How come there is a so fundamental lack of knowledge of sound science theory/philosophy in the EMF area? Reporters, "experts", scientists seem to go mentally blank when the magic word "EMF" is sounded.
If there is a rumour that there is a needle in a haystack; "I sat down and got stung, I tell you!". Then we send one hundred scientists to search after the imaginary needle. The first say "I didn't find anything", the second "I didn't find the needle", the third "I don't believe there is a needle", the fifth "I am /convinced/ there has never been a needle", the eight "If there were to be a needle in there we would have found it long ago, of course", the ninth tells the man with the ache in the lower parts "You imagine things", the tenth "I think it would be bad for society to /worry/ about needles in haystacks, somastics you know", the fourteenth "We should avoid debating this, we only stir the public up and scare people, let's get the journalists together and shut them up!".
There follows a long time of silence and ridicule of the needle. All who are stung by it is called names behind their backs, or even in their face. Most of the scientists shy from that area of research, it isn't "serious", you can't get money for it.
However, some journalists struggle to show that there ARE people who get hurt and we should feel sorry for them. At some point some political decision is made to "let's shut them up, I can't stand the noise! Get some scientists going, but between us, engage only those who are /reliable/ you Know what I mean, hohoho".
We then have a group of scientists who say "we take this seriously!", "we work hard on this issue, but so far we haven't found anything". For the public this seems reassuring, but for the patient it is strange that the don't listen to "You are looking in the WRONG haystack! It is /that/ one over there!".
Finally, a lone and anonymous researcher looks into the right haystack on his own initiative, and finds the needle!
"Oh, we know about that report, but there is so many reports failing to show any convincing proof". The reporters write "the researchers are fighting over the issue and doesn't understand how or why" so the verdict is "non-existent".
Should we then VOTE ABOUT IT? 99 votes nay and one ay?
Science is not a democratic process.
Clas Tegenfelt, 960411
ps. I think this is exactly what is happening in the ES issue in particular and in the EMF issue in
By clearly writing "The text is Copyright (c) 1997 by Clas Tegenfeldt" you may use it, spread it, or make citations from it. Do not make local copies on the web but please feel free to make links to this page.
Tillbaka till http://www.bemi.seLast updated: