ELF Knocks Down AM Towers To Save Earth, Intercoms 616
ScentCone writes "The ELF (Earth Liberation Front) has claimed responsibility for destroying the primary AM towers used by radio station KRKO in Washington state. From their statement: 'AM radio waves cause adverse health effects including a higher rate of cancer, harm to wildlife, and that the signals have been interfering with home phone and intercom lines.' The poor intercom performance must have been the last straw."
Citation Needed (Score:5, Informative)
I'm from Jamaica, the show-me island. So show me you're blowing it out your fanny!
(obligatory Futurama reference)
I wonder if any of these ELF people understand physics... Radio behaves according to the inverse square law; in effect, your cellphone exposes you to much more power than all the cell towers around you, simply due to it being much closer. Similarly, any local transmitter you have (e.g. microwave ovens, CRTs, wifi APs, high-speed digital circuitry, etc) will expose you to more power than those far-away broadcast towers. Unless the AM radio tower is in your backyard, you are probably not in tremendous danger...
Re:Citation Needed (Score:5, Informative)
Ignoring the fact that we aren't very good conductors... at 5-6 feet tall, I doubt the human body can effectively absorb a lot of this relatively very-long-wavelength radiation.
Does anyone have actual data or methods to predict this kind of effect on human bodies?
Re:Citation Needed (Score:5, Informative)
The maximum permissible exposure to the general public from a radiator must be lower than the prescribed limits outside of the fence line. Lower frequencies, like AM radio, have a much higher permissible power than the frequencies used in cell phones or WiFi because the biological effect is less.
They fact that they mention interference to intercoms would lead one to think one of those involved may live nearby or near another antenna.
Re:Citation Needed (Score:5, Informative)
Re:REALLY? [interference] (Score:5, Informative)
Ferrite cores. If you put them on the wires picking up the signal, it's supposed to stop the pickup.
Re:It's about censorship (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, those ELF folks just HATE Washington State University football! The station [krko.com] broadcasts a sports radio format and covers many of the local high school games. Unless the ELF has a dog in the Everett vs. Monroe football game, your comment makes no sense.
Re:Citation Needed (Score:5, Informative)
The fact that radiation is not ionizing anything does not imply that it has no effect on living tissue. It could induce microcurrents in some tissues, or cause certain molecules to resonate in a way which affected important chemical reactions.
Which is not to say that AM radio does have any effect, only that "it's not ionizing!" is not a refutation.
Biological systems are complex; if something as relatively simple as a computer can be effected by EM radiation, it's not completely batty to speculate that biological systems might be also. There are a few studies -- such as this one [wiley.com] -- that have suggested effects on cerebral blood flow or on sleep patterns, but the data remains spotty at best.
I repeat, I'm not claiming that such effects exist, nor am I defending this vandalism. (Calling it "terrorism" is, of course, ridiculous.) But claiming that EM radiation can't have any health effects because it's not ionizing is bad science.
Re:REALLY? [interference] (Score:5, Informative)
Also, watch out for ground loops. If you plug your computer into your power strip, and then plug an amplifier into the analog audio out connector, and then plug your amp into the outlet, you've created a loop antenna in the ground system (there's a loop running from power strip to computer to amp to power strip, because the audio out cable has 2 single-ended signal lines plus a ground line). Getting rid of such loops can be hard (cutting the ground line in the audio cable doesn't entirely solve the problem and has its own issues, for example), but being aware of them and minimizing the area that they enclose can help dramatically.
I saw an example where the problem was exactly as above, and until they moved the power cables around to shrink the loop the local AM station always played on the speakers.
wow (Score:3, Informative)
First off, "carrying capacity" estimates are all over the map. True, 0.5B may be the "low impact" carrying capacity, but even that's not a zero-impact - according to something I saw on TV, we have archaeological evidence that pre-Columbian Americans ruined fisheries and caused other localized environmental damage.
Second off, even if we were beyond capacity, the answer lies in encouraging low birth rates without resorting to China-esque techniques, more responsible stewardship of the natural resources we have, advances in science to feed more people with less environmental impact, and in the very long term, space exploration and colonization.
Mother Nature will also put in some degree of population control: As we have a few mega-disasters every century, each one will kill hundreds of thousands rather than the tens of thousands or thousands it would kill if we only had 0.5B spread roughly evenly around the habitable parts of the planet.
Re:Nobody likes ELF. Not even their "allies." (Score:3, Informative)
I'm really not trolling here, but PETA has been funding ELF for years.
http://sports.espn.go.com/outdoors/general/columns/story?columnist=guest_columnist&page=g_col_PETA_ELF_NYPost [go.com] has a reprinted article from the NY Post.
I don't see many stories that are very recent, outside of what seem like blogs and bash-fests, but since PETA has denied ties all along, it doesn't make much difference to me whether they claim to have stopped or not.
Re:REALLY? (Score:4, Informative)
You are obviously not a radio engineer, or you'd know that the maximum power a radio station is allowed in the United States is 100,000 watts, not 400,000 watts.
Further, since you're talking about a transmitter on a tower, the actual output is likely closer to 4,000 watts for 100,000 watts of EFFECTIVE radiated power, which is not the same thing as ACTUAL radiated power. It's all about height. That's part of the reason why satellite radio can cover the entire country with just 3,000 watt transmitters -- they're in space.
Also, the days of the 5,000,000-watt TV stations are over. The maximum power for station on channels 2-13 is now 10,000 watts I think. On UHF I believe it's around 60,000 watts unless the station gets STA from the FCC. I could be wrong about those numbers, though.
Re:How strange (Score:3, Informative)
I suggest you examine you reservoirs before you make that statement. Most of the ones in California are running around 60% full and dropping. As to your second point about replenishing the water table, it doesn't. Most irrigation techniques involve spraying the crops as opposed to root irrigation. Doing so involves approximately 8% evaporation [ufl.edu]. Following that, farms target irrigation volumes and timing to maximize penetration at the root level and minimize any further penetration. In short, they explicitly try not to replenish the water table.(Nebraska's [p2pays.org] water management recommendation - they're similar for every farming application with minor variations for indigenous soils & climate.)
[sigh] What exactly will happen to the delta if the smelt die off? The general hint is that nothing lives in a vacuum. The smelt are relatively insensitive to salination changes. However the vast majority of the life in a delta are not. If you overdrain the open water sources - lakes, streams, etc - the delta is going to turn into a salt swamp. I'm absolutely certain that you'll appreciate living in the area then because areas undergoing swampification smell so nice. Oh, don't forget to add in the malaria issue due to the large pockets of standing water.
The people of Owen's Lake [usgs.gov] would disagree with you.
That you would state this indicates you have no understanding of the roles the natural aquifer plays in underbrush management.
In short, just because the water is there and free flowing, it doesn't mean that it's not already serving a purpose.
Re:I think they did it (Score:4, Informative)
KRKO only broadcast local sports, no political programming whatsoever. I feel compelled to add: "you gigantic idiot."
You could have spent 5 seconds looking that up, you know. It's not like the radio station's format is classified. Hey look, they even have a website: http://www.krko.com/ [krko.com]
Re:REALLY? (Score:4, Informative)
How about a less anecdotal statement:
(emphasis mine) . Link here [nih.gov]
Re:Stop this now. (Score:5, Informative)
In 2006 PETA found new homes for a grand total of 12 animals on a $31m budget. The rest were killed.
Source: http://www.nraila.org/Issues/Articles/Read.aspx?id=288&issue=021 [nraila.org]
Re:REALLY? [interference] (Score:4, Informative)
The size of the loop makes a difference. Consider two devices connected by a shielded signal cable. If they are plugged into the same power outlet, the loop is no larger than the length of the power cords and the signal cable. The safety grounds come together at the outlet. There should be no significant current flowing in the power cord safety grounds.
Now plug the two devices into different outlets. The outlet safety grounds might not come together any closer than the electrical panel. In theory, safety grounds only carry current during a malfunction. In practice, there are induced currents and leakage. One outlet's ground may carry leakage from a furnace blower motor, and the other does not. Cable TV coax is should be tied to the electrical panel ground where the coax enters the house. This means that the coax shield forms another large ground loop when connected to any single-ended device with a safety ground, for example audio equipment.
Devices powered from different outlets should not be connected by single-ended signal cables. Professional audio uses balanced connections, and the shield is usually only connected at the input side. You can put a ground isolation balun in the cable TV coax where it connects to your TV. If all of your home entertainment devices are plugged into the same outlet, and you isolate the cable TV ground, you should not have hum. Keep the cable short, and you shouldn't have RF problems. Speaker cables are long enough to act as antennas, so if you live near a transmitter, you may want to put ferrite cores on the cables near the amplifier.
Re:Citation Needed (Score:3, Informative)
ELF does not have an office because they work as isolated individuals or covert cells. Really, anyone could [i]claim[/i] to be affiliated with ELF and technically be correct. Their ideology is clearly stated in some of the works released by more established members, and the actual actions presented here seem to be in line with them. The reasons why these actions were carried out seem to be fairly shortsighted however, and not of the same ethical caliber of spiking trees and freeing test animals.
Re:Doubt it was ELF (Score:4, Informative)
There is no 'ELF' and there's no way to arrange an alliance with them.
I wish slashdot would explain what 'ELF' is a little better when posting articles about it. They are a front. Something that exists solely so that people can attribute their actions to it. That is what 'front' means.
Usually, the fact a group is a front is a secret, but when it's in the name of the group, it means the organization doesn't officially exist, hence anyone can claim to be working for it. Groups spring up that claim they're part of it, because they share the same goals, and they attribute their actions to it, which keep them from having to expose themselves and state their goals. They can use the other, nonexistent group as a 'front'.
And there's a press office in DC that is not ELF, but the 'ELF press office', which will just simply repeat whatever message you send it. You don't have to actually work for 'ELF' to get them to repeat your message, because there is no actual 'ELF' to work for. (And they, quite deliberately, are operated with no knowledge of people actually doing the things, so have no way to confirm this stuff.)
Re:Citation Needed (Score:3, Informative)
Firstly, you use Wikipedia as a source? Moreover, your own link contains verbiage which would classify this as terrorism, only you didn't put it in bold:
Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for an ideological goal (as opposed to a lone attack), and deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants.
How is knocking over a massive antenna not disregarding "the safety of non-combatants"? Further:
Much of the time, the victims of terrorism are targeted not because they are threats, but because they are specific "symbols, tools, animals or corrupt beings" that tie into a specific view of the world that the terrorists possess. What about these towers is not a symbol that ties into the specific world-view of the attacker(s)? They aren't attacking it because it is an actual threat (despite the BS about radio waves and cancer), they are doing it because it is a symbol of "the man."
Re:Stop this now. (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, PETA runs ads saying 'X is unacceptable', and run ads about the most horrific animal abuse.
That does not mean they consider other uses 'acceptable'. PETA is an inherently dishonest organization.
I point out their webpage explicitly says, and I quote 'People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), with more than 2.0 million members and supporters, is the largest animal rights organization in the world.'.
And just in case that's not clear, here's their FAQ: 'What do you mean by âanimal rightsâ(TM)?
People who support animal rights believe that animals are not ours to use for food, clothing, entertainment, experimentation, or any other purpose and that animals deserve consideration of their best interests regardless of whether they are cute, useful to humans, or endangered and regardless of whether any human cares about them at all (just as a mentally challenged human has rights even if he or she is not cute or useful and even if everyone dislikes him or her). For more information on why animals should have rights, click here.
They are not ours to use for food, clothing, entertainment, experimentation, or any other purpose
Right there. Black and white. PETA's own web page. http://www.peta.org/about/faq.asp [peta.org]
PETA believes it is immoral to use any animals, whatsoever, in any manner at all. Not just abuse of them, heck, not even eating them. Read what they actually say about pets: http://www.peta.org/about/faq-comp.asp [peta.org]
And you'll notice they don't actually answer the real question 'Do you believe it is ethical to own pets at all?'.