A Cell Tower On My School?!

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000 18:56:29 -0500 From: DDeBar Subject: PLEASE DISTRIBUTE AS WIDELY AS POSSIBLE!!!

Here in Ossining, NY, we have recently been waging a war against a huge multi-national, corporation with major environmental implications for the entire planet.

Without your help, there will be a cellular transmission tower on our high school in a few weeks. This is a very dangerous development for the well-being of our kids. First, here's some background information to provide context for the instant struggle:

The world is about to be totally bathed by microwave radiation for the first time in the (known) history of humanity. This is being done to "enhance the communications options" of customers of cell-phone providers. However, there have been numerous allegations made by medical doctors and other health professionals which claim that serious health consequences, including leukemia, brain cancer, and/or other serious illnesses, may result from microwave radiation exposure; hence, the current plans to link the world with wireless phone networks may have major health implications for our species. These allegations warrant close study.

Over the past decade, cell-phone use has exploded in the U.S. and throughout the world. The technology rests upon the use of the microwave spectrum as a carrier, and incorporates new designs into the old wave patterns which now utilize digital (i.e., "0" or "off" states and "1" or "on" states) means of encoding the transmitted material.

It is widely known and proved that microwaves can be used to heat the water molecules in organic materials. In fact, microwaves have been utilized for cooking purposes for a long time.

It is also, apparently, acknowledged by all (including the telecommunications industry, according to published materials) that there are dangers to living organisms when the tissues of same suffer the thermal (i.e., heating) effects that can accompany cell-phone usage near the head.

Apparently, there are plans to use satellites over the next couple of years in order to provide a thorough bath of signal around the planet, in order to insure complete coverage around the world. However, at present, towers at a regular interval are needed to accomplish cellular network installation for providers of cellphone service.

As it now stands, the FCC gave out licenses to various telecommunications companies for territories that each would be able to serve. Among others, Sprint, apparently, got a license to provide such "service" to the NY metropolitan area, and, it seems, they need a site in Ossining for thier network.

One problem that faces telecommunications companies in the construction of their networks is that people don't want to be near the towers that are essential to the operation of the networks, for reasons that range from the aesthectic impact of the tower designs to concerns over the possible health effects of the constant bombardment by microwave radiation. Since the construction of cellular towers is usually within the regulatory purview of local building or zoning departments and other municipal authorities, our law provides people an opportunity to discuss the desirability of installation proposals. However, recent amendments to Federal law (Telecommunications Act of 1996) apparently proscribe the consideration of health comcerns in the municipal or state approval process, so these regulatory hearings are now generally precluded from considering residents' health concerns. In fact, the mere mentioning of such concerns in the process can result in court-ordered approval of the application. Consequently, these concerns have not been, and cannot be, in the current legal environment, adequately addressed in the consideration of cellular service build-out applications. This failure to deal with such a fundamental issue potentially places all people at substantial risk.

Regardless of the limits upon speech that were imposed by the new body of law, people generally show up, en masse, to object to cell tower proposals in their neighborhoods at municipal meetings considering such applications. This is a potentially destabilizing political force in most communities, since many people are concerned about the potential health dangers of this technology and, yet, by law, the municipality cannot take those concerns into account when making a decision on a permit application.

Given this situation, local politicians, seeing their own demise in the contradiction between the law and the concerns of their own constituents, have tried to find a way out. Ossining's Town and Village government were no exception...

Sprint apparently needs to construct a cell tower in Ossining in order to adequately build out its cellular network in its very important Weschester County, NY franchise area (Westchester adjoins New York City to the north). Residents have been told that Sprint first went to the local municipality and asked them to assist in finding an acceptable location for the facility. Sprint, it is alleged, was informed that a moratorium on cellular tower permits existed in both the Village and Town of Ossining, and, according to the Superindendent of the Ossining School system, was directed to the school district. According to a letter by the Ossining Village Corporation Counsel's office, school district property is not subject to local zoning.

On September 9, 1998, the Ossining Union Free School District approved a proposal to lease the rooftop of Ossining High School to Sprint for the cell tower, at a price of $30k/annum, plus roof repairs, and an escalator of the greater of 3% or CPI. The term is for 10 years, with an affirmative obligation upon the district to apply for approval by the NYS Department of Education for a ten year extension.

Although the board was presented with a package from a telecommunications advisor that prominently featured the Federal statute proscribing the consideration of potential health effects, and Assistant Superindendent Richard Freyman read from this section to concerned parents before the 9/9/98 vote approving the contract was taken, in fact, because this was a LEASE (i.e., a real estate deal), and not a request for a municipal approval, a full discussion of the health concerns could be had and considered. School districts are permitted to consider any facts or concerns of the community in the disposition of school property; in fact, they are required to do so. Such a discussion, including a comprehensive presentation by a local medical doctor, was had prior to the vote. The Board, which counts no medical doctors among its membership, approved the lease anyway, discounting the medical evidence presented, without consulting any medical authority whatsoever before doing so.

According to counsel for the school district, the lease was subject to the requirements of NYS Education Law Section 403-a, which requires either a referendum or the approval of the State Commissioner of Education for a lease of school property for a term in excess of 10 years. The district submitted the proposal to the Commissioner. Several residents, including Leslie Plachta, M.D., a local family medical practioner who counts some of the high school's students among his patients, and Don DeBar, a concerned local resident, requested that the lease not be approved, with Dr. Plachta arguing among other things, that the tower presented a potential danger to the health of the students and staff of the high school, and Mr. DeBar emphasizing legal and procedural irregularities in the approval of the contract.

The Commissioner denied the lease as an illegal use of school property for private gain. Sprint then sued the Commissioner of Education and two of his deputies both in their official capacities AND INDIVIDUALLY, in the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York in White Plains. The NYS Attorney General, defending the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioners, moved to have the action dismissed as to the individual defendants. Judge Barrington Parker, Jr. dismissed the action as to the Commissioner, individually, but let it stand against the individual Deputy Commissioners. Apparently (I have only seen this in Lexis, but it was not in the Court file), there was an adjudication of the primary issue in favor of Sprint, and the lease was approved by the Commissioner late last summer.

Community outrage began to swell, after DeBar called for a boycott of Sprint on his local public access show "The Local Scene with Don DeBar," which airs town-wide. Parents and other concerned residents formed a group called "Safe Ossining Schools" (SOS) to fight the implementation of the lease. On Wednesday, 1/19/00, members of the group and other residents successfully organized a protest outside the School Superindent's office while the Board and the Administration were in a special meeting with Sprint and, according to news reports, TEN (!) Sprint lawyers. Simultaneously, SO held an informational meeting at Ossining's Trinity, where over 300 people heard medical experts present evidence on the health effects of cell towers. Both events got considerable press coverage in the Metro NY media.

Also last week, a lawsuit was filed by Dr. Plachta and DeBar, under Article 78 of the NYS Civil Practice Laws and Rules, challenging the validity of the cell tower lease on procedural and environmental grounds.

The following day, the school district issued a press release which claimed that Sprint was now considering other possible locations in Ossining. On the same day, two articles appeared in the local Gannett newspaper ("The Journal News") which dealt with cell towers. The first, about the Ossining lease, contained a quote from Sprint representative Larry McDonnell to the effect that Sprint had already looked extensively for an alternate site and didn't believe one was likely to be found. The other covered opposition to an unrelated cell tower proposal in nearby Irvington, NY, where, for the first time, residents turned out to vocally oppose the construction of a fifth cell tower atop Abbott House. Health effects were cited in the article as the reason for residents' concerns.

Finally, DeBar last week presented proposed legislation to Assemblywoman Sandra Galef (D), of the 90th Assembly District ((914) 941-1111), at a televised public meeting, which legislation would amend the State Education Law (by adding a new sub-section 7 to Section 403-a) to prohibit the construction of cell towers on school property and/or schools throughout the state. He has also sent the proposal to Assemblyman Richard Brodsky (D), chairman of the Assembly's Environmental committee, as well as (by e-mail) the entire NYS legislature.

Here is the situation that cell tower opponents now face: There is apparently an attempt underway to stall the process, which Sprint and/or the board may be doing in the hope that a pause in their activity will allow the opposition to dissipate. The district has thus far refused to take an aggressive public posture with Sprint. Calls by DeBar and others for the resignation of the board members who voted to approve the deal made the front page of at least one local weekly. Posters saying "Resign" and "Boycott Sprint" cover telephone poles all over town.

This week (week of 1/23/00), another local cable show will bring materials from the demonstration and the informational meeting to a larger area than that covered by DeBar's show. Also, Pacifica Radio's Democracy Now host Amy Goodman, who spoke with DeBar by telephone Thursday night, said she was familiar with the Ossining case already (New York City's Pacifica station WBAI has aired interviews with Plachta and DeBar), and requested materials which, hopefully, will reach a national audience sometime in the coming days. DeBar would like as wide a discussion of the potential dangers of this technology as possible. He sees it as an EXCELLENT organizing opportunity for environmentalists, given the efforts of telecommunications companies to extend their networks to cover the entire inhabited surface of the planet with a technology that may be fatally unsafe.

Ossining needs help organizing protests against Sprint, statewide. Your efforts are necessary to the success of this attempt to educate state residents about the potential dangers of cell towers. Please respond as soon as possible.

(We'd REALLY like a letters to the editor campaign that seeks legislation to keep these things off of schools (see my proposal above) and mentions WHY (the potential health effects).)

Dr. Leslie Plachta can provide you with 2 websites FULL of information -- email him at: lplachta@cyburban.com


Don DeBar 87 Ferris Place Ossining, NY 10562 914 649-6597 spikey@bestweb.net

-- J (someones@thedoor.com), January 25, 2000



-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 25, 2000.

Take a field strength meter out to the bottom of a cell tower and do a reading.

NOW go to the literature and see what has been said in ref to that particular field strength.

THEN come back and tell us if the data YOU have gathered and the info in the literature pertaining to that field strength warrants concern.

JUST as a hint, if the dangers were as serious as some have suggested, we would be seeing a HUGE increase in the maladies mentioned in the article. We would ALSO see it in the Ham Radio community, which has been exposing itself to 440mHz and higher freqs for 15 and more years.


-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), January 25, 2000.

:The world is about to be totally bathed by microwave radiation for :the first time in the (known) history of humanity.

Apparently Don has never been outside on a sunny day. We are exposed to microwave radiation from the sun all the time in far greater quantities than you would ever receive from a cell site. Ever heard of sunburn and skin cancer?

In addition, most cellular traffic is on 900 or 1200 Mhz. The range for microwave is above 2000 Mhz so all the prattle about microwaves has nothing to do with cell sites.

-- Jim Cooke (JJCooke@yahoo.com), January 25, 2000.

What happens if I transmit on my 440 beam into a Chemtrail? Molecular change of chemtrail? Oh the Humanity! Mrs Chief is getting increasingly cranky, I think it's the change but I'm going to tell her it's the cell phone and save 25 bucks a month.

-- Chief (bmc@sealret.com), January 25, 2000.

Sunburn and skin cancer are associated with exposure to ultraviolet radiation, not microwave radiation. See this chart -- The Electromagnetic Spectrum

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), January 25, 2000.

There is a million times more radiation eminating from a handheld cell phone than someone near a cell tower would experience. The jury is still out on the handhelds, however.

But if you want something to have a song and dance over, look at the statistics for the percentage of the population that is being 'dosed' by the medical-phamaceutical industry with legal mind altering chemicals such as Rydalin, Prozac, Xanax, etc.

-- (@ .), January 25, 2000.

Leaving the question of safety for a moment (hey, if a couple of Weschester County yuppies want to fry their brains, that's no skin off my nose), I would question the ethics of using taxpayer-supported property to benefit a for-profit corporation (when the immediate tax base is offered no say in the matter -- and you can't get much more "immediate" than a school district). Whether their health concerns are justified or not (and they may well not be), it would seem that the parents of those kids -- being the people footing most of the bill for that district, lest we forget -- should be allowed some serious input if it means that much to them.

That, or let almighty Sprint pick up the tab for the district. They could even change the signs to read, "Ossining High School -- Sponsored by Sprint."

-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), January 25, 2000.

Because we, and Michael, and the Squirrel Hunter have seen so many towers beanstalking up around I-5, 205, 217, 26, etc, we've been curious as to what they might be, etc. Saw this article:

Powerless Over Towers for Wireless

@ 10 years ago an enormous microwave tower went up over Fairmount @ Portland Heights. We were doing a 3-year CHF job near there 24/7, and also taking agency shifts in the area. Lo and behold, a year after the tower went up, we were going directly under it to that neighborhood to provide care for cancer patients. One after the other of the residents died of cancer. Bone, prostate, lung, ovarian, breast, bladder, bone, lymphoma -- all within about the same 5 blocks. Finally we told the agency we were too nervous being there and would not accept any more jobs in the area. Of course they mocked us ... *sigh* ... then they went out of business ... we still don't go anywhere near there, except for that year working at OHSU, where we were pelted with radiation from implants ... egads, health care is dangerous!

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), January 25, 2000.

There was a recent thread -- late last week, titled "Paging Squirrel Hunter (Oregon). That was the FIRST TIME I EVER GOT PAGED! Wow. Can't recall who began the thread ... Shakey? Spider? In any event, amongst the commntary on that thread was a hotlink to the webiste for a bookseller/new age tech association in Alaska. I've ordered their stuff before but for some reason the name slips my mind. One of the new products was a book on this topic by Nick Begich. Sounds as if that would be worth looking into before ou rbrains are fried in super- charged ether.


-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts@upina.cellrelaytower), January 25, 2000.

Hey, if SPRINT needs a place to put the tower in Ossining, put it in Sing Sing! I'm sure the inmates won't protest!!

-- Z (Z@Z.Z), January 25, 2000.

Squirrel Hunter, now I understand your 'nuts@upina.cellraytower'!

Chuck, most ham antennas are outside their buildings, not inside their 'shacks' (equipment rooms). Portables only work well when you're reliably in good range of a repeater. Been wading through "Now You're Talking", et. al., recently, you see.

Finally, my sense is that the effects of long-term exposure to low levels of radiations of various frequencies can take an awful long time to become statistically evident. Long, as in decades or generations. We as a society seem so accepted to the idea of controlling kids through chemistry; adding this to the mix is gonna make it that much harder to predict which kids are gonna go postal.

-- Redeye in Ohio (cannot@work.com), January 25, 2000.

Electromagnetic Radiation

When a voltage is applied to a conductor and current passes through it, an electromagnetic field develops. This field can extend to a few millimeters, or it can be thousands of miles, eg: radio waves. These fields can be quite strong eg: 300,000 Volt mains from power companies, radio broadcasts of differing frequencies.
The problem is two fold.

First the power consideration

If a family were to set up a home near a high voltage transmission line, it is widely known they will suffer some form of genetic manipulation given a period of time, the fields are incredibly strong within short distances, hence the reason MOST are on hilltops AWAY from populated areas. Next, how about that 5 Watt transmitter next to your ear?, ie: cell phone. This is entirely too much power to be so close to ones flesh, especially the most sensitive of all our organs - the brain, and there is the frequancy consideration with cell phones - a double wammy.

2nd the frequancy consideration

As these fields pass through our bodies at very high speeds, ie: radio waves, they are at such short wavelengths, that they actually begin to disturb the electrons surrounding atoms inside our bodies. How long do you think it will be before you have a brain tumor? You are manipulating electrons surrounding atoms which comprise molecules inside your body! In short your are manipulating cell structure.


Microwave radiation is a little different. It is comprised entirely of excited electrons. The devices that transmit microwaves through the air are overhead on towers. They appear to look like there wrapped in cloth. They are kept high, so as to be away from the population, and transmit approx. 30 miles or so, to the next repeater. Microwave radiation in ANY amount is extremely harmful, espcially when your child puts his nose up to the microwave to view the popcorn cooking. Yes, your microwave does leak, that is why there are meters to measure it, this is called exceptable levels. Again, I must stress that given this frequancy (anything in the GHz) genetic manipulation will occur. How much and how long are the only questions.

Now, your educated.

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 25, 2000.

"Next, how about that 5 Watt transmitter next to your ear?, ie: cell phone."

Yeah, how about it. An AMPS handheld is 600 milliwatts, and a PCS handheld is only 200 milliwatts. An AMPS bag/car-phone is three watts, but the antenna is nowhere _near_ your head, and the inverse square law dictates that your exposure is therefore _less_ than it would be with a lower power handheld.

The anti-cell phone agenda is driven by neo-luddism.

-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 26, 2000.


You are missing the point.

There are considerations that have to be taken into account. First, which is better? A 5 Watt cellphone used for 10 seconds, or a 200 Milliwatt cellphone used for 30 minuites?

So, there are 3 factors, I was mistaken.

Frequancy Power Time

When is the last time youve seen people on cell phones for extended conversations? Ive personally seen people on the phone continuously for 30 minuites or longer, thanks to the new batteries, and lower power.

But again, the risks are real. The problems they create are real. It is only a matter of time.

The frequancy and power is real and its danger is FACT, unless you listen to the PR flak from cell phone makers and lobbyists. Try talking to an Engineer and then have a conversation with a rat who now has a tumor.

Money rules in this world, allways has, allways will. (oil?)

Time is the unknown, but these certainties be established within your lifetime.

Do I really need to bring up the smoking thing? They knew it was deadly years ago, and they tried to hide it.....

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 26, 2000.

Look, idiot, I already explained to you, there _aren't_ any "5 watt" cell phones.

And the _THREE_ watt phones -- i.e., _mobiles_ (NOT "handhelds") aren't used anywhere _near_ anyone's head.

Come back when you learn what the hell the inverse square law is, and how it affects near field RF propagation.

Until then, you only confirm that you're a lunatic neo-luddite driven by unreasoned dogma, "backed up" (in your own mind) by a pathetic pseudo-science.

-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 26, 2000.

Hhhmmm, don't use a cell phone cuz don't have the $$$. But can say brain tumors are definitely on the rise. Lotsa 3BD (blood brain barrier) treatment patients. Drs are puzzled why the huge increase in brain cancer, especially among the younger & middle-aged set.

We just take care of them at the end; many are very nice patients, and it's an easier death than other types of cancer.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), January 26, 2000.

Big words for such a small brain!

Again you've missed the point. Didn't I use that analogy allready? I don't care what power the cell phone is, ANY transmitter that close to the brain is cause for concern.

Perhaps, since your so hip on this "inverse square law", perhaps you'd like to quote it? Anyone with common sense realizes that the farther away you are from something harmful, the better off you are. But, I forgot, you missed the point.

BTW, did you use a dictionary so you could use them there big words?

Goes to show you!, they let anyone on in this ride!...Sluggo, Your intellect is showing.

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 26, 2000.

Hey luddite -- every time you _double_ the distance from the radiator, you reduce the field strength to a _fourth_.

Go from 1mm to 2mm and your power is reduced by 75%.

Go from 2mm to 4mm and it's again reduce by _another_ 75%

By the time you're at several _feet_ from the antenna, the power is _absurdly_ low in comparison to nearly _anything_ even the most puny handheld can put out.

So much for your "argument" about "five watt" radios.

I'll let you in on a little secret that will save you a lot of grief in the future: when you lose an argument, shut up.

-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 26, 2000.

Man, your brain is not functioning properly, too much talk time on that package?

Exactly how many millimeters is your brain from your ear?

Again, for 3rd time: IT WAS NOT ABOUT POWER, it was about ALL THREE: POWER, FREQUANCY, TIME.

Please inspect device above your shoulders, it isn't compliant.

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 26, 2000.

OK, OK, now I get it.

When you lose an argument, don't give up, just start YELLING.

What a sad little fart.

PS: the antenna of a "high power" (i.e., _three_, not "five") watt phone is many, many, many millimeters from the user's head.

Offhand, I'd say probably about a thousand or so, and separated by a piece of steel known as the "roof" of the car.

Your next assignment: look up the meaning of the word "faraday" and its relevance to the above statement regarding the word "roof".

-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 27, 2000.

Sluggo, Now its time to finish you off.

You said, "Hey luddite -- every time you _double_ the distance from the radiator, you reduce the field strength to a _fourth_. Go from 1mm to 2mm and your power is reduced by 75%. Go from 2mm to 4mm and it's again reduce by _another_ 75% "

Shall we disect this? If we reduce the field strength according to your porported law, here is what it looks like.

Lets use 300 mWatts, shall we? Using your law (not correct ) Going from 1 to 2 mm, would reduce the power to .125 Watts. If we move another 2mm away to 4 mm, using your law, we end up with .031 Watts. Now lets go to 8 mm, using your law, we end up with .0078 Watts.

Lets take a leap here, shall we?

At 524 Meters we end up with, using your law, a Power of 2.72 X10-13 which, unfortunately for you is much too low a power for a reciever to pick up.

In order for your law to work, I would have to be standing within 400 ft of the cell tower in order to use my cell phone.

Sluggo, again, you know NOTHING of the law of physics, nothing of the basic electronics. Do not attempt at speaking further, untill you take some classes.

Who lost now?

End of Line

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 27, 2000.

Dear Moron,

I hate to break it to you, but field strength measurements are taken in the form of volts, millivolts, or microvolts.

You lose, but there's a lovely consolation prize waiting for you in the mens room at the 72nd St. IRT subway station (bway line, _not_ the lex).

Look, dork, if you want to argue that the inverse square law is a figment of my imagination, all you're going to do is provide living proof of the "when you lose an argument, shut up" axiom I so gratiously provided you just yesterday.



-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 27, 2000.

Sluggo, You still won't shut up?

You said, "I hate to break it to you, but field strength measurements are taken in the form of volts, millivolts, or microvolts."

What exactly do you think Power is? P=E X I. In other words, Voltage times Current equals Power.

Did you really think the Law you so elequantly put can use any arbitrary number for distance?

You said "Go from 1mm to 2mm and your power is reduced by 75%"

Now, if this were true, I could also use your "theory" and apply it to micrometers.
So, using your theory, we could go from 1 micrometer to 2 micrometers and the power would be reduced by 75%!!

Heck!, why stop there? Lets get even smaller, but you know what? Now I would have to be climb the ladder up the cell tower and place my cell phone 540 micrometers away from anteana for the cell phone to operate.

Please stop speaking, because you nothing of this field, nor could you ever hope to.

Your intelligence is now very, very thin, as is obvious to anyone who reads this.

You Loose, again.

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 27, 2000.


FYI:Field Strength is measured in Decibels. DUH!

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 27, 2000.

Enough with the techno-geek pissing in the wind flame argument. If they are serious about stopping this, then my suggestion is to get a good diamond carbine sawblade and hack the tower legs off and drop the tower onto the lawn. End of problem. Do it enough, and Sprint will quit due to financial loss.

-- Not (a Terrorist@this.Time), January 27, 2000.

You really know how to dig your wheels in, don't you.

The fact that you think I'm making up the Inverse Square Law tells me that you've got a pathological condition that won't allow you to admit that you don't know what you're talking about, even when it's painfully apparent that you're completely ignorant of the topic.

Here's a babygrade primer for you: http://www.mitedu.freeserve.co.uk/Theory/antenna.htm

Hint: for high UHF used in cell/PCS phones, the far field pretty much approaches the antenna.

Key quote: "This equation is sometimes referred to as the inverse square law, doubling the distance, gives a four fold reduction in signal power."

Gee, do you think they heard that from _me_?

Come back when you're capable of something more substantial than blowing smoke out your rear end.

In other words, if you don't know what you're talking about, don't talk about it.

-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 27, 2000.

"Field Strength is measured in Decibels. DUH!"

Oh, really?

From the aforementioned primer, "Sensitivity is usually quoted in units of V/m or volts per meter. The equation below is used to calculate field strength in V/m..."

Like I said, when you don't know what you're talking about -- and it's painfully apparent that you know _nothing_ about RF propagation - - your best bet is to stop talking about it.

You are completely ignorant of the subject, yet you're compelled to continue to proseletize for a pseudo-scientific cause driven by a neo- luddite agenda.

You're somebody's fool.

-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 27, 2000.


First you told us, that for every doubling of a millimeter we moved away from the transmiter, the field strength was reduced by 75%.

I proved you wrong.

2nd, you told us that field strength was not measured in Power

I also proved you wrong.

Now your telling us that field strength is not measured in "volts, millivolts or microvolts...", but rather volts per meter.

What do you think Decibels are?

Did you really think that by scowering the net, you could come up with answers to questions you know nothing about?

I asked you to quote this "inverse square law" , and you screwed it up, because you didnt use the proper distance.... its not millimeters, and it cannot change to your every whim..... thats why they call it a law!

Now, please go to a college and take a course. You do not know anything about basic electronics.

How many strikes do you need against you to be out??

You Loose, AGAIN There were no other arguments

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 27, 2000.

Good _grief_ but you're stupid.

Hell, I've seen _CB'ers_ with a better grasp of RF than you.

The only thing you've proven is that you don't know RF from shinola.

I tell you what, moron. You keep proving what sort of lunatics are raging against cell phones, and I'll sit back and let you destroy your own arguments one faux pas at a time.

The inverse square law stands immutable (except, of course, for directional radiators, but I wouldn't want to confuse you and _further_ than you already are).

And it dictates, as it has always dictated, and always WILL dictate, that for every doubling of distance -- REGARDLESS of unit of measurement -- the received signal strength (in VOLTS, not watts or amps) will be reduced by 70%.

From one foot to two feet: a 75% reduction.

From two feet to four feet: an additional 75% reduction. That makes it 1/4 of 1/4 of the strength at one foot.

Yes, it's pretty damned dramatic, isn't it. That fifty thousand watts of broadcast signal at the tower translates to a few (as in "single digit) MICROVOLTS a few miles away.

But hey, you're a fool on a fool's errand. You've got to smash the machines, because they're inherently evil. That's your calling as a luddite, and heaven forbid anyone would succeed at reasoning a little _sense_ into that thick wooden head of yours.

-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 27, 2000.


Ah!, So now it's FEET, instead of MILLIMETERS? Finally, you got it right.

Did some serious Net searching, huh?

Now, for this field strength. Do you have a meter that measures it? Just for the heck of it, go here, and you'll find a meter that does measure it, and guess what? It's in Decibels.

Your just loosing all the way around, arent you?


-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 28, 2000.


I should just wait, but I can't.

First is "field strength", now its "signal strength"..... Can't you get anything right? One is completly different than the other, and is measured differently than the other..DUH!

Now, I've allready proven to you that you cant arbitrarily use any distance to calculate your "70% less power theory" (But for your sake, well do it again) If we used millimeters, you would have to stand within a block of the cell station to use the cell phone. Use your calculator, and do the math. 1mm - 2mm -- 4mm --8mm, By the time you get to 540 Meters, signal strength or field strength (your choice) is too low to be picked up by ANY cell phone reciever over a block away. (FYI: A cell phone reciever cannot pick up anything less than a few microvolts, and X10 -13 is too low)

Man, your just screwin up big time, dont play with the big boys, go outside and play in the sandbox.


-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 28, 2000.

I think I'm going to pee my pants if I laugh any harder!

First, before I forget, you can't even spell *loser*, you pathetic LOSER. Yeah, YOU, loser. I'm talking to YOU, fool. You put your foot in it, then you put your OTHER foot in it, then you stomp down for all you're worth -- which ain't much, if your antics here are any indication.

Feet, meters, millimeters, inches, yards, miles, light-years -- it makes NO difference.

Every time you double the distance, you reduce the strength (or received signal, or whatever term you want to apply) by 75%.

I've had it with you. You've proven my point, so rave on, fool.

Or should I say, "looser", bwahahahahahahahahahah!


-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 28, 2000.


Oh, ya, couldn't resist.

This is from your "research" site. Why you missed it is beyond me. No, wait a minuite, its because you know NOTHING.


"This equation is sometimes referred to as the inverse square law, doubling the distance..."

"Where E is field strength in V/m, d is distance in meters and Pt is the power of the transmitter in watts."

Notice, that distance is not anything you want it to be, but rather, it is defined in METERS, not millimeters, not feet, not anything, BUT METERS!!!


You Loose, AGAIN!

Get Lost, Get educated.

How many times must I nail you to the floor?

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 28, 2000.


Is it me, or is it that YOU have mispelled LOOSER? Check you dictionary!



You have no ground with which to walk!

The door, is that way >>>>>>>>

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 28, 2000.


Couldn't help this little icing on the cake.

You said "Feet, meters, millimeters, inches, yards, miles, light- years -- it makes NO difference."

Sorry to break it to you, but light-years is a measurement of TIME, not DISTANCE.


Loving every minuite of it.......

-- Electman (vrepair1@tampabay.rr.com), January 28, 2000.

"Come back" said the little bird. "You won't -believe- what that moron is saying now!"

The little bird told the truth.

But, I'm going to have to say OK, ya got me, and ya got me good. I didn't take you for a troll until I saw your light year nonsense, and then it suddenly dawned on me. NO ONE can be as stupid as you pretend to be! You've been trolling me around the thread for the past two or three days, sheesh.

Touch'. It takes true brilliance to come off as mind-numbingly - stupid- as that, but you pulled it off, AND you fooled me in the process!


-- Sluggo (sluggo@your.head), January 28, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ