Independent Assessment of Bioprotect Card

Hello Jean

the document of the building biologists

STANDARD OF BAUBIOLOGIE METHODS OF TESTING
(SBM-2003)
Building Biology Guidelines for Sleeping Areas

gives the following table:

Electromagnetic Waves (RF)
Power density in microwatt per sq meter
anomaly: none weak strong extreme
Pulsed mW/m2 < 0.1 0.1 – 5 5 – 100 > 100
Unpulsed mW/m2 < 1 1 – 50 50 – 1,000 > 1,000

I don't know how this compares with other peoples meter readings in
practise. Spanish Microwave syndrome paper by Navarror gives the
values that they measured and found with sickness at towers, I'm
sorry
I can't look them out. Some people are saying that regardless if the
level from towers is low, some people are still affected by it, but
obviously more with a higher reading.

With respect to meters, I think we would all like to know if anyone
knows the best commercially affordable meter to get to measure from
say 300 Mhz to 3 GHz with a proper spectrum breakdown. This is what
we
need to use to measure our sources. I had thought of getting an
Aaronia, but now with some of these comments I am not sure. As has
been said it is difficult to keep investing money in meters without
being sure we have a thorough one. I was expecting one to arrive, but
it fell through. I wonder if anyone has a good choice to measure all
HF sources properly to suggest?

regards,

Rowan C


--- In [hidden email], "tdx244" <jean_nn@h...> wrote:

>
> Please, I need something like a reference. So I suggest if anybody
> could give the "usual" values in µW/cm2 or µW/m2 for a phone
mast
100
> meter far, horizontally, with no obstacles.
>
> I repeat the number I got was in the range of 600, I assume it was
> 600µW/cm2. But from what I read here, it might be 600µW/m2
which is
> 10000 times lower.
>
> Of course once it's shielded in the appartment the values get lower
> (don't worry I don't have this value at the sleeping place, at
least
> not any longer).
>
> jean.

Hello,

on my website I have placed some papers in english about meters.
See: http://www.milieuziektes.nl/Pagina110.html
There are 2 english issues.

Most meters get influenced negatively by radio end TV transmitters.
Therefore Gigahertz Solutions have constructed their meters beginning at 800
MHz up to 3.000 MHz.

I have found, that people can get electrosensible from RF radiation at 200
up to 2.000 uW/m2.
Once they have become electrosensible, they may start having reactions at
levels from 1 uW/m2 .
That is a point most people do not understand.

Now, many use different values.
On http://www.milieuziektes.nl/Pagina112a.html
there is a small programm Mobidig.exe.
It is verye usefull in changing many values in the value you prefer.
V/m into uW/m2 or uW/cm2 or W/cm2.
Or uW/m2 into V/m.

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton Antivirus




----- Original Message -----
From: "rowsteroz" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2005 15:59
Subject: [eSens] Re: That meter is bullshit!

Thanks for your answer Rowan, your comment sums up well my basic
concern. To try to get an idea of what's going on.

Just a worry : you use the word microwatt then write mW/m2.

So just to be sure, because to me mW stands for milliwatt.

milliwat mW = 0.001 W  

microwatt µW = 0.001 mW  

????

jean.



--- In [hidden email], "rowsteroz" <rowanc@w...> wrote: 1,000
>
> I don't know how this compares with other peoples meter readings in
> practise. Spanish Microwave syndrome paper by Navarror gives the
> values that they measured and found with sickness at towers, I'm
> sorry
> I can't look them out. Some people are saying that regardless if
the but
> it fell through. I wonder if anyone has a good choice to measure
all anybody
> > could give the "usual" values in µW/cm2 or µW/m2 for a phone
> mast
> 100
> > meter far, horizontally, with no obstacles.
> >
> > I repeat the number I got was in the range of 600, I assume it
was
> > 600µW/cm2. But from what I read here, it might be 600µW/m2
> which is
> > 10000 times lower.
> >
> > Of course once it's shielded in the appartment the values get
lower
> > (don't worry I don't have this value at the sleeping place, at
> least
> > not any longer).
> >
> > jean.

Hi,

I think it is in accordance to what I hope I have understood so far.

200 to 2000 µW/m2 is too much.

And I think 40 µW/m2 is already a problem for me (what I get in the
sleeping area, although there is a swiss shield curtain).

Basically I was wrong when I thought I measured 40µW per sq cm it was
40µW per sq meter. Hopefully.

jean.


--- In [hidden email], "charles" <charles@m...> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> on my website I have placed some papers in english about meters.
> See: http://www.milieuziektes.nl/Pagina110.html
> There are 2 english issues.
>
> Most meters get influenced negatively by radio end TV transmitters.
> Therefore Gigahertz Solutions have constructed their meters
beginning at 800
> MHz up to 3.000 MHz.
>
> I have found, that people can get electrosensible from RF radiation
at 200
> up to 2.000 uW/m2.
> Once they have become electrosensible, they may start having
reactions at

Who in fact has started this thread??
The initial message (cited below) hasn't been signed...
Anyway, I would be looking forward to hearing more about Spectrans from
him....

Drasko


> That meter is NOT accuarate at all! Its just a winkidinki
> widebandmeter. So forget the reading.
> Buy a spectrumanalyzer like the SPECTRAn from aaronia (about 250 EUROS
> only!) and you get a ACCURATE reading which you can afford ;-)
> See www.elektrosmog.de/Spektrumanalyser.htm or have a look on the
> lessemf website...
>

Oh boy! Even on BETA20 they work better and much mor accurate then ALL
other meters i know so far (and i know ALL of them below 5000 Euros).
And charless dosent like Aartonia so he allways will write such shitt
on those devices. Thats not fair at all.

--- In [hidden email], "Drasko Cvijovic" <pecina@c...> wrote:
> Who in fact has started this thread??
> The initial message (cited below) hasn't been signed...
> Anyway, I would be looking forward to hearing more about Spectrans from
> him....
>
> Drasko
Hello Drasko,

i am using the SPECTRANs right from the beginning (BETA1). In the
beginning it was, ok lets say "Beta" ;-) sure but we did know that.
The Hardware is 100% finsihes do only the software is changing the
cabability of those meters it that gets MUCH MUCH better every
day/week. At the moment we allready have a MUCH better accuracy then
Aaronia prommissed it: typical +/- 1dB instead of +/- 3dB as announced.
The meter itself is very nice AND EASY to use and it hase a HUGE!
display and VERY cool and usable design.
You have 3 MODI which can be changed by using the Enter-Key:
SPECTRUM ANALYSIS
EXPOSURE LIMIT CALCULATION
AUDIO ANALYSIS
So its 3! meters in one.
A very cool function is the ADVANCED HOLD mode. Just press the
"Point-Key" and SPECTRAN records all datas as long as you want. Thats
how you get a perfect "24h-diagram". Its reayl cool! Then you can
switch to EXPOSURE LIMIT CALCULATION and see how high this values are
in PERCANTAGE! to different exposure limits (all Salzburger Levels and
even the international ICNIRP level is calculated!). Those
calculations are made as shown in the law so they are perfect. NO
other meter can do this so far (only some NARDA for 10000 US$ up)

But the COOLEST funktion of SPECTRAN is that it shows the FREQUENCY of
ALL signals and that it measures up to 7GHz!!!! So you RELAY know what
you are measuring and you CANT beat that device especialy for that price.

Sorry Charless just forget your rubish and stop yealing at Aaronia!

Yeah, I think the aaronia products are cool. I was contemplating
buying the set at 300 euros, including the HF detector 2. But those
two detectors have not a digital display. Although the price is very
attractive and it is already suitable for measuring.

Now, thanks to this yahoo list I've heard about the spectrans. When
I'll be able to gather the money, I'll buy one, hopefully.

jean.


--- In [hidden email], "low_emf" <low_emf@y...> wrote:
> --- In [hidden email], "Drasko Cvijovic" <pecina@c...> wrote:
> > Who in fact has started this thread??
> > The initial message (cited below) hasn't been signed...
> > Anyway, I would be looking forward to hearing more about
Spectrans from announced.
> The meter itself is very nice AND EASY to use and it hase a HUGE!
> display and VERY cool and usable design.
> You have 3 MODI which can be changed by using the Enter-Key:
> SPECTRUM ANALYSIS
> EXPOSURE LIMIT CALCULATION
> AUDIO ANALYSIS
> So its 3! meters in one.
> A very cool function is the ADVANCED HOLD mode. Just press the
> "Point-Key" and SPECTRAN records all datas as long as you want.
Thats
> how you get a perfect "24h-diagram". Its reayl cool! Then you can
> switch to EXPOSURE LIMIT CALCULATION and see how high this values
are
> in PERCANTAGE! to different exposure limits (all Salzburger Levels
and
> even the international ICNIRP level is calculated!). Those
> calculations are made as shown in the law so they are perfect. NO
> other meter can do this so far (only some NARDA for 10000 US$ up)
>
> But the COOLEST funktion of SPECTRAN is that it shows the FREQUENCY
of
> ALL signals and that it measures up to 7GHz!!!! So you RELAY know
what
> you are measuring and you CANT beat that device especialy for that
price.
>
> Sorry Charless just forget your rubish and stop yealing at Aaronia!

Hi Jean,

i see you got it ;-)
I think there was a SPECTRAN-Set (EMF & RF / 2 meters in a package))
around 400 Euros so thats almost the price of the old Aaronia
Profi-Set. Propably thats a cool beginner-Set and you can upgrade it
later (you get a 100% chargeback at Aaronia if you order a bigger
version evan after years!)...

--- In [hidden email], "tdx244" <tdx244@y...> wrote:

Hmmm...
Well, you seem to be an expert! We haven't heard from you before?!

As you have tested so many devices, I would be interested in a specific
aspect regarding Spectrans...
I have tested Aaronia HF Detector and found it rather usefull for that
money, but problematic for radar readings particularly. (Radars have their
weird duty cycles). It really does read radars (within the declared
frequency range) but the readings don't match the expected (calculation plus
other instruments), especially at high signal levels.

Have you tested Spectran regarding radars?

I would be interested what Charles particularly finds wrong with Spectrans?
"Charles's" Gigahertz 59b was significantely more reliable than Aaronia HF
Detector,
regarding radar readings, although it is much more expensive.

Anyone else to participate in this discusiion?

Drasko

----- Original Message -----
From: "low_emf" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Friday, July 01, 2005 11:47 AM
Subject: [eSens] Re: That meter is bullshit!

Hello Drasko,

i didnt test a "real" radar so far but SPECTRAN seems to work fine on
simulated signals from my HP sweeper (just tested some typical radar
pulses i know so far). I will fly to NY tody so i will try to make
some tests on the airport and will report, hows that ?

About Charless and Aaronia: It seems to be a quite easy story:
He is sponsored by Gigahertz so he will never! ever say a good word
about Aaronia. About a year ago he WANTED to have lowcost
spectrumanalyser (even if they wouldnt work perfect!) and now that
there is the first on the market even for UNDER 250 Euros!!!- See by
yourself... Realy "strange", isnt it ? Now, thats what a found out so
far even when he always says "no, i am not sponsored" but, hey, its
more then obvios even for a idiot what the FACTS! are saying Mr
Charless...

> Hmmm...
> Well, you seem to be an expert! We haven't heard from you before?!
>
> As you have tested so many devices, I would be interested in a specific
> aspect regarding Spectrans...
> I have tested Aaronia HF Detector and found it rather usefull for that
> money, but problematic for radar readings particularly. (Radars have
their
> weird duty cycles). It really does read radars (within the declared
> frequency range) but the readings don't match the expected
(calculation plus
> other instruments), especially at high signal levels.
>
> Have you tested Spectran regarding radars?
>
> I would be interested what Charles particularly finds wrong with
Spectrans?
> "Charles's" Gigahertz 59b was significantely more reliable than
Aaronia HF
> Detector,
> regarding radar readings, although it is much more expensive.
>
> Anyone else to participate in this discusiion?
>
> Drasko

Hello Drasko,

first of all, nobody is sponsoring me.
Not Priggen, not Gigahertz Solutions, not Endotronic, not Rom technik, no
one.

I have nothing against Aaronia, as long as they behave like normal decent
people.
But decent they are certainly not.

They have a very big mouth, and that is the only thing they have.
They do not post directly, but always under an alias, and they always like
to suggest, that they are customers, but they are not.

It is quite normal, that with the development of new apparatus, things do
not work out as one would wish.
Last year Aaronia blasted in newsgroups that starting the 1th of November
2004, all other manufacturers of broadband meters all over the world would
be out of business with the promised new Spectrans.
In stead of bloating that statement, they should heve been quiet till the
meters were a reality.
On the 1th of November 2004, nothing happened.

Now, since June 2005, a few BETA meters are surfacing.
The development is NOT finished yet.
That is normal, but the dumb bloating goes on.

Also in the past, Aaronia has been into court many times in order to take
back quite a number of claims.
And that is what I have against Aaronia.
Their claims are too farfetched.

Perhaps someday the Spectran can be a good meter, but not today.
Aaronia does know that of course, otherway they would have sent me an
evaluation sample, which they did not.
And I have heard, that the momentary versions do lack too many things.
That is not astonishing for a new product, but not a reason for bloating.

I am against every company that bloats claims, they cannot fullfil.
Why can't Aaronia shut up till the development is finished, and everybody
can make his own judgement?

The largest german supplier of Aaronia meters has stopped selling and
advertising them.
They have given a statement because the Spectrans are of bad quality and
still in development phase.

Aaronia claims the Spectran is the best in the world.
It simply is not today.
Far from that.
Perhaps, if they work hard enough, it may be operational on the 1th November
2005.
But they should than work very hard.

The statement: *About a year ago he WANTED to have lowcost
spectrumanalyser (even if they wouldnt work perfect!)* is not true.
I have been invited for only seeing a first cardboard prototype of a
Spectran, but after Aaronia's bloating about that in newsgroups I
retalliated and stated that I only want to review such a thing, when it
commercially available for everybody.
It is of no use mentioning it when it is not available the first year.
And I have been proven right about that.

The Multidetektor is horrible.
The HF Detektor I was really awfull.
The HF Detektor II Profi was good at that moment (2 years ago), but nowadays
an antiquity.
The Spectrans? Wait and see.

In my opinion, the Spectran is too complicated for the amateur.
Professionals keep using their approved and normed installations.
And for building biologists, the Spectrans are way too slow.

There are momentarily other developments coming, which are very promishing.

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton Antivirus




----- Original Message -----
From: "low_emf" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 13:59
Subject: [eSens] Radar measurement

I support this dialog about the meters because I want to have as much
information as possible about the products. I encourage the exchange of
information. Let's do it without name calling or slandering. That
brings down the quality of the esens list.
And, because I could be the idiot you're talking about. I don't know
much about these products and would like some neutral leadership from
the more experienced technologically trained members of this group.
thank you,
Andrew
On Jul 2, 2005, at 7:59 AM, low_emf wrote:

> its
> more then obvios even for a idiot

As you can see Charless allways writes the same bullshit (just "copy
and paste" in ALL chatrooms) about Aaronia. A posted my own
measurements compared with realy professional equipment from Anritsu
and R&S before. This shows that the SPECTRAN even jet are working
perfect and are even better then stated from Aaronia (they say +/-3dB
i measure +/1 to +/- 1.5dB).
And they are MUCH better then ALL broadbandmeters so far (AND even
much cheaper as most of them), and as i stated before, i know ALL of
those meter too.

I think no more words are needet to show whats going on about
Charless, always the same blablabla...

--- In [hidden email], "charles" <charles@m...> wrote:
> Hello Drasko,
>
> first of all, nobody is sponsoring me.
> Not Priggen, not Gigahertz Solutions, not Endotronic, not Rom
technik, no
> one.
>
> I have nothing against Aaronia, as long as they behave like normal
decent
> people.
> But decent they are certainly not.
>
> They have a very big mouth, and that is the only thing they have.
> They do not post directly, but always under an alias, and they
always like
> to suggest, that they are customers, but they are not.
>
> It is quite normal, that with the development of new apparatus,
things do
> not work out as one would wish.
> Last year Aaronia blasted in newsgroups that starting the 1th of
November
> 2004, all other manufacturers of broadband meters all over the world
would
> be out of business with the promised new Spectrans.
> In stead of bloating that statement, they should heve been quiet
till the
> meters were a reality.
> On the 1th of November 2004, nothing happened.
>
> Now, since June 2005, a few BETA meters are surfacing.
> The development is NOT finished yet.
> That is normal, but the dumb bloating goes on.
>
> Also in the past, Aaronia has been into court many times in order to
take
> back quite a number of claims.
> And that is what I have against Aaronia.
> Their claims are too farfetched.
>
> Perhaps someday the Spectran can be a good meter, but not today.
> Aaronia does know that of course, otherway they would have sent me an
> evaluation sample, which they did not.
> And I have heard, that the momentary versions do lack too many things.
> That is not astonishing for a new product, but not a reason for
bloating.
>
> I am against every company that bloats claims, they cannot fullfil.
> Why can't Aaronia shut up till the development is finished, and
everybody November nowadays
> an antiquity.
> The Spectrans? Wait and see.
>
> In my opinion, the Spectran is too complicated for the amateur.
> Professionals keep using their approved and normed installations.
> And for building biologists, the Spectrans are way too slow.
>
> There are momentarily other developments coming, which are very
promishing. specific
> > > aspect regarding Spectrans...
> > > I have tested Aaronia HF Detector and found it rather usefull
for that

Back to TECHNICAL basics then, thank you! Just set up your next
question and i will try to give you a "neutral" and technical feedback
only ;-)

P.S. I didnt ment you to be a idiot (but i think you know that) ;-)

--- In [hidden email], Andrew McAfee <amcafeerr@n...> wrote:

I dare to write under my own name, plus my website.
So everybody knows who I am.

Just a simple question.
Who is behind [hidden email] ??
Are you so afraid to give your own name?
Do you have so much to hide?

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton Antivirus


----- Original Message -----
From: "low_emf" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 17:20
Subject: [eSens] Andrew, you are 100% right

And that is what I call bloating.

Your Spectran can't even properly measure a simple wireless DECT phone.
Other meters can.
And quite well.

And that is what most people want to know.
How reliable is a certain meter.
What can it measure.
To what extend.

Which meter is suitable for my own needs.
And that may differ from person to person.

A lot of people are not technical.
Most people want something to *point and read!*

That is easier said than done.
(Some meters must be grounded; others not.
Some meters must be held with the arm outstretched; others must be hold
close to the body.
Some antennas must be compensated; others not)
For the amateur there is a lot of technical mumbo-jumbo involved.

And I am sure, that low_emf does not know the brand new prototype meter, I
am holding here.
And the other one which is coming next week.

This is not a contest.
Just want to show that bragging and bloating is useless.

Greetings,
Charles Claessens
member Verband Baubiologie
www.milieuziektes.nl
www.milieuziektes.be
www.hetbitje.nl
checked by Norton Antivirus


----- Original Message -----
From: "low_emf" <[hidden email]>
To: <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 17:14
Subject: [eSens] See Drako, thats what i mean...

CONTENTS DELETED

> I encourage the exchange of
> information. Let's do it without name calling or slandering.

Yes indeed. Perhaps "low_emf" doesn't realize that his
credibility suffers with the continued name calling
and swearing?

In any case, this sort of behavior is unacceptable
to me, so "low_emf" will be moderated from this point
forward.

So if you wish to see any of your posts make it to this
list "low_emf", you will have to do it without name
calling, slander, or swearing. Otherwise, they will be
deleted.

Marc (list moderator)

It does not effect my sinuses, but it does my lungs.

----- Original Message -----
From: "low_emf" <low_emf@yahoo.com>
To: <eSens@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 4:14 PM
Subject: [eSens] See Drako, thats what i mean...


> As you can see Charless allways writes the same bullshit (just "copy
> and paste" in ALL chatrooms) about Aaronia. A posted my own
> measurements compared with realy professional equipment from Anritsu
> and R&S before. This shows that the SPECTRAN even jet are working
> perfect and are even better then stated from Aaronia (they say +/-3dB
> i measure +/1 to +/- 1.5dB).
> And they are MUCH better then ALL broadbandmeters so far (AND even
> much cheaper as most of them), and as i stated before, i know ALL of
> those meter too.
>
> I think no more words are needet to show whats going on about
> Charless, always the same blablabla...
>
> --- In eSens@yahoogroups.com, "charles" <charles@m...> wrote:
> > Hello Drasko,
> >
> > first of all, nobody is sponsoring me.
> > Not Priggen, not Gigahertz Solutions, not Endotronic, not Rom
> technik, no
> > one.
> >
> > I have nothing against Aaronia, as long as they behave like normal
> decent
> > people.
> > But decent they are certainly not.
> >
> > They have a very big mouth, and that is the only thing they have.
> > They do not post directly, but always under an alias, and they
> always like
> > to suggest, that they are customers, but they are not.
> >
> > It is quite normal, that with the development of new apparatus,
> things do
> > not work out as one would wish.
> > Last year Aaronia blasted in newsgroups that starting the 1th of
> November
> > 2004, all other manufacturers of broadband meters all over the world
> would
> > be out of business with the promised new Spectrans.
> > In stead of bloating that statement, they should heve been quiet
> till the
> > meters were a reality.
> > On the 1th of November 2004, nothing happened.
> >
> > Now, since June 2005, a few BETA meters are surfacing.
> > The development is NOT finished yet.
> > That is normal, but the dumb bloating goes on.
> >
> > Also in the past, Aaronia has been into court many times in order to
> take
> > back quite a number of claims.
> > And that is what I have against Aaronia.
> > Their claims are too farfetched.
> >
> > Perhaps someday the Spectran can be a good meter, but not today.
> > Aaronia does know that of course, otherway they would have sent me an
> > evaluation sample, which they did not.
> > And I have heard, that the momentary versions do lack too many things.
> > That is not astonishing for a new product, but not a reason for
> bloating.
> >
> > I am against every company that bloats claims, they cannot fullfil.
> > Why can't Aaronia shut up till the development is finished, and
> everybody
> > can make his own judgement?
> >
> > The largest german supplier of Aaronia meters has stopped selling and
> > advertising them.
> > They have given a statement because the Spectrans are of bad quality and
> > still in development phase.
> >
> > Aaronia claims the Spectran is the best in the world.
> > It simply is not today.
> > Far from that.
> > Perhaps, if they work hard enough, it may be operational on the 1th
> November
> > 2005.
> > But they should than work very hard.
> >
> > The statement: *About a year ago he WANTED to have lowcost
> > spectrumanalyser (even if they wouldnt work perfect!)* is not true.
> > I have been invited for only seeing a first cardboard prototype of a
> > Spectran, but after Aaronia's bloating about that in newsgroups I
> > retalliated and stated that I only want to review such a thing, when it
> > commercially available for everybody.
> > It is of no use mentioning it when it is not available the first year.
> > And I have been proven right about that.
> >
> > The Multidetektor is horrible.
> > The HF Detektor I was really awfull.
> > The HF Detektor II Profi was good at that moment (2 years ago), but
> nowadays
> > an antiquity.
> > The Spectrans? Wait and see.
> >
> > In my opinion, the Spectran is too complicated for the amateur.
> > Professionals keep using their approved and normed installations.
> > And for building biologists, the Spectrans are way too slow.
> >
> > There are momentarily other developments coming, which are very
> promishing.
> >
> > Greetings,
> > Charles Claessens
> > member Verband Baubiologie
> > www.milieuziektes.nl
> > www.milieuziektes.be
> > www.hetbitje.nl
> > checked by Norton Antivirus
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "low_emf" <low_emf@y...>
> > To: <eSens@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, July 02, 2005 13:59
> > Subject: [eSens] Radar measurement
> >
> >
> > > Hello Drasko,
> > >
> > > i didnt test a "real" radar so far but SPECTRAN seems to work fine on
> > > simulated signals from my HP sweeper (just tested some typical radar
> > > pulses i know so far). I will fly to NY tody so i will try to make
> > > some tests on the airport and will report, hows that ?
> > >
> > > About Charless and Aaronia: It seems to be a quite easy story:
> > > He is sponsored by Gigahertz so he will never! ever say a good word
> > > about Aaronia. About a year ago he WANTED to have lowcost
> > > spectrumanalyser (even if they wouldnt work perfect!) and now that
> > > there is the first on the market even for UNDER 250 Euros!!!- See by
> > > yourself... Realy "strange", isnt it ? Now, thats what a found out so
> > > far even when he always says "no, i am not sponsored" but, hey, its
> > > more then obvios even for a idiot what the FACTS! are saying Mr
> > > Charless...
> > >
> > > > Hmmm...
> > > > Well, you seem to be an expert! We haven't heard from you before?!
> > > >
> > > > As you have tested so many devices, I would be interested in a
> specific
> > > > aspect regarding Spectrans...
> > > > I have tested Aaronia HF Detector and found it rather usefull
> for that
> > > > money, but problematic for radar readings particularly. (Radars have
> > > their
> > > > weird duty cycles). It really does read radars (within the declared
> > > > frequency range) but the readings don't match the expected
> > > (calculation plus
> > > > other instruments), especially at high signal levels.
> > > >
> > > > Have you tested Spectran regarding radars?
> > > >
> > > > I would be interested what Charles particularly finds wrong with
> > > Spectrans?
> > > > "Charles's" Gigahertz 59b was significantely more reliable than
> > > Aaronia HF
> > > > Detector,
> > > > regarding radar readings, although it is much more expensive.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone else to participate in this discusiion?
> > > >
> > > > Drasko
> > >
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>




------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

a.. Visit your group "eSens<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eSens>" on the web.

b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
eSens-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<mailto:eSens-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>

c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]