Subject:  Re Independent engineer for cities/counties (Mann)(Carney).
Date:     Mon, 13 Nov 2000 171021 -0600
From:     Roy Beavers 
To:       guru 
--------------------------------------------------

.......Response from EMF-L.......

But -- Deb...  the real dishonesty is: **"within RF limits."**  Those 
so-called "RF limits" are the limits defined by the electrical/electronics professional
engineers (the IEEE and the ICNIRP)....  Of which Weller is a 
"card carrying" theological prime example.....  

Your engineers simply showed his tests to be dishonest WITHIN HIS OWN 
THEOLOGICAL STANDARDS!!!!

Those standards do not recognize the full extent of the "nonionizing" 
hazards..... i.e., THOSE STANDARDS --themselves -- DO NOT PROTECT THE PUBLIC....!!!...guru.....

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Independent engineer for cities/counties (Mann).
Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 14:25:23 -0700
From: Deb Carney 
Reply-To: deb@carneylaw.net
Organization: Carney Law Office
To: roy@emfguru.com
References: <3A0ECFD3.2C6A1576@emfguru.com>

You need an independent engineer because engineers hired by the "proponents"
sometimes do not provide accurate  results.  The engineering report given to
Jefferson County by Robert Weller of Hammett and Edison stated that everywhere
on Lookout Mountain was within RF limits when, in fact, a number of areas were
over the limits.  Unless our engineers had checked, we would not have known any
better.

BEWARE.  Unless industry knows their measurements are being checked, there is no
independent verification.  Read the CARE response to the Lake Cedar Group
request for preemption for the details.
Deb
www.c-a-r-e.org

Roy Beavers wrote:

> Hi everybody:
>
> .........Sarah is continuing to build a list on this subject......  Fine!!
> Sarah, please put that list ("file") into your software....  I am not
> prepared to build such a list here ... or the on the website....  Perhaps
> later ... if it appears to be more important (to the whole group)......
>
> Folks, please send your submissions for this list direct to Sarah Mann
> ........
>
> I DO wish to reiterate my "doubts" about this.....  I believe it MAY
> legitimize a process that will be VERY EASY for the vested interests to
> control!!!  As it will also give a **false sense of public safety** when
> the "theology" of the electrical/electronic profession (which denies any
> real hazard from "nonionizing radiation" or non-thermal effect) becomes
> the "referee" of local decisions.....
>
> If I were to pick whom I BELIEVE should be "the referees" of this important
> public safety decision -- I would pick the **cell biologists** ... NOT the
> engineers........Cheerio.......guru.......
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Independent engineer
> Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 09:00:02 -0500 (EST)
> From: ". ." 
> To: roy@emfguru.com
>
> THe purpose for an independent engineer would be to prove need by doing
> signal strength testing like they did in Vernon, New Jersey.
>
> In addition, I found another ordinance from Gloucester MA that requests
> indendent engineer before and after.  Add it to the growing list.  I think
> that when the ignorant little cities are trying to write an ordinance and
> use someone else's boilerplate they think they are clear.  They are just too
> ignorant to know they can by law get a second opinion.  Let's make the list
> long so that advocates like ourselves can provide others with this soure.
>
> Sarah
> NY
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com
> Reserve your name now at http://www.email.com


Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.emfguru.com