Why did the Earth Liberation Front do this? My guess would be they did it for publicity. Knock something big over, get on the news, get more money and members with free advertising.
But, according to their statement, that wasn't it at all. Really it was because, "AM radio waves cause adverse health effects including higher rates of cancer, harm to wildlife," and, "the signals have been interfering with home phone and intercom lines."
Okay, let's assume this is really why they knocked the towers down.
Question 1: Do AM radio waves cause cancer?
Answer: In order to answer this question you need to have a simple understanding of three things: how does cancer work, how do AM radio waves work, and is there something common to those two things that would add up to one causing the other. For example: all known carcinogens (radiation, chemicals, viruses) cause cancer by breaking chemical bonds and producing mutant strands of DNA.
So, for AM radio waves to cause cancer, they have to be proven to break chemical bonds and produce mutant strands of DNA. What method would AM radio waves use to do this? Well, AM radio waves work the same way all other radio waves work, whether it's FM, TV, microwave ovens, cell phones, Wi-Fi, cordless phones, garage door openers, radio controlled toys, GPS receivers, satellites, etc. Simply put, they're a form of electromagentic radiation.
What's that? Radiation? Didn't I just say above that radiation is known to cause cancer? Yes. But not electromagnetic radiation at low frequencies, which is what AM radio -- in fact, the frequency is known as RF or "radio frequency." Check it out: electromagnetic radiation comes from photons and the energy of the photons varies depending on the frequency. It has been estimated that 1 million photons in a power line have the same amount of energy as just 1 photon in a microwave oven, and 1,000 microwave photons are equal to about 1 photon of light. So, are the photons generated by AM radio waves at a frequency than can break the electron bonds that hold DNA together, thus causing cancer?
Nope. The whole RF part of the electromagnetic spectrum is made up of forms of non-ionizing radiation. Examples of ionizing radiation include x-rays and gamma rays, and these forms of radiation have enough energy to break the bonds that hold DNA together. RF can't even enter tissue, let alone break down DNA. A cell phone, for instance, is 1o million times weaker than the lowest energy ionizing radiation. AM radio waves are stronger than cell phones, but they're still radio waves (non-ionizing radiation).
So, we know how cancer works. We know how AM radio waves work. There doesn't seem to be a link between them. This doesn't mean it's completely impossible that some day we might find out there is some link. It does mean that based on everything that science has taught us it's incredibly improbable and unlikely and not worth knocking AM radio towers down over.
Question 2: Let's say AM radio waves cause cancer. Do the Earth Liberation Front's claims even hold up logically to their own theory?
Answer: No. If AM radio waves caused cancer, it would be likely that other forms of electromagnetic radiation cause cancer, too. So, the Earth Liberation Front should be knocking down TV towers, too. The reason I mention this is because, aside from health defects, the Earth Liberation Front mentions IN THEIR OWN STATEMENT that their other reason for knocking down the AM radio towers was, ""the signals have been interfering with home phone and intercom lines." Well, dumb-dumbs, phones (portable ones) and intercoms USE RADIO WAVES. Sure, they're lower frequency, but it's the exact same technology and most people get physically closer to a phone or intercom than they ever would to an AM radio tower (unless you're in the process of knocking one down). So you think radio waves cause cancer, but it annoys you when one form of cancer causing radio wave disrupts another form of cancer causing radio wave. That makes sense.
Question 3: Does the Earth Liberation Front honestly believe their own claims, or are they being intellectually dishonest and hiding their real motives?
Answer: That's impossible to tell. Either way it has the same end result -- they get publicity. So even if they honestly believe AM radio towers cause cancer (a theory which their worry about phones and intercoms undermines), they still get publicity from knocking down the tower. The entire CNN article is based on a news release / statement made by the Earth Liberation Front itself, so it would seem to me that they're actively trying to promote the fact that they knocked down the AM radio towers. Anyway, my guess would be members of the organization have TVs, wi-fi, cell phones, microwaves, garage door openers and other forms of electromagnetic radiation IN THEIR OWN HOMES. But, getting rid of these would make life immediately less convenient on a personal level. Knocking down an AM tower in the middle of the night just takes a couple hours and no resources -- you steal someone else's excavating machine and knock over someone else's tower -- then you can go back to the radio-wave filled comfort of your own home.
What really bugs me is the fact that the CNN article doesn't mention once that AM radio towers don't even cause cancer. I know they're trying to be impartial and objective, but simply repeating the Earth Liberation Front's claims and not examining the other side of the issue is not the same as being impartial and objective. They do note that the government considers the Earth Liberation Front domestic terrorists, and they interview the people at the radio station about their reaction to the attack, but they don't address the whole reason behind the attack in the first place. So, a reasonable reader could read the article and think, "Well it was an extreme thing to do, but cancer is bad, so I guess they made a good point." If CNN wants to lead the reader to an impartial and objective conclusion, it is their job to explore the science behind the Earth Liberation Front's claims.
Sources:
Trottier, Lorne. 2009. "EMF and health: A Growing Hysteria. Skeptical Inquirer. September/October.
http://www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/content/PED_1_3X_Cellular_Phone_Towers.asp?sitearea=PED
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/09/04/washington.towers.terrorism/index.html
No comments:
Post a Comment