12 thoughts on “Voice Post: Lovelock Redux – Sneaking In For Gas”

    1. How is it naughty? Every engine that pulls in produces 50,000 volt sparks out of the distributor. A cellular phone won’t produce diddly. In fact, static electricity is generally not strong enough to spark off fumes, let alone that teeny .6 watt transmitter in your phone.

      The laws were cumulinated by morons with a severe stupidity problem (ignorance, but refusing to talk to or believe those people who had the knowledge)


      1. Mythbusters are fun, but they aren’t scientific evidence – they do not follow either the Scientific Method nor good testing procedures as followed by engineers. I wouldn’t stake my life on their claims. I don’t happen to know whether the motivation behind banning cellphones at gas stations was scientifically sound either, but I’d rather err on the side of caution.

        1. http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/weekly/aa062399.htm

          http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/05/14/tech/main617547.shtml (No proof here the phone caused the fire)

          The FCC says:
          The rumors and reports may be fueled by warnings posted at gas stations or included in wireless phone owners’ manuals suggesting that wireless phones should not be used around fuel vapors.
          There is no evidence that these reports are true.

          Navy Safety:
          http://www.safetycenter.navy.mil/ARTICLES/cellphone.htm (more or less says, “well, it’s unclear” and “it’s unlikely”)

  1. Haha, these voice posts are awesome. I think the best posts are when you have no real reason to post (ie information about what’s happening) but just call because you want to talk to someone. Good fun.

Comments are closed.