Letter Sent to Roger Tolces
Subject: Formal Challenge Regarding Scientifically Invalid Claims and Technically Inadequate RF Sweeps
Dear Mr. Tolces,
I am writing to issue a formal technical challenge to the methods, claims, and reports you publish and promote under Advanced Electronic Security Company. As a licensed TSCM professional and contributor to the CyberTorture Debunked Archive, I have carefully reviewed the RF analysis practices you publicly describe, as well as content from your website and client reports.
What I found raises serious technical, ethical, and legal concerns. Your methodologies appear incapable of detecting covert or state-level threats, and your sweeping claims are unaccompanied by the scientific rigor needed to back them.
🚨 1. Your Analyzer Configuration Cannot Detect Covert Signals
From multiple report screenshots and public examples, your spectrum analyzer settings are not adequate for detecting low-power threats. Specifically:
| Parameter | Setting | Why This Fails for Covert Detection |
|---|---|---|
| Noise Floor | ~–90 dBm | Signals of interest often occur at –130 dBm or lower. Your device is blind to them. |
| Resolution Bandwidth | 10 MHz | This is far too wide. Narrowband pulses, implants, and spread-spectrum bursts disappear completely. |
| Sweep Span | 5 GHz | Overly wide span hides signal detail; resolution is lost. |
| Sweep Speed | 50 ms | Too fast to integrate short bursts or ultra-low duty cycle threats. |
| Reference Level | –30 dBm | Suppresses weak signals into the floor visually. |
If your clients believe you’re detecting implants, beam-formed RF, or V2K emissions using this setup, they are being misled. No signal classification or verification can happen with that configuration.
📋 2. Request for Technical Evidence and Clarification
If you believe your scans are valid, I am formally requesting the following from your next report or any previous documented case:
🔹 A. IQ Data
Raw I/Q capture of any signal you claimed was harassment, implant telemetry, or weaponized.
- What equipment was used to record it?
- How was the IQ file stored and timestamped?
- Is it available in SigMF or SDR-compatible format?
🔹 B. Waterfall Plot
Time-frequency view of the signal in question, clearly showing:
- Persistence or repeatability
- Burst timing or structure
- Signal-to-noise ratio
🔹 C. Signal Classification Method
For every “signal of interest” you identified:
- What modulation type was detected?
- What bandwidth and center frequency?
- Was there directionality? (e.g., via Yagi, near-field, or phased array)
- Was the signal demodulated or matched to known protocol behavior?
🔹 D. Physical Evidence
Have you ever recovered a device or implant that corresponds to a detected signal?
- Where is the chain-of-custody documentation?
- Has any device been analyzed by a third-party electronics lab?
- Was RF output matched to the captured signal?
Without this, your reports and claims lack the foundation to be presented in court, referenced by engineers, or relied on by victims seeking real help.
⚠️ 3. Pseudoscientific Claims on Your Website
Your website includes dozens of speculative and dangerous claims presented as fact, including:
- Radar guns capable of causing instant brain damage
- EMP weapons and “microwave rifles” made from spare parts
- Electrostatic shield systems that supposedly deflect directed energy
- Bio-implants that run on bodily fluids and broadcast voice signals
None of these claims are supported by peer-reviewed publications, electromagnetic field modeling, or independent replication. You are mixing sci-fi with fear-based marketing and selling it to vulnerable individuals.
⚖️ 4. Professional Responsibility and Legal Exposure
Selling sweep services or devices based on scientifically unsupported claims may expose you to:
- Consumer fraud complaints
- Lawsuits under deceptive trade practice statutes
- Regulatory complaints to the FCC or state investigators
You have a duty to either show evidence or stop making claims that harm victims and discredit legitimate investigators.
🧠 5. Public Challenge
If you believe your work is scientifically valid, I invite you to:
- Join a recorded, neutral, expert-moderated technical call
- Present your findings, IQ data, and signal classifications
- Explain your equipment and methodology live
- Submit a report for peer review by licensed RF analysts
Sincerely,
#######
Licensed TSCM Professional | CyberTorture Contributor
“Pseudoscience isn’t harmless when it’s sold to trauma victims.”