3 ms·

For others (like me) to whom the name of the author (Joel Moskowitz) is unfamiliar: He is a wifi / cell phone radiation "truther" who thinks the EMF in everyd

For others (like me) to whom the name of the author (Joel Moskowitz) is unfamiliar: He is a wifi / cell phone radiation "truther" who thinks the EMF in everyday devices causes cancer https://www.acsh.org/news/2007/02/16/cell-phone-dangers-still-argued https://www.acsh.org/news/2007/02/16/cell-phone-dangers-stil... The fact that this is in Scientific American, even in the Opinion section, is simultaneously a testament to the openmindedness of science, and quite sad. After reading his ideas, I think we should all feel a little lucky that Trump hasn't made hime the head of the FCC.

userbinator 7y ago
is simultaneously a testament to the openmindedness of science, and quite sad. That brings to mind the old saying, "don't be so open-minded your brain falls out." Also, I'm pretty sure Trump is very much not in the group of "cell phones/EMF/etc. cause cancer" believers.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
  Or the classic aphorism of the Space Marines: "An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded."
rahidz 7y ago
To be fair, his views don't have enough of a pro-business bias to them for the current (or most) administrations. Speaking of a pro-business bias, the ACSH: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Council_on_Science_and_Health https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Council_on_Sc...
- appleflaxen 7y ago
  fair enough. it's a true statement, though, that conventional scientists and experts in EMF don't feel there is any real risk of these wavelengths.
whoopdedo 7y ago
This is the second article I've read on SciAm's _blog_ platform that has disappointed me with its pseudo-scientific tone. The previous was a rant[1] against GMO which prompted considerable dissent[2]. I get that the blogs authors have more editorial freedom, but opinions that stray so far from the scientific mainstream puts the fine magazine's reputation at risk. [1] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/broccoli-is-dying-corn-is-toxic-long-live-microbiomes/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/broccoli-i... [2] https://kfolta.blogspot.com/2019/08/scientific-american-destroys-public.html https://kfolta.blogspot.com/2019/08/scientific-american-dest...

userbinator 7y ago

is simultaneously a testament to the openmindedness of science, and quite sad. That brings to mind the old saying, "don't be so open-minded your brain falls out." Also, I'm pretty sure Trump is very much not in the group of "cell phones/EMF/etc. cause cancer" believers.

asdfasgasdgasdg 7y ago
Or the classic aphorism of the Space Marines: "An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded."

rahidz 7y ago

To be fair, his views don't have enough of a pro-business bias to them for the current (or most) administrations. Speaking of a pro-business bias, the ACSH: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Council_on_Science_and_Health https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/American_Council_on_Sc...

appleflaxen 7y ago
fair enough. it's a true statement, though, that conventional scientists and experts in EMF don't feel there is any real risk of these wavelengths.

whoopdedo 7y ago

This is the second article I've read on SciAm's _blog_ platform that has disappointed me with its pseudo-scientific tone. The previous was a rant[1] against GMO which prompted considerable dissent[2]. I get that the blogs authors have more editorial freedom, but opinions that stray so far from the scientific mainstream puts the fine magazine's reputation at risk. [1] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/broccoli-is-dying-corn-is-toxic-long-live-microbiomes/ https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/broccoli-i... [2] https://kfolta.blogspot.com/2019/08/scientific-american-destroys-public.html https://kfolta.blogspot.com/2019/08/scientific-american-dest...