d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Science, Technology & Nature > Microwave Warfare Explained > By Dr. Barrie Trower
Prev14567812Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Views: 2325Replies: 117Track Topic
Member
Posts: 6,759
Joined: Jul 8 2007
Gold: 0.00
#51
Feb 28 2013 01:26pm
as a community, it's our responsibility to not dignify fanatical claims made by paranoid lunatics with responses. let's all collectively ignore him. he's always ridiculously misinformed

and hopelessly adamant about it too

This post was edited by Derkaderk on Feb 28 2013 01:27pm
Member
Posts: 17,045
Joined: Jan 29 2007
Gold: 6,063.53
#52
Feb 28 2013 02:30pm
Quote (Derkaderk @ Feb 28 2013 12:26pm)
as a community, it's our responsibility to not dignify fanatical claims made by paranoid lunatics with responses. let's all collectively ignore him. he's always ridiculously misinformed

and hopelessly adamant about it too


like the cold winter we having ? dis information? the hard winter of 1889 i posted last summer compared to this years winter would be same or could be as bad..

1 for me
what other mis information you talk about? I like to question things but soo far all I get is useless facts with not all the viable's added or no imagination/

soo the only question left here is why this guy would lie and can they make a cloud solid enough to mirror a microwave back at earth.

he just keeps pointing out microwaves travel through gas ...we all know that already :wallbash:

This post was edited by doomchaser on Feb 28 2013 02:32pm
Member
Posts: 17,045
Joined: Jan 29 2007
Gold: 6,063.53
#53
Feb 28 2013 02:42pm
Quote (Azrad @ Feb 26 2013 02:13pm)
Oh, in the previously linked sword statement, in paragraph 23 he claims microwaves inflict DNA damage!


from 1993,in America for six years,the Communications Industry
employed 200 research doctors – at a cost of $28.5 million – to study the
safety of their microwave systems.(1)The studies showed increased
tumours,genetic damage,a greater risk to children,damage to the blood-
brain barrier;in all,15 epidemiological studies were carried out.The
research scientist leading these studies has predicted 30,000-50,000 cancers
worldwide this year alone -of just one type of cancer.Please remember,
this is the Industry ’s own research .These results were suppressed.
I will mention a fraction of some other studies:
ECOLOG – Reviewed 200 peer-reviewed/published papers and said (2)“It
can be concluded that electromagnetic fields,with frequencies in the mobile
telecommunications range,do play a role in the development of cancer ”.

and you say it can't cause cancer? did you do your own study? ok I ask again who do you work for?

and what else you want claim is a lie?
Member
Posts: 7,324
Joined: Dec 22 2002
Gold: 1,261.00
#54
Feb 28 2013 03:19pm
Quote (doomchaser @ Feb 28 2013 01:42pm)
from 1993,in America for six years,the Communications Industry
employed 200 research doctors – at a cost of $28.5 million – to study the
safety of their microwave systems.(1)The studies showed increased
tumours,genetic damage,a greater risk to children,damage to the blood-
brain barrier;in all,15 epidemiological studies were carried out.The
research scientist leading these studies has predicted 30,000-50,000 cancers
worldwide this year alone -of just one type of cancer.Please remember,
this is the Industry ’s own research .These results were suppressed.
I will mention a fraction of some other studies:
ECOLOG – Reviewed 200 peer-reviewed/published papers and said (2)“It
can be concluded that electromagnetic fields,with frequencies in the mobile
telecommunications range,do play a role in the development of cancer ”.

and you say it can't cause cancer? did you do your own study? ok I ask again who do you work for?

and what else you want claim is a lie?


Let me get this straight:
They are claiming that what Barrie Trower said was a lie.
You prove that what Barrie Trower said wasn't a lie by showing that Barrie Trower said it...

Aren't you supposed to... like... offer sources other than the person claimed to be a liar to prove that he's not a liar?
Member
Posts: 17,045
Joined: Jan 29 2007
Gold: 6,063.53
#55
Feb 28 2013 03:44pm
Quote (russian @ Feb 28 2013 02:19pm)
Let me get this straight:
They are claiming that what Barrie Trower said was a lie.
You prove that what Barrie Trower said wasn't a lie by showing that Barrie Trower said it...

Aren't you supposed to... like... offer sources other than the person claimed to be a liar to prove that he's not a liar?


i just stating his sources for he has come up against this type of attacks more then once i am sure soo easy to find his sources sense he had to have them too defend himself from such attacks.
I don't see the problem ...he has lots of sources for his information call him a liar and then you need to check his sources..

what is the problem? he did not make this up out of thin air he has sources.
Member
Posts: 7,324
Joined: Dec 22 2002
Gold: 1,261.00
#56
Feb 28 2013 08:10pm
Quote (doomchaser @ Feb 28 2013 02:44pm)
i just stating his sources for he has come up against this type of attacks more then once i am sure soo easy to find his sources sense he had to have them too defend himself from such attacks.
I don't see the problem ...he has lots of sources for his information call him a liar and then you need to check his sources..

what is the problem? he did not make this up out of thin air he has sources.


Well, where are they? If they are so easy to find, it should be trivial to offer up a few that can be checked. Give us a link, or the name of the paper/journal/whatever.
Member
Posts: 17,045
Joined: Jan 29 2007
Gold: 6,063.53
#57
Feb 28 2013 09:23pm
Quote (Azrad @ Feb 28 2013 12:05pm)
I have made no such claim, for the fifth and final time, do not put words in my mouth. All I am saying is that Barrie Trower is making untruthful claims about microwaves (and he lied about that report from the US government about microwaves).

You have demonstrated ad nauseum:

That you can not process basic information about electromagnetism.
That you will just move the goal posts when your position becomes untenable, only to return to the position later.
That you are willing to accept anything this man says, no matter how much it conflicts with reality.
That you will create strawman after strawman instead of addressing the issues myself and others have raised.
That you will keep making veiled references (here and in PM's) that somehow I am acting as a shill for some other party (or something to this effect, I'm not sure since you always back down when questioned on it).

I really thought I could reach you, I hoped you were just exhibiting the Dunning–Kruger effect. But I was wrong, this belief of yours has become a tautology. This has a been a huge waste of my time. In the future do not PM me, do not ask for my help, and I will no longer address you directly (unless you actually appear to get your head screwed on straight).

ok issue you stated you have a higher background in physics then this guy soo i ask who your work for..
every time i post one of your issues you seem to have, you say i puting words in your mouth.
I posted his back ground you don't disagree with it or call it false soo not sure why or how you call this guy a fraud
you say gas cannot reflect a microwave ok soo we need too add or atract solids to a cloud some how..

I see easy logic to disagree with your laws of physics why this is impossible to creat but you always dodge the issue and resume your attacks on me and Barrie Trower.

if you call him A liar wonder where is your proof ...and yet again no answer for you? you say microwaves don't cause cancer when there has been plenty of studies that suggest the contrary...with physics we understand around 10% of the universe and not too know 90% of it seems like we should be open too more possible answers..

easy to shut people up out of your field of expertis I am no one to argue this point with you ..But tired of you acted like you know it all when none of us do.

Member
Posts: 17,045
Joined: Jan 29 2007
Gold: 6,063.53
#58
Mar 1 2013 12:33pm


if you watch this maybe you reconsider all and what we actually place in our clouds
Member
Posts: 5,628
Joined: May 29 2006
Gold: 5.00
#59
Mar 1 2013 12:34pm
Quote (doomchaser @ Feb 28 2013 02:24pm)
all you do is say a gas cannot deflect a microwave...gasses can become solid...or added material for a more solid reflection.you state the obv is all but don't take in all the possible ways you can be wrong and he can be right. just accuse him of tellling a lie like your job depends on it. Why i ask who you work for.


Yes they can. Do you know what happens when gases become a solid? They cease being gases. I would address some other points you have made, but your complete ignorance to what you're discussing that it wouldn't be worth it.

Quote (doomchaser @ Mar 1 2013 01:33pm)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7C5TFTkblKQ

if you watch this maybe you reconsider all and what we actually place in our clouds


Don't get how this pertains to the discussion since the cloud layer doesn't extend to the ionosphere.

This post was edited by Aisu_aS on Mar 1 2013 12:36pm
Member
Posts: 17,045
Joined: Jan 29 2007
Gold: 6,063.53
#60
Mar 1 2013 12:39pm
Quote (Aisu_aS @ Mar 1 2013 11:34am)
Yes they can. Do you know what happens when gases become a solid? They cease being gases. I would address some other points you have made, but your complete ignorance to what you're discussing that it wouldn't be worth it.



Don't get how this pertains to the discussion since the cloud layer doesn't extend to the ionosphere.


they have a life time of around 10min or less high density clouds they creat
Go Back To Science, Technology & Nature Topic List
Prev14567812Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll

© 2003-2026 d2jsp  Contact