Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > Chatter > General Discussion


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-26-2008, 04:04 PM   #41 (permalink)
Wise-ass Latino
 
QuasiMondo's Avatar
 
Location: Pretoria (Tshwane), RSA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
No one even bothered looking into a study. I was demonstrating that even when presented to a link that was said to verify the information, no one read it.

Cept Filtherton. Well played.
So let me get this straight. Instead of bringing something useful to the discussion, you bring up an unrelated report guessing that nobody would check your link to prove that nobody reads links?

And the point behind this was...?
__________________
Cameron originally envisioned the Terminator as a small, unremarkable man, giving it the ability to blend in more easily. As a result, his first choice for the part was Lance Henriksen. O. J. Simpson was on the shortlist but Cameron did not think that such a nice guy could be a ruthless killer.

-From the Collector's Edition DVD of The Terminator
QuasiMondo is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 05:00 PM   #42 (permalink)
Currently sour but formerly Dlishs
 
dlish's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Australia/UAE
Quote:
Originally Posted by robot_parade
Could be a tumor.

not really interested in contributing to this thread except to say

Its not a TOOMAR
__________________
An injustice anywhere, is an injustice everywhere

I always sign my facebook comments with ()()===========(}. Does that make me gay?
- Filthy
dlish is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 05:05 PM   #43 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian
I just assumed you'd finally gone off the deep end. I mean, we all know it's coming. There's a pool.
True. It's not a matter of if but when.

I almost happened once when I watched Dexter seasons 1 and 2 all the way through in 2 days. Almost.
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuasiMondo
So let me get this straight. Instead of bringing something useful to the discussion, you bring up an unrelated report guessing that nobody would check your link to prove that nobody reads links?

And the point behind this was...?
I guess you missed it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel, the lady-killer
I was demonstrating that even when presented to a link that was said to verify the information, no one read it.
No one was even ready to listen to any alternative viewpoint.
Willravel is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 05:29 PM   #44 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
The research was posted in the publication International Archives of Allergy and Immunology. The website I linked only happened to host it.
No, the website you linked to had an article written by a naturopath, who graduated from a naturopathic school that also hosted the website. IOW, pure fantasy-land.

The actual study in question might have some merit, but it's a single study, and I'd want to see a lot more before changing my behavior based upon it. It also had *nothing* to do with the OP.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
It demonstrated quite well what I wanted to demonstrate: people don't do research before forming an opinion about things like this.

How many posts between mine and filtherton, who was apparently the first to actually read the study I posted? 12ish.
o You didn't post a study. You posted a summary of the study written by a naturopath, who as a group tend to believe any number of unlikely things.

o You could have linked to the actual study abstract, like I did. Trust me, I didn't have to look hard.

o The study you referred to has nothing to do with the OP. Did I say it already? Let me say it again. The OP referred to people who think that *WiFi* signals cause them actual distress. You referred to a study that claims that *cellphone* signals (similar, but Not Quite The Same Thing), may increase sensitivity to certain allergens. You apparently didn't bother to read and understand the OP, and/or your own damn article, and this has been pointed out to you several times.

o I did read your article, and by the end of the first paragraph, I wondered what the hell it had to do with the OP. Answer: Nothing. You're wasting my time. (Heh, which is actually a pretty stupid thing for someone on the internet to say, but hey, TFP is supposed to be different, right?)
robot_parade is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 05:32 PM   #45 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
This coming from the guy who used wikipedia as a source.
Willravel is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 05:46 PM   #46 (permalink)
Young Crumudgeon
 
Martian's Avatar
 
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
True. It's not a matter of if but when.

I almost happened once when I watched Dexter seasons 1 and 2 all the way through in 2 days. Almost.
Just do me a favour and make sure that when it happens, it happens on the week of August 5th.
__________________
I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept
I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept
I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head
I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said

- Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame
Martian is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 05:51 PM   #47 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian
Just do me a favour and make sure that when it happens, it happens on the week of August 5th.
The week of my birthday? As long as I get to enjoy some cake first.
Willravel is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 06:15 PM   #48 (permalink)
<3 TFP
 
xepherys's Avatar
 
Location: 17TLH2445607250
This thread is AWESOME!

First, I call bullshit on the allergic to EM. Maybe... MAYBE EM can make someone's existing allergies more excited... MAYBE! I doubt it!

Second, peer reviewed, shmeer reviewed. The only certainty in science is that nothing is certain. If you don't adhere to that, you're a shitty scientist. Damned near every possible facet of science goes through reviews and revisions every few decades, tosses out the vast base of recent discovery for that field, and inserts new "peer reviewed, proven" data. Medical is by far the worst. Saccharin is not a health risk, it IS but only in high doses, it's not... oh wait, it IS because we have Sucralose now and we want to sell it instead. Vaccination are important. No, they cause terrible disabilities in children. No, that's only ones that contain mercury. no, they ALL contain mercury.

See the problem here? A study can be done to prove or disprove damned near anything. Your best bet is to apply the logic filter. Does it make sense that RF can cause allergic reactions? Potentially. Are there massive amounts of RF/EM everywhere you go in the US, especially in urban areas? Yes, always and in many frequency ranges. What frequency does 802.11 run on? 2.4GHz and 5GHz... already two different frequencies. Do they BOTH cause allerigc reactions?

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf

According to this chart, published by the US Dept. of Commerce, the 2.4GHz range is in the Amatuer range and is bordered by cell phones (2.390GHz ~2.480GHz) and also such things as radio translocation devices.

The 5GHz range is also bordered by cellular as well as aeronautical navigation systems and space research/radio astronomy.

So... where's the bitching about other things in these ranges? Cellular is far more prevalent and puts out a stronger signal than a wireless access point. So if that's the case, how can they tell the access point is making things bad, when they should already be totally fucked by the cell phones?

It just stenches of bullshit!

< /application of logic filter >
__________________
The prospect of achieving a peace agreement with the extremist group of MILF is almost impossible...
-- Emmanuel Pinol, Governor of Cotobato


My Homepage
xepherys is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 06:34 PM   #49 (permalink)
Metal and Rock 4 Life
 
Destrox's Avatar
 
Location: Phoenix
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlish
not really interested in contributing to this thread except to say

Its not a TOOMAR

Thank you! I laughed.


As for the nut job:

He's fucked, time to move or invest in Reynolds.


-


And guys, seriously. Stop trying to compare your e-penis's. You look silly.
__________________
You bore me.... next.
Destrox is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 06:56 PM   #50 (permalink)
Young Crumudgeon
 
Martian's Avatar
 
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by xepherys
See the problem here? A study can be done to prove or disprove damned near anything. Your best bet is to apply the logic filter. Does it make sense that RF can cause allergic reactions? Potentially. Are there massive amounts of RF/EM everywhere you go in the US, especially in urban areas? Yes, always and in many frequency ranges. What frequency does 802.11 run on? 2.4GHz and 5GHz... already two different frequencies. Do they BOTH cause allerigc reactions?

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/osmhome/allochrt.pdf

According to this chart, published by the US Dept. of Commerce, the 2.4GHz range is in the Amatuer range and is bordered by cell phones (2.390GHz ~2.480GHz) and also such things as radio translocation devices.

The 5GHz range is also bordered by cellular as well as aeronautical navigation systems and space research/radio astronomy.

So... where's the bitching about other things in these ranges? Cellular is far more prevalent and puts out a stronger signal than a wireless access point. So if that's the case, how can they tell the access point is making things bad, when they should already be totally fucked by the cell phones?
It's not just cell phones. Virtually all modern devices that are 'cordless' and use RF use the 2.4GHz range. Cordless phones, garage door openers, some types of remote controls, wireless game controllers, bluetooth devices, microwave ovens and so on. 2.4 GHz is an unlicensed frequency band, meaning that anyone can make use of it and it's very popular for all sorts of short-range devices. Wi-fi uses two distinct frequency bands but the 5 GHz band is only used by 802.11a and 802.11n; the more popular and widely used 802.11 b/g standards use the 2.4 range.

If I were responsible for handling this case, I'd tell these people that I'd be willing to make concessions if a reputable third party could prove their condition is real. On the very small chance that it is, they need to be looked after, and if it's really not then they get made fools of. Seems to work out to me.
__________________
I wake up in the morning more tired than before I slept
I get through cryin' and I'm sadder than before I wept
I get through thinkin' now, and the thoughts have left my head
I get through speakin' and I can't remember, not a word that I said

- Ben Harper, Show Me A Little Shame
Martian is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 09:29 PM   #51 (permalink)
Crazy
 
echo5delta's Avatar
 
Location: Swamp Lagoon, North Cackalacky
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martian
I just assumed you'd finally gone off the deep end. I mean, we all know it's coming. There's a pool.
Which reminds me - you owe me a sawbuck, dude.

I admit, I haven't read any of the studies cited, nor do I care to after reading the article. I do, however, have a hunch - very similar to the "Huge Guy Theory" put forth to explain the killing of two Russian mobsters in Boston a few years back.

If there really are people out there who are no-shit, genuinely allergic or reactive specifically to WiFi signals and frequencies, would they:

a) have likely been discovered randomly, in onesies and twosies, in several large, very wired cities like Chicago, Toronto, or Atlanta in the past five years?

b) be found in a group large enough to file a discrimination lawsuit in fuckin' Santa Fe New Mexico over the course of a few months?

Meanwhile, anyone want any of these wolftickets I'm selling?
__________________
"Peace" is when nobody's shooting. A "Just Peace" is when we get what we want. - Bill Mauldin
echo5delta is offline  
Old 05-26-2008, 10:41 PM   #52 (permalink)
has a plan
 
Hain's Avatar
 
Location: middle of Whywouldanyonebethere
I read the studies, and I felt they did not apply: wrong frequency range, wrong proximity range, wrong reactions. This is what I think of studies:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aaron Eckhart as Nick Naylor from "Thank You for Smoking"
Nick Naylor, the face of cigarettes... the Colonel Sanders of nicotine. This is where I work, the Academy of Tobacco Studies. It was established by seven gentlemen you may recognize from C-SPAN. These guys realized quick if they were going to claim that cigarettes were not addictive, they better have proof. This is the man they rely on, Erhardt Von Grupten Mundt. They found him in Germany. I won't go into the details. He's been testing the link between nicotine and lung cancer for 30 years and hasn't found any conclusive results. The man's a genius. He could disprove gravity.
__________________
Hain is offline  
Old 05-27-2008, 12:46 AM   #53 (permalink)
Oh dear God he breeded
 
Seer666's Avatar
 
Location: Arizona
I am going to have to call bullshit on the wifi allergies. Go into any apartment building with your lap top, and see how many networks you can find. These people would be in non stop pain anywhere they went. Not just fucking Starbucks.
__________________
Bad spellers of the world untie!!!

I am the one you warned me of

I seem to have misplaced the bullet with your name on it, but I have a whole box addressed to occupant.
Seer666 is offline  
Old 05-27-2008, 12:56 AM   #54 (permalink)
Winter is Coming
 
Frosstbyte's Avatar
 
Location: The North
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seer666
I am going to have to call bullshit on the wifi allergies. Go into any apartment building with your lap top, and see how many networks you can find. These people would be in non stop pain anywhere they went. Not just fucking Starbucks.
This, absolutely this. At any given time, I can pick up between 10 and 20 wireless networks in my apartment. They blanket virtually all homes, office buildings and businesses open to the public. It's silly, it's been presented as silly, and the article will linked says nothing to support their claim.
Frosstbyte is offline  
Old 05-27-2008, 04:45 AM   #55 (permalink)
Too Awesome for Aardvarks
 
stevie667's Avatar
 
Location: Angloland
Well, i will have to default to my normal explanations on this subject:

A- Its all bollocks, and, failing that:

B- Blame Canada
__________________
Office hours have changed. Please call during office hours for more information.
stevie667 is offline  
Old 05-27-2008, 05:47 PM   #56 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: San Antonio, TX
I wasn't going to post on this thread anymore because it's so silly, but I saw this link on boingboing, and thought I'd share. Some crazy guys actually did a study on this:

http://www.badscience.net/?p=470

Shocking conclusion:

Quote:
Short-term exposure to a typical GSM base station-like signal did not
affect well-being or physiological functions in sensitive or control individuals.
Sensitive individuals reported elevated levels of arousal when exposed to a UMTS signal. Further analysis, however, indicated that this difference was likely to be due to
the effect of order of exposure rather than the exposure itself.
I wondered what 'order of exposure' meant...

Quote:
Elevated levels of arousal were found under double-blind conditions for the
sensitive participants during the UMTS compared to sham exposure, similar to the
findings of Zwamborn et al. (2003). Further analysis revealed that this increased
arousal was most likely due to a higher proportion of sensitive individuals receiving
the UMTS signal first. It is not surprising that sensitive individuals would be more
anxious in the first of the double-blind sessions, given the degree of uncertainty they
may have felt in not knowing how the signal would affect them.

...

In addition, the elevated level of arousal was not reflected in either the number or severity of symptoms reported, or the intensity of physiological measurements.
I didn't bother reading the entire study. So it sounds like "Nothing to see here, except maybe the fairly surprising suggestion that some people are affected by some kinds of E-M radiation, maybe." The caveat is interesting enough to warrant further study, IMHO, but the rest is as expected.

Ooh, look. Research. Pretty.
robot_parade is offline  
Old 05-28-2008, 12:55 AM   #57 (permalink)
Banned
 
A lot of people want Wi-fi, and a very few want it banned.

Therefore, the few should consider investing in a lead house and lead clothing.

But watch out- lead poisoning also causes chest pains! also known as death!
Coolyo is offline  
 

Tags
achoo, allergic, bullshit, sorry, wireless


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:41 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360