These are some of the books published by Ralph H. Abraham:
If you disagree with Kaivarainen then fine, but please give me more than just a hand waive.
The third link, International Institute of Biophysics has this to say of themselves:
Coherence in Biology
Biocommunication
Biophotonics
With regard to Art Bell, UFO, Crop Circles and the ilk – that is not my bailiwick, and I have no opinion.
Electromagnetism is an undeniable force and thus, a significant subject in physics. I do not have any personal “tin foil” hat theories but I have noted some allegations concerning brain tumors and cancers:
A neurologist in the United States is suing Motorola, the world's second largest mobile phone manufacturer, because he says that using a cell phone caused a malignant brain tumour.
Dr Christopher Newman, 41, has filed an $800m (£540m) lawsuit against Motorola and eight other telecommunications organisations.
The lawsuit, filed in Baltimore, accuses the companies of failing to tell users that cell phones produce high levels of radio frequency radiation, which can cause cancer and other adverse health effects. The malignant tumour was discovered in March 1998 behind Dr Newman's right ear.
His lawyer said that he used mobile phones at least several times a day between 1992 and 1998 for his work.
Cancer study may help Motorola suit 9/10/02
In what could bolster an $800 million lawsuit against Motorola and major cell phone carriers, a new study found a possible link between older cell phones and brain tumors. Although many studies have found no cancer risk from cell phone use, the research published in the latest European Journal of Cancer Prevention said long-term users of analog phones are at least 30% more likely than nonusers to develop brain tumors.
Newer digital phones emit less radiation than older analog models of the sort studied.
Judge rejects cancer link to mobiles 10/1/02
A US judge has thrown out the evidence filed against several mobile-phone firms in an $800m lawsuit that alleges the devices cause brain tumours.
The move clears the way for the dismissal of the suit against several manufacturers, including cell-phone giant Motorola, which was brought by American neurologist Christopher Newman…
Dr Newman's lawyers presented evidence from a Swedish researcher that suggested brain tumours were more likely to be found on the side of the head where patients held their mobile phone.
They also presented the judge with studies that showed that radiation damaged rats' DNA.
But US District Judge Catherine Blake ruled that the evidence was not generally accepted by scientists and that there was no proven link between cell phones and tumours…
Mr Angelos said he may appeal against the decision….
You're arguing from authority. There's a huge literature on EM effects on living matter. The 16 ton elephant of all this research is that there's no credible mechanism supported by elementary physics that permits chemical alteration of matter by low intensity, low frequency EM fields. The epidemiological studies, as such studies generally do, disagree with each other. But in any case, correlation does not mean causation.
But again, look at what I pointed out. 'Creation science' appears to be correlated with fringe theories about physics, biological effects of EM fields that are rejected by mainstream science, Velikovskianism, etc.. How curious that this amazing edifice of science, that has been so successful in so many areas, has gotten it so badly wrong so often, and these errors have been detected only by a few lone prophetic figures. Doesn't that make you want to step back and say 'hmmmm'?
Reject modern science if you wish. There are lots of perfectly happy, very very busy people out there constructing comprehensive world views out of tinfoil and Tesla's wilder ideas and contrails. Mostly they're harmless, and leave the rest of us alone.
I have a former student, scientifically very bright, technically enormously talented, who was convinced people (more precisely, his enemies, who include various well-known figures in the community and the Democratic National Committee) were beaming messages to him through his clothes and his car radio. He's scientifically literate, highly intelligent, and paranoid schizophrenic. I realized in dealing with him that at some stage you stop arguing what he's saying is impossible, and try to insist that regardless of how it stops him from developing his ideas, it's really important he take his medication. Very few people can live with untreated schizophrenia in the manner of 'A Beautiful Mind'. Unlike Nash, he hasn't realized yet he's nuttier than Chunky-style Skippy.
I just I figured I'd point out the direction you're going, and that it's 90 degrees away from sanity. But carry on. Until you realize for yourself you're taking big steps further and further into lunacy, arguing with you will do no good.