There have been double-blind tests performed, but the subjects were quite upset when they learned that apparently it wasn't the wifi signals making them sick, but the blinking lights on the wireless devices.
IE lights disabled, radios fully enabled, on highest power, transmitting data: No symptoms. Simulated status light activity, radios completely disabled and unpowered: symptoms. Lights & radio on : symptoms Lights & radio disabled: no symptoms.
Conclusion: Clearly we need to investigate the status l
Interesting, do you have a source ? (Aka citation needed). I'm genuinely interested in getting such kind of study result. Of course the real subject is long term exposure effects of radio microwaves. For which I'm not sure many results (scientific ones) exist. And incidentally I'm going to install Ethernet plugs in our sons school next week to avoid this - not for me but by other parents demand (which I think will bring more reliable connectivity - win win )
There are a half a dozen studies that show this. The *belief* that there is radio causes the symptoms. The radio itself doesn't.
The same is true for a whole class action lawsuit that got started when a company put up a radio transmission tower in a neighborhood. A few people claimed they started getting sick around the time it went up and blamed the radio waves.
The company stalled for a year, to assess the situation. The people remained sick.
Then they showed up at court, conclusively proved that the tra
And yet people on Slashdot collectively lean toward believing claims that fracking causes sickness by contaminating drinking water thousands of feet above the drill depth without so much as a blind study..
Falsehood 1: You can light your tap water on fire. Fox made this claim famous in the first Gasland movie when he showed a resident of Colorado striking a match as water came out of his tap; the natural gas dissolved in the water burst into flame. Yet the water was tested by the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, which reported to the resident: "There are no indications of any oil & gas related impacts to your well water." The agency concluded that the natural gas in his water supply was derived from natural sources—the water well penetrated several coal beds that had released the methane into the well.
Is it just me or what?? You don't "light something on fire". You simply light it. The verb "light" in this context means "to set on fire". Clearly some dimwit started this "lighting on fire" nonsense and now everyone and their parrot is "lighting things on fire".
In summary:
1. You light a fire
2. You set fire to a bush
3. You set a pile of wood on fire
4. You strike a match to light it
You never light something on fire, unless you mean to say that you're setting fire to something that is somehow bal
I was able to light my grandparents well water coming out of the tap 40 years ago. This isn't new.
Correct.... not new. The fracking issue mostly is simply some historic issue looking for deep pockets to dig into. Energy companies drilling for oil and mining coal. Attorneys looking for deep pockets to dig money out of.
I said mostly... there are some troubles in paradise but fracking is not the issue to pay attention to.
You had mail, but the super-user read it, and deleted it!
What does Science have to say about this? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:5, Interesting)
There have been double-blind tests performed, but the subjects were quite upset when they learned that apparently it wasn't the wifi signals making them sick, but the blinking lights on the wireless devices.
IE lights disabled, radios fully enabled, on highest power, transmitting data: No symptoms.
Simulated status light activity, radios completely disabled and unpowered: symptoms.
Lights & radio on : symptoms
Lights & radio disabled: no symptoms.
Conclusion: Clearly we need to investigate the status l
Re: (Score:3)
Interesting, do you have a source ? (Aka citation needed).
I'm genuinely interested in getting such kind of study result. Of course the real subject is long term exposure effects of radio microwaves. For which I'm not sure many results (scientific ones) exist. And incidentally I'm going to install Ethernet plugs in our sons school next week to avoid this - not for me but by other parents demand (which I think will bring more reliable connectivity - win win )
Re: (Score:0)
There are a half a dozen studies that show this. The *belief* that there is radio causes the symptoms. The radio itself doesn't.
The same is true for a whole class action lawsuit that got started when a company put up a radio transmission tower in a neighborhood. A few people claimed they started getting sick around the time it went up and blamed the radio waves.
The company stalled for a year, to assess the situation. The people remained sick.
Then they showed up at court, conclusively proved that the tra
Re: What does Science have to say about this? (Score:0)
And yet people on Slashdot collectively lean toward believing claims that fracking causes sickness by contaminating drinking water thousands of feet above the drill depth without so much as a blind study..
Re: What does Science have to say about this? (Score:0)
And so the people lighting their tap water faucet output on fire near the fracking must have some nifty pyrotechnics on hand instead?
Re: What does Science have to say about this? (Score:4, Informative)
Falsehood 1: You can light your tap water on fire. Fox made this claim famous in the first Gasland movie when he showed a resident of Colorado striking a match as water came out of his tap; the natural gas dissolved in the water burst into flame. Yet the water was tested by the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, which reported to the resident: "There are no indications of any oil & gas related impacts to your well water." The agency concluded that the natural gas in his water supply was derived from natural sources—the water well penetrated several coal beds that had released the methane into the well.
Re: (Score:2)
The water itself DID light on fire, and the water from the tap was tested and found the gas. So you can't call that 'falsehood #1'.
The Colorado Dept said that the falsehood was 'fracking caused the gas in the water.', not the water could light on fire.
Whether the state of Colorado is correct is another matter, but you yourself are stating your own claim so badly that it looks you are the one lying.
Re: (Score:2)
Is it just me or what?? You don't "light something on fire". You simply light it. The verb "light" in this context means "to set on fire". Clearly some dimwit started this "lighting on fire" nonsense and now everyone and their parrot is "lighting things on fire".
In summary:
1. You light a fire
2. You set fire to a bush
3. You set a pile of wood on fire
4. You strike a match to light it
You never light something on fire, unless you mean to say that you're setting fire to something that is somehow bal
Re: (Score:2)
I was able to light my grandparents well water coming out of the tap 40 years ago. This isn't new.
Correct.... not new.
The fracking issue mostly is simply some historic issue looking for deep pockets to dig into.
Energy companies drilling for oil and mining coal.
Attorneys looking for deep pockets to dig money out of.
I said mostly... there are some troubles in paradise but fracking is not the issue
to pay attention to.