Possible evidence of cellphones affecting human brain found

[p1t1o]

14 minutes ago, Green Baron said:

Ehmm, then the search was too quick :-)

I know, I was hoping you might have a useful search term or two? There are some crackpot "theories" to be avoided.

16 minutes ago, Darnok said:

But this is not answer for my question.

Yes it is, by doing what I said you can assign unique properties to each pole of the magnet. You will find that there are 2 different poles. Assign a name to each. Bingo. Use the diagram in your own post to help visualise.

16 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Now remember to start from zero and forget every rule about magnetism and current you know.

This is exactly what I was talking about, I cannot be expected to derive all of known physics on a Monday.

You may as well ask "Why is the sky blue? First forget everything you know about EM radiation and chemistry."

 

Here is a useful practical experiment you can use to demonstrate all of these things:

First, gather a large amount of hydrogen.

Then, wait an arbitrarily long amount of time.

Observe.

 

*edit*

45 minutes ago, Darnok said:

Try to talk with people and convince them to use safer things would be good start?

Or harmful effect are going to appear on future generations? Its is better not use things that we know can be harmful isn't?

Safer things than sleep, ok.

 

Edited October 17, 2016 by p1t1o
avoid a double-post

[Darnok]

14 minutes ago, Green Baron said:

@Darnok, would you consider changing the thread title ?

It is not about cancer caused by electromagnetic field... so no.

3 minutes ago, p1t1o said:

Yes it is, by doing what I said you can assign unique properties to each pole of the magnet. You will find that there are 2 different poles. Assign a name to each. Bingo. Use the diagram in your own post to help visualise.

 

That diagram is result of thesis that N attract S pole and now you are trying to use it as proof supporting studies that helped to create that diagram.

[Red Iron Crown]

Thread title not related to article, and OP is not accepting any valid arguments (if the premise is "forget what science already has discovered" then there is no rational argument). Closing this one as flame bait/trolling.