> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:hum-
> [email protected]] On Behalf Of Trev
> Sent: Sunday, 1 February 2009 7:56 p.m.
> To: Hum Sufferers
> Subject: Re: The Cell Phone "Tower of Doom" - Articles
>
>
> You're conveniently forgetting sidebands Geoff!
What about them ? There are no 'sidebands' as such with FM, and AM has
always had them, apart from SSB channels, which usually also have suppressed
carrier.
>The channel switching
> that goes on in Tetra for instance produces sharp wave fronts at
> microvave freqs and given the receptiveness of brain tissue to the
> switching rate cannot just be discounted, Where are the safety tests?
No it doesn't. What comes out of a cell-phone tower is a constant level at a
constant bandwidth , with a constant amount of modulation. There are no
out-of-band emissions, else adjacent channel allocations would be interfered
with and everybody would be most annoyed.
> Humans are not wideband receivers.They are selective and sensitive
> organisms.
Bollocks. Humans 'receive' all the frequencies that they are being
irradiated with.
> The time constant for sickness is 10+ years. In 10 years we'll check
> the Alzheimers and kids Leukemia figures.,sure.
> It will be too late
And what about the greater levels of RF that have been de rigour for
decades? Cellphone towers are low power, and DTV requires significantly
lower rf levels than analogue TV ever did.
> The Gov'rt will be very sorry ..... and the taxpayer will pick up the
> bill.
> Profits due will already be banked /spent on some new wheeze.
> You are so complacent..
Not complacent at all, just realistic and not neurotic.
> On another thread here you talk of tripe being spoken just because you
> don't agree.
No , it is 'tripe' because it is more often than not, patently flawed
factually.
> Well , your views are tripe- dressed up in techy jargon as you never
> produce an ounce of proof .
> Your views are totally subjective and no more valid than any other and
> often a lot more irritating to boot!
As you like. I can rationalise ANY of my assertions, and seem to be able to
easily spot basic flaws in many of the other 'theories' and point them out -
which most then summarily ignore/dismiss as 'biased'. Call that subjective
if you like. I call it objective.
I do not like my Hum any more than anybody here. But it does not make me
feel like some sort of pioneer/hero to champion ideas that are just plain
silly.
geoff
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Hum
Sufferers" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/hum-sufferers?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
