Arthur Black's Jan. 22 editorial "Paranoid? Who's paranoid?" claims that the paranoid community hasn't responded to the MIT paper impugning the effectiveness of Deflector Beanie technology. This is false. The MIT paper was debunked last November, as can be read here on my website.
In short, the MIT experiment was unsuitable for the phenomenon in question and had procedural irregularities that would have disqualified it from a reputable peer-reviewed journal.
As the published author of one of the seminal works on personal mind-control protection using aluminum foil, I find it odd that I was not contacted by Mr. Black for a quote. Regardless, simple research on his part would have revealed the response to the MIT paper (it's the very first hit on Google for "'deflector beanie' MIT").
That Mr. Black either chose not to do any research or to ignore the existence of a response brings into question his competency as a journalist. I would expect such behavior from a writer for the Chilliwack Times, but I am disheartened to see it in someone from the Chilliwack Progress. I hope this is not indicative of a lowering of journalistic standards in our great Republic of Cascadia.