Subject:  (Woodley) Re Frogs and canarys....Reality Check (fwd)
Date:     Mon, 13 Jul 1998 155307 -0500 (CDT)
From:     "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To:       emfguru@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------


---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 1998 15:50:54
From: "Richard W. Woodley" 
To: "Roy L. Beavers" 
Subject: Re: Frogs and canarys....Reality Check (fwd)


	This could provide for some interesting comparisons though - the power
frequency radiation may obviously not be apparent where the frogs are but
RF radiation might be. My gut feeling is that EMFs are not responsible for
the frog problem but it is an interesting and not so far out hypothesis.

At 11:23 07/07/98 -0500, you wrote:
>
>.....Robert, a telecommunications engineer with SCM consultants,
>is not happy with guru's suggestion that we should be studying the
>health effects of the worldwide "bath" of RF and MW wireless that the
>world is now receiving.....
>.....Consider this:  most estimates of the _magnitude of the change_
>that the world is experiencing in our environmental ultraviolet radiation
>due to the thinning of the ozone are very low -- on a percentage basis,
>only a few percentage points......
>.....By any criteria one might choose, the _magnitude of change_ that the
>world is experiencing in its RF and MW environment since the "electronics
>age" began is on the order of 1000% to 1,000,000%!!!  (Becker observed
>the same in "The Body Electric.")
>.....I don't think we should be so 'cavalier' about changes in our
>environment of such magnitude -- at least, not until we have looked
>carefully at what the consequences might be!  Particularly when we
>are provided such a good "canary" clue ... as the frogs seem to be
>providing.......guru......  Nevertheless, Robert, thanks!!!!!
>
>......"I may disagree wholeheartedly with what you say, but I will
>defend until death your right to say it."......Voltaire.....
>
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 08:40:00 -0700
>From: Robert Pritchett RCDD LAN Specialist 
>To: "Roy L. Beavers" 
>Subject: Re: Frogs and canarys....Reality Check
>
>This means we have to cut back on our consumption of frogs' legs? And it
>took so long to hybridize those 3-legged frogs!
>
>I suppose with the frogs leaving the planet earth, we get stuck with the
>flies and other plagues as depicted in the Book of Revelation...
>
>We are celebrating "The Year of the River" here in the Tri-Cities, WA. The
>river in question happens to be the Columbia, but the Yakima and Snake also
>combine here.  The major polluter in this area is fertilizer run-off.  It
>causes the fungal varieties to increase and the bottom feeders can't keep up
>with it.  I can't claim to have seen any deformed frogs, even as polluted as
>some areas of the ground is from radiation run-off.
>
>Only with the wildest imagination could we claim that the cause of the
>fungal increase is due to hydroelectrical generator fields and step-down
>yards (EMF source) on our rivers here in the Northwest.
>
>Could we take a reality check here? Let's not use EMF as a hammer in
>attempts to finding nails. Electrical sources generated by Man isn't all
>THAT universal! [knee-jerk, knee-jerk ;^) ]
>
>Get a world map, check the locations of deformed frog sitings and THEN
>report! Or this EMF forum is going to end up on "Urban Legends" and loose
>credibility.
>
>Robert Pritchett
>http://www.scm-ae.com/itgroup/roberts.htm
>
>also http://www.owt.com/usersgroup
>
>
>
>
>
>



Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html