Health Risks Associated with Living Near High-Voltage Power Lines

Join the discussion
Registration is free. Start your own thread to ask a follow-up.
70 replies · 98K views
edward said:
Take a closer look most of them are on dirt.

That's true, but the cows are probably more interested in the grass that's growing in the dirt.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
edward said:
Take a closer look most of them are on dirt.

You are not serious, are you?

The "paths" you are referring to are photoshopped EMF lines. You take a closer look.
 
edward said:
I am not serious now:redface: I've been had by a junglebeast.:smile:

If you thought everything in that pic was real, then I would have thought the shape of the 'paths' would be of much more interest than the fact the cows were using the 'paths' as you would expect them to if they were real, for the same reason a human would.
 
edward said:
I've been had by a junglebeast.:smile:

Happens to the best... ;-)
 
edward said:
It was meant for the person who asked for info . What part of that don't you guys understand.
The part explains how that makes it ok to spread misinformation. The person who asked wouldn't notice the misinformation, so it is ok to say it? Is that it?

Edward: you really need to address this.
 
Last edited:
Very prevocative. But look closely. This picture is a spoof or a fraud.

http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/1710/cowsp.jpg

There is white cow with a black spot in the direction of it's 6:30. This cow plus the spot occurs 7 times in the picture. And never without the telltale spot.

The brown cow is pasted 6 times. The black cow is pasted a dozen times.

I am shocked and offended by repetition. The artist needs more cows!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Edward -

Try this. Science does not set out to disprove a hypothesis. Science tries to support one. The null hypothesis may be viewed as the same thing as "disproof", or not accepting the given hypothesis.

The null hypothesis is never proven by scientific methods, as the absence of evidence against the null hypothesis does not establish it. In other words, one may either reject, or not reject the null hypothesis; one cannot accept it.
 
With regard to the 'Photoshopped' cows, note the direction of the shadows, too.
Fun pic, I think...
 
apologies for starting such a heated debate. I only brought up this topic as we were - at that time looking for houses and came across one that was worth more than it was being sold for simply because a number of potential buyers had issues with a nearby distribution tower. Besides providing for an awful view - I wanted to know if this reasoning was substantial.
 
No prob. What you have there is a case where perception = reality. People perceive a health effect and aesthetic issue, therefore there is a reality of a lower housing value. So for that, it doesn't really matter if the perceived problem is real or not - you still have to deal with it either way.

A similar issue exists with radon.
 
Britney Spears must have grown up near high-voltage power lines.