References: <%_wk9.52964$1C2.firstname.lastname@example.org> <3D9442F1.42F2FBAF@webaccess.net> <3D9467AC.9745AC66@webaccess.net>
Subject: Re: Any ideas on measuring radiation in the home ?
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6700
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 15:53:40 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 15:53:40 GMT
Organization: AT&T Worldnet
< Thanks for the inputs so far and the circuit diagram, etc; I am trying to
ignore the attacks and negativity.>
I am not really 'worried' about this spark. The question was more general.
There is potential for a LOT of 'mischief' in this area of expertise. And
you will never have evidence to show. The damage will be imperceptible. Such
as tones that match with brain frequencies and drive you nuts, reading
brainwaves by thermal imaging, using imaging feedback to pump in controlling
brainwaves, small cancers in blood vessels, muscles, skin, brain, blood
cells, etc, a little burnt skin layers, some damage to the eyesight,
cataracts over a long period, unnoticeable loss of hearing, clots under the
skin that eventually get infected and turn into cancers, etc..., use of
power lines and home sheet metal fixtures and appliances to inject 'really
high-energy' microwaves, etc. And I am not talking product design issues
such as the shoe measuring device or monitors that one poster has mentioned.
I am talking deliberate, planned, secret people who could do such things. No
one would know. No evidence unless you get the right measuring devices. The
only question is, is it within the limits of the technology today. If the
answer is yes, the devil is not very far. This kind of stuff has been around
for quite some time. It is only a matter of further refinement and
miniaturization and deployment, target/victim selection, etc.
"GregS" wrote in message
> In article <3D9467AC.9745AC66@webaccess.net>, Chuck Simmons
> >Chuck Simmons wrote:
> >> John Woodgate wrote:
> >> >
> >> > I read in sci.electronics.design that News2020
> >> > (in )
> >> > 'Any ideas on measuring radiation in the home ?', on Fri, 27 Sep
> >Today, radiation hazzards have turned into a kind of witch hunt. People
> >with no understanding of the radiation involved succeed in creating
> >problems where none exist. And thus we have this thread.
> I took home a geiger counter I assembled. I went all through the house
> for radiation. The wind up clock I was using was radioactive, probably
> alpha particles. I found a source of radiation comming from my camera
> I narrowed it down to a Pentax uranium coated lens. It sems only the back
> element was radiating, but it had enough energy to go through thinner
> materials. It obviously did not expose my films. The warning from Pentax
> do not wear the camera.