thoroughly discredited "study", nobody has found any link whatsoever between vaccines and autism, while there is actual concern of harm from cellphone EM radiation from scientists (see the paper I linked for example).
Oh wow. Actual concern. Crazy. Of course, nobody has found any link whatsoever between cellphones and, well, ANY kind of harmful condition. But we have "concern", so who needs science!
Oh, and for future reference, stop misusing the term "strawman".
Also, how do you think your microwave oven works? It uses dielectric heating to rapidly vibrate (and thereby heat) the water molecules in food. Guess what - dielectric heating works on you too, and there is no cut-off range; even low frequency RF has some dielectric heating effect on the water and some body tissues. Just throwing some actual facts into this discussion....
Just throwing some actual facts into this discussion.
Right on man! Btw, did you know that your oven - you know, the normal kind that cooks food - emits infrared radiation? And your lighbulbs also emit infrared radiation? And there's no cutoff range; even low amounts of infrared radiation have some effects on water and some body tissues. You don't want to get cooked like a roast, do ya? Might wanna think about tossing out those bulbs.
In any case, consumer choice and information is a good thing.
It's a good thing when the information is relevant, sure. It's a bad thing when you're misleading people. Next you'll be wanting warning about autism placed on all vaccines. Sorry, but when your "information" is only there as a way of furthering the agenda of insane conspiracy theorists, it's definitely not a "Good Thing".
Certain is there is any health risk to using cell phones it is rather small, but who are to to decide what information people should have? Let them decide, and act accordingly.
Absolutely. Likewise, the risk that some god somewhere might find your cellphone personally offensive and condemn you to the pits of hell is rather small, but who are we to decide what information people should have? I demand that every cellphone carry a sticker stating "WARNING: This phone may cause third degree burns and eternal damnation."
Well, OK. I can understand the idea that a pedophile's sexual preference could be "underage" as opposed to "male" or "female", but isn't it a more natural human trait to take care of or protect the immature of our species rather than exploit or abuse them?
Yuhuh. And isn't is a more natural human trait to have sex with the opposite sex, rather than with your own?
Nature.... evolution... they're all about variety. Rule 34 exists for a reason, you know.
Write your government rep, and tell them you want the nuclear regulations shitcanned. Oh, and educate the general public so that a repeal of at least two-thirds of those regulations isn't instant political-suicide for any politician who proposes it. Do that, and you might just get your wish.
Now all you Blu-Ray movie watchers can sit thru non-skip-able commercials about the "amazing Hi Def picture of the Blu-Vi-402" movies coming soon!
I'm constantly amused by the fact that these commercials were first put on VHS tapes in order to stop the movie from getting damaged, while on modern media they're the only part of the disk that never seems to get damaged. You can't skip the commercials, but the movie is guaranteed to skip! There's something poetic about that....
You just said the exact same thing that he did, except you left out the bits which explain why a "practical" reactor is all of those things. And you quoted a guy called hymen. So you lose:)
Chinese sweat shop labor, e.g. at Foxconn, make about $168-176 per month
Yep, and a baker in China makes less than $100 per month. Seeing as how there's not much demand here for Chinese bread, I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that the "sweatshops" apparently pay better than what the chinese themselves are willing to pay.
And for what they're being *COUGH*paid*COUGH*, why the hell would they even care?
Because what they're getting is far, FAR better than what they'll get if the factory gets shut down? Even in the first world, losing your job can ruin your life. In the third world, the repercussions are even worse.
Which may not be such a bad thing, in a sense.... Yes, I am fully aware that this is not "fair" - since when has that mattered?
Irrational beliefs and behaviours are a bad thing, regardless of the cause or target. I’m not concerned with “fairness”. I care about trying to get people to think rationally and base their actions and beliefs on something other than emotions, religion, or political ideology.
I agree that the “silver lining” here is that any backlash against the oil industry can only help fuel the drive toward alternative sources. However, it’s not necessary. We’re facing a copper shortage, too, but we don’t need to demonize the copper companies in order to switch various industries to alternate materials. I’d much rather see people approach these problems in a rational manner. Fear-mongering and societal hysteria have rarely produced positive results.
Don't let your ego run away without you. You're not worth stalking.
Yeah, all the stalkers say that. Actions speak louder than words.
Using Ad Hominem instead of responding to my comment only proves my point. You're here to troll.
Naw, I'm just not here to throw pearls to swine. I don't see any reason to seriously address an individual who constantly makes appeals to logical fallacies while simultaneously posting irrational drek. If you actually care about logic and rationalism, go check out the JREF or the Sceptics Society. Maybe we can have a discussion after you've learned to be a reasonable human being.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, because no multi-billion dollar industry has ever before considered the idea of polluting a knowledge pool with borderline personalities and general nonsense in order to give their flocks an excuse to blah blah blah blah ....
lol. I see you need the helmet more than I do. Send me your address and I'll mail you one ASAP. Then we can team up, and figure out who left the deuce in the urinal. I'm getting a raging clue already!
Well, you and this guy:
http://www.equilibrauk.com/microwaveprotection.shtml
have convinced me. Luckily these guys:
http://zapatopi.net/afdb/
have a way to fix the problem. Thanks, brave keyboard warrior! I feel safer already. And braver. And WAY less desperate. Can't wait for the warning labels to come out. Cheers!
My bet is that the vast majority of those planets have run away from having a habitual environment by turning into planets like Venus or Mars.
So you're suggesting that they have an occasional atmosphere? I don't know. Usually, once a planet gives up its atmosphere habit, it doesn't go back.
1. You can accuse me of being "desperate" all you like - it automatically weakens your position because it's obvious to anyone with an IQ over 50 that you're talking out of your ass.
2. Accusing me of dodging, and then calling my comment foolish without bothering to explain what's foolish about it, makes you look like a hypocritical twit.
3. No, my computer does not connect to the internet via "cell phone tech". Unsurprisingly, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
4. The phrase "It includes the accepted realities of the world we live in" is meaningless fucking babble.
5. The only emotions I feel while speaking to you are amusement and pity. Those are a direct result of your inability to come up with anything even remotely resembling a coherent argument.
6. Your argument is ENTIRELY composed of logical fallacies. You have offered NOT ONE SHRED of actual evidence to support your contention that low-power RF emissions generated by cell-phones cause any harm whatsoever. You have used an argument from ignorance. You have used strawmen. You have implied conspiracies, and questioned the motives of everyone on the planet. You have done everything EXCEPT offer a rational explanation of your silly beliefs. If you're too blind to see that, don't worry - the rest of us can see it just fine.
Now, I'd say that, unless you can actually present some evidence or make a coherent argument, we're done here. Judging by the rest of your comments, I'm sure you'll come back and press ahead with a rant about how "Dr." Deepak Chopra has proved that low power modulated EM adversely affects the chromodynamic balance of inverted neurons by causing quantum tunneling fluctuations in the non-local strata and interrupting the locality of our consciousness, or some such pseudo-scientific drivel. That's fine. Feel free to babble on for as long as you like, but until you're able to present a solid argument backed by actual facts, don't expect a response.
The thing that surprises me is that - given the facts which your already pointed out - someone would actually bother to fake the data. I always figured that 90%+ of torrents were illegal, so why would anyone conduct a fraudulent study and run the risk of being exposed, just so they could get a few extra percentage points? It makes me question my basic premise - maybe there ARE more legitimate torrents than I'm aware of.
And yet, you are the one who sounds desperate.
lol. Mr Strawman resorts to ad-hominem. Surprise!
You're really arguing that non-ionizing radiation is safe because life expectancy (may have) gone up over the last 50 years?
Nope.
Infra Red radiation has been around forever, so our bodies have adapted to accept it. However, low power, modulated EM signals which have been shown time and again to communicate with cells and cause them to alter their behavior in a variety of odd ways is a brand new feature in our environment.
Well .... ignoring for a sec the fact that IR is part of the EM spectrum ... I guess you're technically correct. I mean, we only invented sunlight a few decades ago. No time to adapt!
And when people try to explore this, the telecom companies launch into the same tactical response patterns the tobacco industry used when it was suggested that their products might be dangerous. That alone warrants curiosity.
Well there's a nice, logically sound argument. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not trying to get you, eh?
Basically, you like your cell phone tech, and so it's not allowed to be bad, and any logic or evidence to the contrary must be denied because your overriding imperative, (things you like can't be bad), must stand at all costs.
My cellphone spends 90% of it's time in my car. I'm on a pay-as-you-go plan, and spend about $6 a month on it. But yeah, I love my phone SOOOOO much that I want it to give me cancer. Sure. Is there ANY part of your argument that doesn't hinge on logical fallacies?
So that's a "no", then.
But but but ... I thought it was about the pipeline?
Is there ANY conspiracy theory in which you don't believe?
RF radiation affects tissues differently from, say, infrared or X-ray radiation.
All the more reason to ban infrared! Have you SEEN the kinds of disasters it's caused in the past???
The bottom line is that we have environmental hazards which have not existed except for the last 50 years in a very long evolutionary history.
And yet, amazingly enough, general health and life expectancy keep getting better and better! Why, you'd almost think that the two were related somehow.
There's very little data one way or the other.
Ah, yes, the standard escape clause. Want to believe in Santa Claus? No problem! "There's very little data one way or the other." Works every time!
The fact that the cellphone companies are resisting even the tiniest concession to consumer demands for more information suggests that the cellphone companies are afraid of that information. Maybe they know something you don't.
No, they know exactly what I know: that most people are stupid easily frightened sheep, and that losing a large fraction of your customers because of an idiotic conspiracy theory is a very real hazard.
Of course, it would still be a straw man since besides Wakefield's thoroughly discredited "study", nobody has found any link whatsoever between vaccines and autism, while there is actual concern of harm from cellphone EM radiation from scientists (see the paper I linked for example).
Oh wow. Actual concern. Crazy. Of course, nobody has found any link whatsoever between cellphones and, well, ANY kind of harmful condition. But we have "concern", so who needs science!
Oh, and for future reference, stop misusing the term "strawman".
Also, how do you think your microwave oven works? It uses dielectric heating to rapidly vibrate (and thereby heat) the water molecules in food. Guess what - dielectric heating works on you too, and there is no cut-off range; even low frequency RF has some dielectric heating effect on the water and some body tissues. Just throwing some actual facts into this discussion. ...
Just throwing some actual facts into this discussion.
Right on man! Btw, did you know that your oven - you know, the normal kind that cooks food - emits infrared radiation? And your lighbulbs also emit infrared radiation? And there's no cutoff range; even low amounts of infrared radiation have some effects on water and some body tissues. You don't want to get cooked like a roast, do ya? Might wanna think about tossing out those bulbs.
In any case, consumer choice and information is a good thing.
It's a good thing when the information is relevant, sure. It's a bad thing when you're misleading people. Next you'll be wanting warning about autism placed on all vaccines. Sorry, but when your "information" is only there as a way of furthering the agenda of insane conspiracy theorists, it's definitely not a "Good Thing".
Certain is there is any health risk to using cell phones it is rather small, but who are to to decide what information people should have? Let them decide, and act accordingly.
Absolutely. Likewise, the risk that some god somewhere might find your cellphone personally offensive and condemn you to the pits of hell is rather small, but who are we to decide what information people should have? I demand that every cellphone carry a sticker stating "WARNING: This phone may cause third degree burns and eternal damnation."
If you think Christianity is anti-proift, you haven't been to the Vatican.
Well, OK. I can understand the idea that a pedophile's sexual preference could be "underage" as opposed to "male" or "female", but isn't it a more natural human trait to take care of or protect the immature of our species rather than exploit or abuse them?
Yuhuh. And isn't is a more natural human trait to have sex with the opposite sex, rather than with your own?
Nature .... evolution ... they're all about variety. Rule 34 exists for a reason, you know.
It's high time we got rid of fission (other than what we need for medical & research reasons). The claimed cost-efficiency _does not exist_. Period.
Pha! Tell to the US aircraft-carrier-and-submarine fleet!
Yes, but which nuclear reactor type are you talking about? Most don't qualify as "prototype" any more. Thorium-fueled?
Write your government rep, and tell them you want the nuclear regulations shitcanned. Oh, and educate the general public so that a repeal of at least two-thirds of those regulations isn't instant political-suicide for any politician who proposes it. Do that, and you might just get your wish.
Now all you Blu-Ray movie watchers can sit thru non-skip-able commercials about the "amazing Hi Def picture of the Blu-Vi-402" movies coming soon!
I'm constantly amused by the fact that these commercials were first put on VHS tapes in order to stop the movie from getting damaged, while on modern media they're the only part of the disk that never seems to get damaged. You can't skip the commercials, but the movie is guaranteed to skip! There's something poetic about that ....
You just said the exact same thing that he did, except you left out the bits which explain why a "practical" reactor is all of those things. And you quoted a guy called hymen. So you lose :)
I would absolutely LOVE to see how you plan to coat an aircraft in constantly spinning liquid mercury.
Chinese sweat shop labor, e.g. at Foxconn, make about $168-176 per month
Yep, and a baker in China makes less than $100 per month. Seeing as how there's not much demand here for Chinese bread, I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that the "sweatshops" apparently pay better than what the chinese themselves are willing to pay.
Here's a bunch more numbers for you to look at:
http://www.worldsalaries.org/china.shtml
And for what they're being *COUGH*paid*COUGH*, why the hell would they even care?
Because what they're getting is far, FAR better than what they'll get if the factory gets shut down? Even in the first world, losing your job can ruin your life. In the third world, the repercussions are even worse.
Which may not be such a bad thing, in a sense ....
Yes, I am fully aware that this is not "fair" - since when has that mattered?
Irrational beliefs and behaviours are a bad thing, regardless of the cause or target. I’m not concerned with “fairness”. I care about trying to get people to think rationally and base their actions and beliefs on something other than emotions, religion, or political ideology.
I agree that the “silver lining” here is that any backlash against the oil industry can only help fuel the drive toward alternative sources. However, it’s not necessary. We’re facing a copper shortage, too, but we don’t need to demonize the copper companies in order to switch various industries to alternate materials. I’d much rather see people approach these problems in a rational manner. Fear-mongering and societal hysteria have rarely produced positive results.
Don't let your ego run away without you. You're not worth stalking.
Yeah, all the stalkers say that. Actions speak louder than words.
Using Ad Hominem instead of responding to my comment only proves my point. You're here to troll.
Naw, I'm just not here to throw pearls to swine. I don't see any reason to seriously address an individual who constantly makes appeals to logical fallacies while simultaneously posting irrational drek. If you actually care about logic and rationalism, go check out the JREF or the Sceptics Society. Maybe we can have a discussion after you've learned to be a reasonable human being.