CycleBanter.com - View Single Post - Alert: Environmental and Human Health Effects of Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation

**Bill Z.**

Mike Vandeman writes:

On 01 May 2007 17:31:29 -0700, (Bill Z.)
wrote:

Mike Vandeman writes:

On 30 Apr 2007 14:45:38 GMT, Chris wrote:

Mike Vandeman wrote in
:

1. I don't think there's enough space there to provide that amount of
energy.
2. It is unfair to the wildlife to shade their homes like that. A MUCH
better solution would be to put those solar panels over all of our
roads, shading nothing but concrete & a few roadside plants.

LOL. Regardless of whether Chris estimated the land area accurately
enough, it sesm that our self-styled defender of animal rights wants
his beloved critters to live in an area with levels of radioactivity
that make them unsuitable for humans! :-)

That's what it takes, to keep humans from invading their habitat. That
doesn't say much for us. Or you.

Doesn't say much for me???? You stated (unwittingly, I presume) that
you don't want to discourage critters from living in areas with
dangerous levels of radioactivity!

By the way, how come you didn't drop gratuitous physics jargon about
ionizing radiation, as you usually do? You are slipping!

It doesn't have to be mentioned in this case because everyone should
know that it is superfluous in this context. In the previous discussion,
the term was anything but gratuitous given the crazy statements you
were making.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB