This is amusing:
on Santa Fe's infamous wi-fi lawsuit—
a well-tread topic to SFR readers
—and the online version of the story runs next to an ad for the Nexus One smartphone.
As it happens, the LAT story itself is well-written:
Granted. But why lump anti-nuclear activists together with New Age healers? That's like saying LA is known for its abundance of
plastic surgeons, social justice advocates and wealthy, vapid starfuckers
.
The LAT's sister paper in
and a
have picked up this latest take on Firstenberg's case. At the Chicago Tribune, a
offers an alternative scientific explanation for all the anti-wi-fi activism here.
Some weeks back, a Danish paper
, too.
Can anyone translate that?
SFR has also been flooded with email—oddly enough—from self-proclaimed electrosensitives who believe our skeptical reporting does a disservice. We'll get to around to those claims in another post.
Finally, here's an update on Firstenberg's case
. Last week, attorneys for Firstenberg's neighbor, Raphaela Monribot, sent a letter to to 1st Judicial District Judge Sarah Singleton summarizing their opposition to an injunction against Monribot using her electronics at home. Their arguments attack the testimony of Firstenberg's doctors, who diagnosed his "electrosensitivity" based only upon their personal experience, and call into question whether Firstenberg—who also testified that he believes there is "
no safe distance
" from a cell phone tower—will ever be satisfied:
For more, stay tuned... Er...For more, stay tuned... Er...
Update:
Skeptics be warned: GMA's video report is credulous.
