It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Research: Possibility that Wind Turbine Farms, Solar Panel farms, and Large Green Projects to Genera

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 24 2014 @ 11:35 PM

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: jrod
Nothing green about factory made high tech junk.

Use less.

Don't even acknowledge jrod. In any thread that he/she doesn't like all he/she does is make false claims and he/she has shown time and again that whomever "jrod" is can't comprehend what is being discussed.

Unfortunately there are always people like jrod who will never accept any evidence that contradicts their "beliefs". Despite their lack of knowledge on the subject being discussed and their lack of experience.

Jrod, if you do not know how to make a concise and intelligent argument based on empirical evidence do not participate in the thread.

edit on 24-7-2014 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 12:13 AM
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Wait, you make a claim that cell towers have existed for a "long time" but you do realize that cell phone utilization has increased dramatically, year by year, for the last 20 years, right? I'm sure you're then aware, that the equipment must be upgraded, new towers installed, overall much more power is being distributed through this network. I'm also sure you realize that 4g infrastructure was implemented over the last about 7 years now, right? Lastly, I'm sure you're taking into consideration the various wifi signals that have been increasing, year by year, for the last 15 or so years, right?

So the whole have existed for a "long time" doesn't really pan out, when you take juuuuust a second to actually critically think it through.

I'm not saying it IS because of these sources, only that your reasoning is rather poor, and you don't seem to have provided enough evidence to make a case against it being mannade RF radiation in the microwave range.

I found this image:

Now how does that fit into the timeline of these events.... hmmm... pretty well, don't you think?
edit on 25-7-2014 by pl3bscheese because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 12:36 AM
a reply to: ElectricUniverse


I consider myself a scientist.

The change in the Earth's magnetic field you mention previously. We very well maybe undergoing a polar shift.

It has happened in this planet's history. This is the first time in our modern civilization that we have encountered such an 'anomaly'.

What do you think about the polar shift 'theory' ?

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 01:03 AM
I mentioned how wind turbines, and the plans to set up large farms in the oceans will affect certain fish as well as mammals such as whales, and dolphins.

The following abstract is an example of research which shows infrasound produces a flight and avoidance response in Pacific juvenile salmonids.

Infrasound produces flight and avoidance responses in Pacific juvenile salmonids

F. R. Knudsen1,
C. B. Schreck2,
S. M. Knapp3,
P. S. Enger1,* and
O. Sand1

Article first published online: 19 APR 2005

DOI: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.1997.tb02002.x


Oncorhynchus tshawytscha;
Oncorhynchus mykiss;
avoidance responses

A 10-Hz frequency sound caused flight or avoidance responses in juvenile spring chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha and rainbow trout O. mykiss. Groups of fish were placed in 3-m diameter circular tanks with a water depth of 1 m. The sound source was a 25-cm diameter aluminium tube with a piston in one end. The piston was driven back and forth by an eccentric coupling to an electric motor at a frequency of 10 Hz and with peak to peak amplitude of 4 cm. The sound source was turned on for 5 s when the fish was within 1 m. Initial tests always resulted in a strong flight response, but after three to four tests the fish more typically simply swam away as far as possible from the source. This avoidance response did not habituate even after 20 trials.

The purpose of the following research was to find out whether schools of large wild-caught herrings could be guided by the use of anthropogenic sources using light, and sounds including infrasound. The results of the research supports the fact that infrasound, such as that generated by wind turbines at sea, can and do stimulate a flight and avoidance response on wild caught herrings.

Experimental Evidence of Threat-Sensitive Collective Avoidance Responses in a Large Wild-Caught Herring School

Samantha Bui mail, Frode Oppedal, Øyvind J. Korsøen, Damien Sonny, Tim Dempster

Published: May 17, 2013
•DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063696


Understanding species-specific flight behaviours is essential in developing methods of guiding fish spatially, and requires knowledge on how groups of fish respond to aversive stimuli. By harnessing their natural behaviours, the use of physical manipulation or other potentially harmful procedures can be minimised. We examined the reactions of sea-caged groups of 50 salmon (1331±364 g) to short-term exposure to visual or acoustic stimuli. In light experiments, fish were exposed to one of three intensities of blue LED light (high, medium and low) or no light (control). Sound experiments included exposure to infrasound (12 Hz), a surface disturbance event, the combination of infrasound and surface disturbance, or no stimuli. Groups that experienced light, infrasound, and the combination of infrasound and surface disturbance treatments, elicited a marked change in vertical distribution, where fish dived to the bottom of the sea-cage for the duration of the stimulus. Light treatments, but not sound, also reduced the total echo-signal strength (indicative of swim bladder volume) after exposure to light, compared to pre-stimulus levels. Groups in infrasound and combination treatments showed increased swimming activity during stimulus application, with swimming speeds tripled compared to that of controls. In all light and sound treatments, fish returned to their pre-stimulus swimming depths and speeds once exposure had ceased. This work establishes consistent, short-term avoidance responses to these stimuli, and provides a basis for methods to guide fish for aquaculture applications, or create avoidance barriers for conservation purposes. In doing so, we can achieve the manipulation of group position with minimal welfare impacts, to create more sustainable practices.

More research how infrasound produces a flight and avoidance result on other fish species.

Environmental Biology of Fishes 57: 327–336, 2000.
© 2000 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands.
Avoidance responses to infrasound in downstream migrating European silver eels, Anguilla anguilla

Olav Sand, Per S. Enger, Hans Erik Karlsen, Frank Knudsen & Torstein Kvernstuen
Department of Biology, University of Oslo, P.B. 1051 Blindern, N-0316 Oslo, Norway

Received 15 July 1998 Accepted 31 March 1999

Key words: infrasound source, acoustic fence, fish barrier, fish passage, migration, fish

In an attempt to develop an efficient acoustic fish fence, we have designed an infrasound source able to generate
large nearfield particle acceleration. The source generates water movements by means of two symmetrical pistons
in an air-filled cylinder with 21 cm bore. The pistons are driven by eccentric coupling to an electric motor, with
5 cm p.p. amplitude. The piston movements are 180 out of phase. The piston reaction forces are thus opposed,
leading to vibration free operation. The submergible infrasound source is operated freely suspended in the water
mass. The emitted sound frequency is 11.8 Hz. The particle acceleration is about 0.01ms−2 at a distance of 3m,
corresponding to the threshold intensity for deterring effects of infrasound on Atlantic salmon smolts. The sound
source was employed to test the effect of intense infrasound on migrating European silver eels. Fish confined in a
tank displayed startle behaviour and prolonged stress reactions, telemetrically monitored as tachycardia, in response
to intense infrasound.
The field tests were carried out in the River Imsa. A trap that catches all the descending eels
is installed near the river mouth. The trap was separated in four equal sections. During the periods with infrasound
exposure, the proportion of silver eels entering the section closest to the sound source was reduced to 43% of the
control value. In the section closest to the opposite river bank, infrasound increased the proportion of trapped eels to
144% of the control values. This shift of the migrating eels away from the infrasound source was highly significant.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 02:06 AM
There are already at least some conservancy groups opposing the implementation of wind farms over areas that will impact marine life, including mammals such as whales.

Scientists Request President Piñera to Relocate Wind Farm to Protect Whales

More than forty international marine mammal specialists sent a joint statement addressed to President Sebastián Piñera, requesting the implementation of an Environmental Impact Study and the relocation of Chiloé Wind Farm project in order to avoid negative impacts on one of the largest populations of blue whales in the planet.

Santiago de Chile, 14 de Diciembre de 2011 (CCC News) – Representatives of the Cetacean Conservation Center and Ecoceanos Center delivered today a joint statement in the presidential palace La Moneda addressed to president Sebastian Piñera, regarding the wind farm project “parque eólico Chiloé”.

The letter, that has the support of 45 marine mammal specialists from around the world, expresses the concerns of the researchers “regarding the development of a large scale wind farm project to be located in the coastal borderline of the northwestern zone of Chiloe Island in Chile, an area internationally recognized as a critical habitat for a unique population of endangered blue whales”.

The following research abstract explains how infrasound and low frequency sound/noise causes vibroacoustic disease (VAD) in individuals and animals that are excessively exposed to ILFN (infrasound and low frequency)

Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2007 Jan-Apr;93(1-3):256-79. Epub 2006 Aug 4.

Vibroacoustic disease: biological effects of infrasound and low-frequency noise explained by mechanotransduction cellular signalling.

Alves-Pereira M1, Castelo Branco NA.

Author information


At present, infrasound (0-20 Hz) and low-frequency noise (20-500 Hz) (ILFN, 0-500 Hz) are agents of disease that go unchecked. Vibroacoustic disease (VAD) is a whole-body pathology that develops in individuals excessively exposed to ILFN. VAD has been diagnosed within several professional groups employed within the aeronautical industry, and in other heavy industries. However, given the ubiquitous nature of ILFN and the absence of legislation concerning ILFN, VAD is increasingly being diagnosed among members of the general population, including children. VAD is associated with the abnormal growth of extra-cellular matrices (collagen and elastin), in the absence of an inflammatory process. In VAD, the end-product of collagen and elastin growth is reinforcement of structural integrity. This is seen in blood vessels, cardiac structures, trachea, lung, and kidney of both VAD patients and ILFN-exposed animals. VAD is, essentially, a mechanotransduction disease. Inter- and intra-cellular communication is achieved through both biochemical and mechanotranduction signalling. When the structural components of tissue are altered, as is seen in ILFN-exposed specimens, the mechanically mediated signalling is, at best, impaired. Common medical diagnostic tests, such as EKG, EEG, as well as many blood chemistry analyses, are based on the mal-function of biochemical signalling processes. VAD patients typically present normal values for these tests. However, when echocardiography, brain MRI or histological studies are performed, where structural changes can be identified, all consistently show significant changes in VAD patients and ILFN-exposed animals. Frequency-specific effects are not yet known, valid dose-responses have been difficult to identify, and large-scale epidemiological studies are still lacking.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 06:47 AM
a reply to: jrod

Sorry ElectricUniverse but I have to answer for the sake of the readers.

Two ground source heat pumps, one air source heat pump and an array of solar panels. All sold with lies, requiring several changes of equipment which the salesmen had claimed would last two decades, and causing massive stress to ourselves and damage to property. Both ground source heat pumps have been decommissioned after a fraction of the advertised lifespan. Remember it's the projected lifespan of the equipment that is used in the salespersons calculations of efficiency. The fake renewable systems I have experience of were all paid for by our misguided landlords with generous help from the renewables trough, (subsidies).

None of this falsely advertised junk has been anywhere near as efficient as the small scale off grid outfits I've seen.

I'm a bicycle commuter with extensive practical experience of low impact living. All my bicycles are secondhand, but in spite of this, you're right, I admit it, I do have experience with the oligarchy. I saw the photographs in 1979. I also have experience of the nuclear industry.
That's me and my machete making a positive difference. If you're really green how about you cycle over to Gloucestershire and help me keep that public footpath clear so we can more easily keep track of what's going on with the thousand tons of nuclear waste in the cracked and leaking storage pit. There is a strong possibility my mother-in-law's fatal cancer was caused by waste from that site. I'll be watching that site till the day I die.

Ground source heat pump boreholes drilled in a haphazard fashion and improperly decommissioned creates routes for polluted surface water to reach pristine aquifers. I have personally witnessed this. Ill informed drilling can create all manner of changes.

Those are my credentials. On grid high tech fake green technology is just more jobs for the boys. The obvious damage this junk has caused to the environment may be dwarfed by the effects suggested in this thread.

edit on 25 7 2014 by Kester because: YouTube glitch

edit on 25 7 2014 by Kester because: spacing

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 07:13 AM
a reply to: Kester

Both you and OP are spreading nothing but ignorance.

Keep it up! Maybe someone will actually believe you.

Green energy is NOT what you two are claiming


posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 07:16 AM

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse

Jrod, if you do not know how to make a concise and intelligent argument based on empirical evidence do not participate in the thread.

I will continue to post in this thread, unless the MODS ban me because I will not let you spread false information.

Your claims in this thread have no scientific basis!

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 07:35 AM
a reply to: jrod

Search the name of one of my other YouTube channels and you find this...
"The Head of Brain Surgery at NASA has even said he would not consider holding one of these to his head (with regards to TETRA)."

TETRA is used by police here and seems to be responsible for cancers. I like constables,I don't want them to be killed by their equipment. I'm familiar with the wireless issue.

I first worked on a leading organic farm thirty five years ago. I'm familiar with the pesticide/herbicide issue.

This thread isn't blaming genuine green technology. This thread is talking about fake green technology and it's dreadful effects, some of which may be far beyond that which I have seen.

Please state your green credentials so we know what experience your viewpoint comes from. It would be fair for the readers, some of whom may be considering investing in fake green rubbish. Speaking of which don't get sucked into the endless search for suppressed energy sources. With limited resources you're better off building a rocket mass heater or some other relatively simple and proven technology.

Anyway, I'm off to write a thread on Ecotricity's subsidised electric supercar. I think I'll put it in the joke forum.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 08:11 AM
a reply to: Kester

Youtube video?

Keep trying!

In your own words can you state the scientific method. (without using google)

edit on 25-7-2014 by jrod because: cw

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 08:19 AM
a reply to: pl3bscheese

I didn't make a claim. I posted several research papers done by experts on the field. All the information is pointing out the same thing, wind turbine farms cause more damage than they do good.

Another example.

World Council for Nature

15 July 2014

To the government of Denmark,

Allow me to bring your attention to several press releases by our organisation, the World Council for Nature. Press releases that have been picked up by numerous news media around the world, and which cast an unfavourable light on the Kingdom of Denmark.”

The first release draws attention to the 1,600 stillbirths of mink puppies, many exhibiting deformities, which occurred this year at a long-established mink farm which has wind turbines as new neighbours. The second quotes the mink farmer complaining that, “when the wind blows from the South West (where the wind turbines are), mother minks attack their own puppies.” And the third relates the closing of a plant nursery because its female employees complain of irregularities in their menstrual cycles, including unusual bleeding, since the installation of wind turbines nearby. The Danish media had already reported these tragic news, in the following articles:

As far as we were able to find out, the response of your government to these health warnings has been to ignore them. When they were brought to the attention of your Minister of Health, Nick Hækkerup, by Member of Parliament Karina Adsbøl at a hearing on the health effects of wind turbines, Mr. Hækkerup turned a deaf ear to the matter: VIDEO Karina Adsbøl

BTW, I did mention that cell towers do have detrimental effects on animals like birds, and humans as well. But you fail to make a case against the fact that "wind turbines disrupt the ability of several species of animals, and insects that use electroreception and magnetoreception."

Marine mammals like whales among others, use low frequency and infrasonic sounds to communicate with each other. Other mammals do the same such as elephants.

Mystery of elephant infrasounds revealed

Date: August 3, 2012

Source: University of Vienna

An international team of voice researchers and cognitive biologists provides new insights into the production of elephant communication. The so-called "infrasounds", i.e. sounds with pitches below the range of human hearing, are found to be produced with the same physical mechanism as human speech or singing.

Elephants can communicate using very low frequency sounds, with pitches below the range of human hearing. These low-frequency sounds, termed "infrasounds," can travel several kilometers, and provide elephants with a "private" communication channel that plays an important role in elephants' complex social life. Their frequencies are as low as the lowest notes of a pipe organ.

Although the sounds themselves have been studied for many years, it has remained unclear exactly how elephant infrasounds are made. One possibility, favored by some scientists, is that the elephants tense and relax the muscles in their larynx (or "voice box") for each pulse of sound. This mechanism, similar to cats purring, can produce sounds as low in pitch as desired, but the sounds produced are generally not very powerful.

Now, what happens when the communication of several species is disrupted?

What happens when the electroreception and magnetoreception of several species is disrupted and overloaded by anthropogenic low frequency sounds and infrasound?

If you want to make a case, and "try" to blame it all on "manmade RF radiation in the microwave range", you need to present EVIDENCE that the research is all wrong. PROVE that the biologists, the doctors and other scientists have got it wrong. All who state that wind turbines not only disrupts the ability of several animal and insect species, but it causes a lot of harm not only to animals but humans as well...

The evidence of adverse health effects from wind turbines has been mounting for years. Let’s note the independent research of Nina Pierpont, M.D. (Johns Hopkins), Ph.D. (Princeton University), who described in detail the symptoms she uncovered through interviewing windfarm victims. (Dr. Pierpont published her 300-page report as, “Wind Turbine Syndrome: A Report on a Natural Experiment,” 2009) (4).

We must add to this the widely available, published work of Dr. Alec Salt and colleagues at the Cochlear Fluids Research Lab, Washington University School of Medicine (St. Louis, Missouri). Professor Salt has demonstrated that infrasound produced by wind turbines can indeed dys-regulate inner ear function, triggering the cascade of symptoms documented by Dr. Pierpont. Infrasound can readily do this, despite the fact it cannot be heard audibly. For decades the wind industry has clung to the fallacy that, “If you can’t hear it, it can’t hurt you.” Salt, a professor of Otolaryngology, has demolished that myth.


edit on 25-7-2014 by ElectricUniverse because: add info and comment.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 08:23 AM
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Can you imagine if this much scrutiny was given to the oil industry?

Fracking never should have been given a Clean Water Act exemption. The EPA has chosen their side.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 08:32 AM

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Can you imagine if this much scrutiny was given to the oil industry?

Fracking never should have been given a Clean Water Act exemption. The EPA has chosen their side.

What in the world?... Stop trying to derail the thread. Stay on the topic. I have spoken before against the circumvention of safety measures that caused oil spills, and have written and spoken against the use of corexit during the golf of Mexico oil spill. But guess what?.. This is another topic that has NOTHING to do with fracking or the oil industry. Do you even understand that?... You can consider yourself a scientist... Heck, you can consider yourself Einstein if you want, but your statements prove the opposite of what you claim. You want to deny ignorance but you swim on it all day long 24 hours a day. Every thread I have seen you participate in is the same. You derail it with "nonsense", inane and illogical arguments that only make sense in that messed up head of yours. You contradict yourself all the time. You are not a scientist... Get that in your head...

I really don't know whether to feel sorry for you jrod, or laugh...

edit on 25-7-2014 by ElectricUniverse because: add comment.

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 08:40 AM
You are extremely guilty of thread drift and topic dilution in almost every thread you participate in. Please kindly alert a MOD if you do no like my post.

This question relates to the OP:

Can you imagine if this much scrutiny was given to the oil and fracking industry?
edit on 25-7-2014 by jrod because: CW

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:19 AM

originally posted by: ElectricUniverse
a reply to: Mianeye

So, are you saying that as long as they die for green projects it is ok?

Remember that more and more green projects such as wind farms are being built each year. This means that the deaths and disturbance of species that use Earth's magnetic field, as well as those that use the electric field in flowers and other animals to gather food will continue to increase, since it is okay for these species to die for "green causes".

I am asking because that seems to be the implication you are making.

So what do you suggest we just burn more fossil fuels?

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 09:34 AM
Anyways... Just to make it clear. My argument is not to blame "everything" on wind turbines. However, the empirical data shows that wind turbines do cause huge impacts on not only animals, and a variety of insects, but they are detrimental to human health as well.

Adverse health effects of industrial wind turbines

Roy D. Jeffery, MD FCFP⇑
Family physician in the Northeastern Manitoulin Family Health Team in Little Current, Ont.
Correspondence: Dr Roy D. Jeffery, Northeastern Manitoulin Family Health Team, Box 549, Little Current, ON P0P 1K0; e-mail

Carmen Krogh
Retired pharmacist and a former Editor-in-Chief of the Compendium of Pharmaceutical Specialties.

Brett Horner, CMA

Canadian family physicians can expect to see increasing numbers of rural patients reporting adverse effects from exposure to industrial wind turbines (IWTs). People who live or work in close proximity to IWTs have experienced symptoms that include decreased quality of life, annoyance, stress, sleep disturbance, headache, anxiety, depression, and cognitive dysfunction. Some have also felt anger, grief, or a sense of injustice. Suggested causes of symptoms include a combination of wind turbine noise, infrasound, dirty electricity, ground current, and shadow flicker.1 Family physicians should be aware that patients reporting adverse effects from IWTs might experience symptoms that are intense and pervasive and might feel further victimized by a lack of caregiver understanding.

Doctors are advising other doctors to expect an increase of people reporting wind turbine syndrome... I wonder why that is...

posted on Jul, 25 2014 @ 04:27 PM
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Excellent link, thank you. The symptoms mentioned are very similar to the effects of the air source heat pump our landlord recently had installed. When commercial jets were grounded here during an Icelandic volcanic eruption stress levels dropped. It was realised the almost constant noise of distant jet engines is a source of stress affecting millions of people. My theory on the jet noise is that it sounds like the worst storm ever or a thousand lions roaring and our instincts put us on the alert. Some of the noises from the technology in our 'renewable' friendly house are similar to air raid sirens. It certainly doesn't sound like anything natural and relaxing.

posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 10:34 AM
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Having some experience with small wind turbines, I will through in that while they produce a good amount of power, they are extremely noise, the vertical ones are a little better but aren't as efficient at harnessing the wind. This is why Wind Gen fields are out in the middle of nowhere.

That said, the noise produced by a generator is also a nuisance. So again I ask, why not this much scrutiny on Oil/Coal Power Plants?

Obviously Kester and ElectricUniverse have teamed up in this thread to high five each other. Both are decent writers but have a difficult time separating pseudoscience from actual science and genuine facts.

Burning more fossils fuels is not an option any more. CO2 is rising fast.
edit on 26-7-2014 by jrod because: typo gremlins

posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 10:54 AM
a reply to: jrod

Looking forward to your scrutiny of oil/coal plants thread. Please don't hesitate.

No idea who this ElectricUniverse individual is.

I am teamed up with this guy.

The first on YouTube to tell us what was happening at Fukushima.

edit on 26 7 2014 by Kester because: YouTube glitch

posted on Jul, 26 2014 @ 11:12 AM
a reply to: Kester

That is good. It seemed like give the first two pages on this thread.

Electric is one of those who think the recent spike in our CO2 is no big deal.

I see a problem and no we have to find ways to stop burning so much Carbon. A large portion of our energy needs can be met other ways. While some can make their own power and not have to pay the power company, many simply are not clever enough and still will rely on the power company to sell them power.

It is not like alternative power will ruin that industry.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in