Campaign AGAINST free Wi Fi

Status
Not open for further replies.
Zack Attack what you are proposing is entirely stupid. So first you are going to cut out all cancer sources. So that's cigarettes, potatoes, nuclear power, certain types of rock, anything electronic, and a huge shield over the planet, etc etc. First I'd be amazed if we could do that. Then we are going to get some people and deliberatly try and give them cancer in the interests of research. Who are you Mengele?
 
Here's another carrot for the stew :D .

In 6 years we have 100% Wifi coverage of a quality to surf the newly rolled out Internet 2 with high quality upload/download from your all singing all dancing iPhone. Cheap digital inclusion to all for the necessary Banking and Benifit services.

Year 7 installed CCTV reach such a level no area is unable avoid its beady eye and with the new high speed upload through WiFi enable cameras and 100% WiFi coverage.

Year 8 the national ID card scheme is rolled out but is uprated as a need to access system for all goods and services.

Year 9 the law is change so that manufacturers are required to tag ALL goods with new micro scopic RFID markers compatable with the free for all 100% WiFi covrage.

All this in the name of anti terror, personal protection and comfort. Glad tidings and peaceful thoughts citizane...
 
I don't particularly want radio towers or tv towers broadcasting either, if radio and tv can be put through cable. But the majority of the country seems to want this, I guess I'll have to leave the country soon,
.

but as Ethics Gradient has already said, putting any signal through a wire will create EM radiation. OK, its probably not as much as putting the signal through the air, but the EM radiation will be there whichever way.
 
Don't you think that would happen anyway if it was possible?

The on-off button exists.

But if it was, over what period would we have to introduce EM sources to assess them as being entirely safe?

rather, what's more important than eradicating the cancer problem? Drastic situations require drastic measures, if this turning off the EM and feeding it through wires is too desperate, then maybe you don't think 40% is that drastic. Give me a % at which you would then start to investigate cancer sources, and contemplate flicking the on-off switch to see if it was the culprit.

Why do you associate newer forms of EM radiation with causing cancers more than anything else that may possibly cause them?

I'm not, I'm saying we don't know, so lets cut if off to see if it is the source.

And why do you suppose that nobody as far as I'm aware has been able to establish a credible link between these forms of EM radiation and health problems of any kind?

Because of my point earlier, cancer does not immediately become present in the person the second you turn on the EM masts, and when there is a 40% cancer rate, SOMETHING is causing it.

What proportion of the 40% should be attributed to smoking, poor diet, genetic disorders and so on, and therefore excluded from this experiment? Quite a high proportion I would suggest.

I know a few people who don't smoke and think they're eating healthily, and still get cancer.

At what point did I indicate that I was "happy with the current rate of cancer"? I doubt that would be true of anybody.

You personally, it seems not. But there are people out there who silently think to themselves, 'yep, I'm one of those people', the same people who argue for risking our planet to global warming or our healths.
 
Now I challenge you to tell me what causes melanomas, WITHOUT TELLING ME YOU DON'T KNOW. Until you do, you can no longer use this sentence in your arguments.



>>>> T H E S U N <<<<
 
Zack Attack what you are proposing is entirely stupid. So first you are going to cut out all cancer sources. So that's cigarettes, potatoes, nuclear power, certain types of rock, anything electronic, and a huge shield over the planet, etc etc. First I'd be amazed if we could do that. Then we are going to get some people and deliberatly try and give them cancer in the interests of research. Who are you Mengele?

What? Please re-read my posts. Nothing of what you just said is anything remotely connected to what I just said.
 
Mod Comment

Gentlemen as you have ignored the polite from my colleague to stop bickering, here is the less polite version.

The arguing stops NOW or the thread gets banished to the scrap heap :lesson:
 
but as Ethics Gradient has already said, putting any signal through a wire will create EM radiation. OK, its probably not as much as putting the signal through the air, but the EM radiation will be there whichever way.

I suspect putting a signal through a shielded ethernet cable will yield negligible radiation, that is compared to pumping the signal through the air.
 
You personally, it seems not. But there are people out there who silently think to themselves, 'yep, I'm one of those people', the same people who argue for risking our planet to global warming or our healths.
isn't that the thing that the governments make up so they can start adding more tax to thing ?
 
Sorry Mylo just see your post !




















I'm off................................................................it was him not me !
 
Mylo, I ask that you atleast keep the thread SOMEWHERE, because when it comes down to the big cheeses who decide if we get national wi-fi, we can give them this thread, showing them that not all AVforums members support this national wi-fi.
 
Mylo, I ask that you atleast keep the thread SOMEWHERE, because when it comes down to the big cheeses who decide if we get national wi-fi, we can give them this thread, showing them that not all AVforums members support this national wi-fi.

Oh yes because the avforums members will make it stop happening. :suicide:

Mylo no matter what people say he's not going to accept it.
The same can be said for the opposing side.
Like all threads (religion based, government based or xbox 360 vs ps3 based) there are two sides in the and they all end up like this.
Time to close me thinks.
 
Mylo, I ask that you atleast keep the thread SOMEWHERE, because when it comes down to the big cheeses who decide if we get national wi-fi, we can give them this thread, showing them that not all AVforums members support this national wi-fi.

Then comply with my simple request :)

The regulars know I have no qualms about deleting threads that get out of hand, no matter how valid they started out.
 
I'm off. I think I've fed the troll enough.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom