[Vo]:A different use for your brain

[H Veeder]

Proessor Roger Bowley unlocks his car from various distances, using waves
from his key, brain and a big bottle of water.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Uqf71muwWc


Harry

Re: [Vo]:A different use for your brain

[Eric Walker]

On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 11:05 AM, H Veeder  wrote:

Proessor Roger Bowley unlocks his car from various distances, using waves
> from his key, brain and a big bottle of water.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Uqf71muwWc
>

Nice.

Professor Bowley: "The only way to find [about something] out is to do the
dammed experiment.  Disprove your prejudices."

Eric

RE: [Vo]:A different use for your brain

[Jones Beene]

From: Eric Walker 

H Veeder wrote:

 

Proessor Roger Bowley unlocks his car from various distances, using waves from 
his key, brain and a big bottle of water.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Uqf71muwWc

 

Nice.

 

Professor Bowley: "The only way to find [about something] out is to do the 
dammed experiment.  Disprove your prejudices."

 

Nice, but it’s not the whole story. What is even more fascinating is that which 
is overlooked - in the context of RF which is near the brain (and into the GHz 
range) – with those waves being able to scramble the H20 of the human brain in 
order to amplify the wave, exactly as shown here. 

 

Doh! It’s the cell phone, professor. And it’s all about the resonance of RF 
inside of cavities of the proper dimensions. This type of cavity resonance may 
make the subject relevant to LENR.

 

One can disprove prejudices and at the same time be in complete denial about 
the dangers of a beloved addiction. That is another type of (reverse) 
prejudice. Or one can quote from a study funded by the cell-phone industry, 
since many of them are, which say the cancer link is unproven. This is 
reminiscent of smoking studies which for years could not agree, until the 
studies’ funded by tobacco companies (often indirectly) were discredited.

 

The signal from a cell phone is many times more intense, the frequency is 
higher so the photons are more dangerous, and the wavelength is perfect for 
reaching resonance inside the brain cavity of a human … yet dozens of studies 
are in conflict over the issue of cancer causation. Follow the buck … or better 
yet … do the experiment.

 

The World Health Organization declared cellphone radiation as carcinogenic in 
May 2011. It was the experimental evidence that was important to them. As 
Professor Bowley sez: "The only way to find out is to do the dammed 
experiment!”  Lab studies were done on neural cells at WHO which showed the 
rapid rate at which double strand DNA breaks upon exposure to RF at levels 
regularly experienced by cell phone uses. Few deny that broken DNA leads to 
cancer … eventually. It is simply a matter of time.

 

Nevertheless in the USA, a “capitalist’s tool” (or fool) at Forbes ignores the 
most damning studies in favor of the ones showing little correlation, even when 
common sense suggests otherwise… and the argument drags on. Billions are at 
stake. Why do you think most cell phones come with a warning (ignored by all) 
not to hold the phone closer than one inch to the ear? Simple, the lawyers put 
that warning into the implied contract so that they can later use it against 
the plaintiff when the case comes to court in 20 years, over brain cancer… 
kinda like the health warning on cigarettes. There are still many MDs who will 
state, under oath, that smoking does not cause lung cancer.

 

Here’s the really sad thing. There is a valid solution: Bluetooth (or a wired 
equivalent). This kind of thing should be mandated, especially for teenagers - 
so as to limit the radiation intensity - but it is not. It reduces radiation by 
800 times ! Why isn’t this mandated? 

 

http://bgr.com/2011/06/09/jabra-recommends-bluetooth-headsets-in-lieu-of-brain-tumors/

 

Yes, it is a self-serving story in a way. Nevertheless, with any solution 
someone new will benefit and someone else will lose. Even if radiation 
reduction is only 100 times less, instead of 800, this makes perfect sense. “Do 
the dammed experiment!”  

 

 

Re: [Vo]:A different use for your brain

[Terry Blanton]

My grandchildren need not worry.  They never phone, only text.

Re: [Vo]:A different use for your brain

[ChemE Stewart]

On Saturday, May 10, 2014, Terry Blanton  wrote:

> My grandchildren need not worry.  They never phone, only text.
>
>
We all should worry

 From: ChemE Stewart
https://mail.google.com/mail/mu/mp/156/?source=na&hl=en>
>
Date: Thu, May 8, 2014 at 10:38 PM
Subject: Kauai Coral Reef Problem
To: 
underwater2...@gmail.com


Terry,

I am a chemical Engineer in Atlanta, GA.  I was doing some of my own
weather related research for the past two years and I stumbled upon
something I think is significant.  I noticed in Florida a statistically
high number of fish dying due to hypoxia around microwave doppler radar
towers.  The Indian River lagoon in Melbourne, FL is having a terrible
problem with diseased biology. Cape Canaveral/Patrick Air Force Base is
next door and has ~ 12,000,000 watts of pulsed radars.

http://www.floridatoday.com/story/news/local/environment/lagoon/2014/05/03/indian-river-lagoon-went-wrong/8672245/

I have run power calculations and statewide statistics, backed by a
researcher at -- and they are pointing to a strong correlation between
locations of pulsed Doppler microwave radars and diseased wildlife. Within
a few miles of that radar site you have pulses of microwave radiation way
beyond the 10 mW/cm2 safe level.  The radar boys will tell you that you can
average the pulses and they are safe.  That is not the effect I am seeing.

You have approx 30,000,000 watts of pulsed microwaves coming off the
Pacific Sands radar site atop the mountain on North Kauai.  Much of that
2-6 GHz radiation is reflecting off the overhead atmosphere (during
storms/overcast skies) and penetrating waterways based upon my research.  I
think the microwaves are ionizing dissolved oxygen and causing oxidative
stress on all biology in the area.  The free radicals of oxygen I believe
are "bleaching" your reefs.

A researcher from --- is running my radar database thru human
health statistics, no results on that yet.

They have been adding radars over the past 10 years or so to that Kauai
radar site.  I believe that is your problem.

I have a creative blog @ darkmattersalot.com if you want to look at some of
my Google Earth maps.I am working on a wildlife research paper to be
submitted shortly. I have readers from 150 countries.  I am seeing signs of
chronic wasting in wildlife around Cape Canaveral, Guam, White Sands &
Pacific Sands.
underwater2web .
12:01 PM (8 hours ago)
to me
Hi Stewart,

This is really helpful information as the coral disease is even in isolated
coves near the Pacific Sands Radar site! These were pristine areas that do
not have human activity, run off from the land or any land based
pollutants! I just did a radio show on this last night as the Kauai coral
disease started shortly after the military started a joint testing
operation with Australia in the area three years ago and they were using a
new microwave blasting technology out of two submarines!

I will pass on your info and please stay in touch. I will do the same. I
will also go to your blog!!

Aloha,
Terry Lilley
Marine Biologist
Hanalei HI
www.underwater2web.com