What did they miss?
The video doesn't show anything about the actual setup, variables, controls, test methods or error modes. It is edited in such a way to show only the effect they wanted to show and there is no data given. It doesn't give us the actual truth yet at the end they say they decided to re-run the experiment again to control for humidity and temperature, yet there is no results from that experiment. I expect that the repeat of the experiment didn't go as they wanted so it was memoryholed. Finally, the video was produced in part with the Environmental Health Trust so there's no way this was impartial, objective science. It started off as modern "science" with an end result they wanted and they built the experiment around that predetermined conclusion. It's about as accurate as climate change model predictions.
"The video doesn't show anything about the actual setup, variables, controls, test methods or error modes."
The video showed all of that. You always pop up when there's a topic on Wi-Fi....why is that? What is your job?
The video "showed" stuff, but there isn't any detail to it that would allow someone else to reproduce the experiment under the same conditions. They published what they wanted to show and left out what they didn't. If it is all true, then there should be lots of experiments that are more detailed in their process and producing the same exact results. Can you find those? I can't.
It showed the most of those things, idk where you're getting that from it sounds like you're just trying to use scientific vocabulary to strengthen your weak argument since you don't go into detail.
They were transparent about temperature and humidity needing to be measured and that those could have caused the results rather than wifi. Complaining that you don't know what happened for the followup is changing the subject.
Yes they showed those things, but that's not enough to guarantee any scientific rigor. Do you know anything about the Scientific Method and how to setup a controlled experiment? It sounds like you want to simply accept their conclusions without knowing the actual details of the experiment, the data and the methods used.
And yes, they were transparent about the temperature and humidity being additional variables that they did not control for, but they still published the video without re-running the experiment with those variables being controlled. They published the video that showed what they wanted to show rather than what may have actually happened. That is scientific fraud.
One VERY obvious one: those little routers put off 20-30W of heat when the Wifi radio amp is enabled. Far less if they are just in standby with the radio off.
In an open room, no issue. But, you take a small box, cover it in tinfoil and create a highly thermally insulated oven. The foil acts as both a convection and radiant barrier.
The retards roasted those little seeds with heat. Not RF radiation.
(Looks like they used a low watt LED bulb, so that wasn't much of a heat source ... just the wifi radio amp.)
I agree that matters, but they didn't miss that. They say the same thing in the video and that they have to do another experiment to know if that was the cause instead of the wifi.
I have to wonder about the reaction here. If this was a study on why niggers are niggers y'all would be praising how these kids are better scientists than leftist phds. The experiment appeared reasonable well executed, and the results shown wer inconclusive but implied something surprising. There's literally no reason to attack and discredit it.
they have to do another experiment to know if that was the cause instead of the wifi.
Then don't publish knowingly incomplete and/or shoddy results. We can wait. :)
Most universities have a anechoic chamber that could do this experiment very well. But, that's beyond a middle school or high school.
I have to wonder about the reaction here.
If this video was just about kids doing cool stuff, that would be awesome. Don't get me wrong - I love experiments. I love when smart kids apply their brains and test stuff. This is awesome, we need more of this. I've, personally, donated significant amounts of time and money to kids in my community to learn about engineering and science.
But, as evidenced by the end of the video - this video wasn't about showing off cool science done by smart kids. It was an attempt to to use some shoddy experiment to fear monger about RF.
I won't be making personal decisions based on a kid's school experiment. And, I see too many adults who lack critical thinking and who have very little understanding of radiation, magnetism, etc.
This isn't about the kids. This is about the fear mongering from the adults.
Seeds germinate better with heat.
Nope. Seeds germinate better in the right temperature range.
That's not a one-direction, universal thing. And the point is to create a control, anyways.
Ummmmmmmmmmm
Millions of variables?
Such as?
This clearly wasn't some kid's project and was led by the teacher to help teach them about controlling for things. They even talk about what they could control better and are doing a follow up.
This is closer to actual science than the type of meta-analysis studies that make up the bulk of science reporting now.
The results are surprising to me too, but I'm not finding any fault with the methods I saw, and I even looked up a few things I thought were suspect and discovered they were just fine (like using aluminum for a Faraday cage for example.
(post is archived)