> at first glance, he looks like a reputable researcher.
The man been trying that "cellphones give you cancer" since at least 2009, with his earliest attacks being closer to some new age metaphysical bullshit, and only later he started to pull some scientific argument.
He has no real science background, no medical background, he is a psychologist. His "academic network" includes people going into homeopathy, antivaxing, GMO and something bordering on new age and conspiracy cults.
Why UC Berkley still keeps him around, I have no idea.
The article is a bit suspect, the author seems to have a personal dislike on the guy. The author works for the American Council on Science and Health which is a nonprofit, but I couldn't find the sponsors.
The article uses personal insult (calling the guy a charlatan) but does not say much about why he disagrees with those positions.
I see no companies on the name of Joel M. Moskowitz, no products sold, no industry sponsors.
On the other hand, I see a guy with no industry ties being slandered online by no reason, weird.
I don't know anything about the guy, if anyone can chime in on why his opinion is not trustworthy I would like to learn more.
I'd rater people attack the argument than the person. 'Truther' and 'Denier' are weasel words designed to discredit and idea without addressing the actual argument. It's like saying "How are you?!" with nothing else to back it up.
That article is very unprofessional in tone, and quite thin on content. I'm not on any side, but if that is the best criticism of him then I'm now very wary of this technology.
Does he have industry ties that we should be aware of, reputation issues, conflicts of interest, something else?