Mary said:

i agree the article involves personal attacks and conjecture rather than fact. Show us an analysis of Arthur Firstenberg claims and refute them..

The onus is on you or anyone else that supports this nut-bar to prove his claims; it is not ours to prove him wrong. This is fundamental: extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence, and these have not been forthcoming from him or his sycophants. Therefore both he and his clams are fair targets for ridicule and attack.

Its not like Arthur is sitting around smoking crack or pot, and at any rate even if he was he would still require our compassion and understanding, if we would so hope him to become a valuable member of our society. I imagine if you examined Arthurs lifestyle you would find him clean living, dedicated to working on changing the world.

I believe many politicians that have questionable values motive, differing personal, political and health beliefs receive more monies than Firstenberg. I believe there are many many rich people who may donate money made in ways that you may disagree with and contribute these monies to political/ or other bodies that you might also disagree with.

while none of this proves anything i think it gives another facet to consider, particularly in your above judgments. This is not a factual article, it borders on slander and personal opinion not based on any provided facts.

Also waiting for checks from big nuclear, big biotech, big chemical, big pharma, big moon hoax fakers and probably a few others.

        Perry said:

The writer of this piece is just yet another hit man. All hit men operate in the same manner. They mock
and ridicule and attempt to make it look as if their opponent is completely without credibility.

They do this with religion, alternative medicine, anyone that doesn’t believe in the whole HIV=AIDS hoax,etc.
The guy that runs Quackbusters is another of these hitmen. The hit men do not want you to know that there are thousands upon thousands of studies that prove that fluoride is harmful, that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, that
GMO foods are killing us slowly, that nuclear testing through out the 1940s-1960s caused and is still causing millions of cancers ever year. These hit men are of the devil, which of course they will deny he exists.

So who do you figure is paying me? I’d love to hear your theory on this. This should be good.

True to form, you are.

        Perry said:

The writer of this piece is just yet another hit man. yap,yap,yap These hit men are of the devil, which of course they will deny he exists.

Off the meds again eh, Perry

They do this with religion, alternative medicine, anyone that doesn’t believe in the whole HIV=AIDS hoax,etc.
The guy that runs Quackbusters is another of these hitmen. The hit men do not want you to know that there are thousands upon thousands of studies that prove that fluoride is harmful, that HIV is not the cause of AIDS, that
GMO foods are killing us slowly, that nuclear testing through out the 1940s-1960s caused and is still causing millions of cancers ever year. These hit men are of the devil, which of course they will deny he exists.

        Reality Checks said:

By now I suspect many of you are eating your own words,

um.. no. Keep waiting.

Um… Seriously? This was written in 2008 (I can’t believe it’s been 3 years). It’s not 2011.

What has changed in terms of wireless systems and infrastructure? Erm.. not a lot. The last vestidges of analog cellular were retired. The US ended regular analog television broadcasts. These, of course, would all reduce, not increase “radiation” levels.

3G coverage has improved a bit with some additional expansion. 4G systems have been introduced, but they are currently deployed to a fairly limited extent. There has been a fair amount of infrastructure expansion in China and a few other places. Not much expansion in the US and almost none in Europe (since nearly complete coverage was achieved some time ago.)

I guess there are probably a few more wifi routers operating today than there were in 2008.

Hundreds of times higher than three years ago? You’ve got to be kidding me.

I do freelance and contract work on network adminstration, IT installaton etc. I also have a part time job for a company that provides vocational work to disabled adults. I do their ecommerace and database stuff.

Why do you want to know?

Um… well I have some polin alergies, although I always had those. About a year ago I got pretty sick with a low grade fever that lasted a couple of days. Uh.. I think I had a very minor cold this winter.

Other than that I’ve been in perfect health. Nope, no headaches. No diziness. I do get fattigue and tireness, but that’s usually a result of staying out too late or too much work and/or partying.

Don’t have any children, but my family is fine, thanks for asking.

Well, no, I suppose not in general – I mean, it’s a dangerous world. One of them could get sick or have an accident. Nobody’s wel being is gauranteed.

But as far as wireless devices and “radiation” then yes, I’m pretty damn certain they’re fine in that regard.

Good advice, but I’ve already done both

        mindy.eastwell said:

Since 2008, studies around the world have proved CELL TOWERS CAUSE CANCER.

Citation? I’ve seen all kinds of studies, many with reports that they show cancer linked to cell towers or cell phones. I’ve read them (the studies, not just the media reports) Still have not seen anything, but I’m always open to new evidence.

However, even if they did cause cancer (which they don’t), there’s a huge difference between something having chronic carsonegeic effects versus acute effects, like producing headaches, fattigue etc. They absolutely, definately, provably do not do the later.

It’s not terribly hard to test either. Put a lot of people in a rooms with a transmitters. Don’t tell them if they are powered on or not. Record the results.

Guess what, it’s been done. Nothing there.

Uh… no.

Cancer is still a fairly common condition in humans. The chances that you will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in your life is more than one third. The chances of dying from it are clost to 20%.

There has been no increase in cancer rates. There has, however, been a signifficant change in cancer mortality: It’s down. For some cancers, it’s down quite a lot in just the past 20 years.

No, there is no increase in cancer. Sorry.

well, there already are and always have been. Not that this has anything to do with cell phones. There are just a lot of ignoramuses in the world and always have been.