#Login Register


  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
Home 


5G cities getting pummelled
Below Average Genius Show this Post
03-17-2020, 10:27 AM #1
Below Average Genius Incognito
 
Sure there is a flu season every winter.

But look which cities are getting crushed the hardest! 
Wuhan: China;s leader in 5G
Milan: Europe's leader in 5G
Qom: Lots of 5G in the city
Tehra: Lots of 5G in the city
Seattle: Gee, would Microsoft's hometown have much 5G and Wifi! 

South Korea, too. 

Cruise ships with metal walls stuffed with WiFi.
03-19-2020, 04:15 PM #2
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:15,594 Threads:471 Joined:Jun 2012
China's other big cities with big 5G don't have the large virus numbers, so your theory is flawed.
 
Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou for instance already had 5G up and running whereas Wuhan had trials taking place.


Quote:
These radio waves are non-ionising, meaning they don’t damage the DNA inside cells, as X-rays, gamma rays and UV rays are able to do. 5G, although at slightly higher frequencies than previous networks, is still in this radio part of the electromagnetic spectrum.
https://fullfact.org/online/wuhan-5g-coronavirus/
03-19-2020, 11:58 PM #3
nona Incognito
 
5G = Fifth Generation=Radio wave frequencies range anywhere from 3 kilohertz (kHz) up to 300 gigahertz (GHz). Every portion of the spectrum has a range of frequencies, called a [i]band[/i], that go by a specific name (from lifewire)
All radio waves travel at the speed of light, but not all waves react with the environment in the same way or behave the same as other waves. It's the wavelength of a particular frequency used by a 5G tower that directly impacts the speed and distance of its transmissions.
A service provider might use higher 5G frequencies in areas that demand more data, like in a popular city 
  • T-Mobile: T-Mobile uses use low-band spectrum (600 MHz) as well as mid-band spectrum.

  • Verizon: Verizon's 5G Ultra Wideband network uses millimeter waves, specifically 28 GHz and 39 GHz.

  • AT&T: AT&T's deployment strategy is to use millimeter wave spectrum for dense areas and mid and low-spectrum for rural and suburban locations.

  • Sprint: Sprint claims to have more spectrum than any other carrier in the US, with three spectrum bands: 800 MHz, 1.9 GHz and 2.5 GHz.

  • As long as they have the law saying that the skewed studies are valid and there is no apparent harm to humans  the insulation of more devices will continue.
slurpdata Show this Post
03-20-2020, 06:13 AM #4
slurpdata Incognito
 
welp,  time for people to up a game or enter,,   perpetrated ?  possibility,  is that.  harnessing. of the ingenuity. at the free expance of others.   top down fabian.  trickle tentacles.  along undescribed.   vision of 'their ' progress.   i suppose

civil dissobediance.  plus i guess anti strange wifi tech. ?  im no expert. obviously. why bother,  unless ,  something serial and concious was in tune.  arguably never going to be a finished story
deep ocean submersible Show this Post
03-20-2020, 06:16 AM #5
deep ocean submersible Incognito
 
(Yesterday, 04:15 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  China's other big cities with big 5G don't have the large virus numbers, so your theory is flawed.
 
Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou for instance already had 5G up and running whereas Wuhan had trials taking place.


Quote:These radio waves are non-ionising, meaning they don’t damage the DNA inside cells, as X-rays, gamma rays and UV rays are able to do. 5G, although at slightly higher frequencies than previous networks, is still in this radio part of the electromagnetic spectrum.
https://fullfact.org/online/wuhan-5g-coronavirus/

(6 hours ago)nona Wrote:  5G = Fifth Generation=Radio wave frequencies range anywhere from 3 kilohertz (kHz) up to 300 gigahertz (GHz). Every portion of the spectrum has a range of frequencies, called a [i]band[/i], that go by a specific name (from lifewire)
All radio waves travel at the speed of light, but not all waves react with the environment in the same way or behave the same as other waves. It's the wavelength of a particular frequency used by a 5G tower that directly impacts the speed and distance of its transmissions.
A service provider might use higher 5G frequencies in areas that demand more data, like in a popular city 
  • T-Mobile: T-Mobile uses use low-band spectrum (600 MHz) as well as mid-band spectrum.

  • Verizon: Verizon's 5G Ultra Wideband network uses millimeter waves, specifically 28 GHz and 39 GHz.

  • AT&T: AT&T's deployment strategy is to use millimeter wave spectrum for dense areas and mid and low-spectrum for rural and suburban locations.

  • Sprint: Sprint claims to have more spectrum than any other carrier in the US, with three spectrum bands: 800 MHz, 1.9 GHz and 2.5 GHz.

  • As long as they have the law saying that the skewed studies are valid and there is no apparent harm to humans  the insulation of more devices will continue.
thanks for a semi clarification, is there any theories or ideas, you might reccomend to gain a wrap around of understanding ?
03-20-2020, 06:04 PM #6
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:15,594 Threads:471 Joined:Jun 2012
WHO put it this way:

5G non-ionizing radiation has been classified as a Group 2B carcinogen causing agent and so is caffeine similarly classified in that group. So 'everything causes cancer' is the message, which means nothing.

Then newer studies point to caffeine being a health benefit...turn that around...can non-ionizing radiation also be a health benefit? Who knows?...WHO does not know, really.
Below Average Genius Show this Post
03-22-2020, 01:42 AM #7
Below Average Genius Incognito
 
(03-19-2020, 04:15 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  China's other big cities with big 5G don't have the large virus numbers, so your theory is flawed.
 
Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou for instance already had 5G up and running whereas Wuhan had trials taking place.


Quote:These radio waves are non-ionising, meaning they don’t damage the DNA inside cells, as X-rays, gamma rays and UV rays are able to do. 5G, although at slightly higher frequencies than previous networks, is still in this radio part of the electromagnetic spectrum.
https://fullfact.org/online/wuhan-5g-coronavirus/
If you believe anything the Chinese government tells you about this, that would be an error in judgment. They didn't shut down 11 cities just for funsies. The gov't is also claiming now that they've had no new cases in the last couple of days., just to give you an idea of the incredible lies they are wiling to tell. 

Wuhan is still shut down, for example. So we are supposed to believe there are no cases  but folks are not allowed to go back to work??
Below Average Genius Show this Post
03-22-2020, 01:47 AM #8
Below Average Genius Incognito
 
(03-19-2020, 04:15 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  China's other big cities with big 5G don't have the large virus numbers, so your theory is flawed.
 
Beijing, Shanghai and Guangzhou for instance already had 5G up and running whereas Wuhan had trials taking place.


Quote:These radio waves are non-ionising, meaning they don’t damage the DNA inside cells, as X-rays, gamma rays and UV rays are able to do. 5G, although at slightly higher frequencies than previous networks, is still in this radio part of the electromagnetic spectrum.
https://fullfact.org/online/wuhan-5g-coronavirus/
I failed to address the quote you supplied. It's an engineering wild guess hypothesis that 5G doesn't damage DNA based on the fact that 5G waves are 'non-ionizing." But the hypothesis get destroyed when biologists test the engineer's wishful thinking. Research has shown that 5G does indeed destroy DNA.
Below Average Genius Show this Post
03-22-2020, 01:53 AM #9
Below Average Genius Incognito
 
(03-20-2020, 06:04 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  WHO put it this way:

5G non-ionizing radiation has been classified as a Group 2B carcinogen causing agent and so is caffeine similarly classified in that group. So 'everything causes cancer' is the message, which means nothing.

Then newer studies point to caffeine being a health benefit...turn that around...can non-ionizing radiation also be a health benefit? Who knows?...WHO does not know, really.
The classification you refer to is from a political body, not from a scientific one. Furthermore, cancer should be the least of anyone's concerns about 5G. Because 5G disrupts electrolyte function, it can kill a healthy person long before any cancer would be big enough to be noticed. There have been multiple examples of this happening in 30 seconds in videos that escaped from Wuhan.
03-24-2020, 05:53 PM #10
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:15,594 Threads:471 Joined:Jun 2012
(03-22-2020, 12:53 AM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(03-20-2020, 05:04 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  WHO put it this way:

5G non-ionizing radiation has been classified as a Group 2B carcinogen causing agent and so is caffeine similarly classified in that group. So 'everything causes cancer' is the message, which means nothing.

Then newer studies point to caffeine being a health benefit...turn that around...can non-ionizing radiation also be a health benefit? Who knows?...WHO does not know, really.
The classification you refer to is from a political body, not from a scientific one. Furthermore, cancer should be the least of anyone's concerns about 5G. Because 5G disrupts electrolyte function, it can kill a healthy person long before any cancer would be big enough to be noticed. There have been multiple examples of this happening in 30 seconds in videos that escaped from Wuhan.
You never post scientific sources, why is that? Show me electrolyte function disruption!
Below Average Genius Show this Post
03-25-2020, 02:34 AM #11
Below Average Genius Incognito
 
(8 hours ago)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
(03-22-2020, 01:53 AM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(03-20-2020, 06:04 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  WHO put it this way:

5G non-ionizing radiation has been classified as a Group 2B carcinogen causing agent and so is caffeine similarly classified in that group. So 'everything causes cancer' is the message, which means nothing.

Then newer studies point to caffeine being a health benefit...turn that around...can non-ionizing radiation also be a health benefit? Who knows?...WHO does not know, really.
The classification you refer to is from a political body, not from a scientific one. Furthermore, cancer should be the least of anyone's concerns about 5G. Because 5G disrupts electrolyte function, it can kill a healthy person long before any cancer would be big enough to be noticed. There have been multiple examples of this happening in 30 seconds in videos that escaped from Wuhan.
You never post scientific sources, why is that? Show me electrolyte function disruption!
I almost never do that because it takes time to relook it up, and I'm working on other things - including my invention that electronically prevents the flu. You can research Prof. Martin Pall and VGCC if you're interested in pursuing it yourself. 

It's probably worth noting that citing WHO is also not a scientific source either. They don't do peer review research.
03-28-2020, 07:34 PM #12
UniqueStranger Art in my heart
Posts:15,594 Threads:471 Joined:Jun 2012
(03-25-2020, 01:34 AM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(03-24-2020, 04:53 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  
(03-22-2020, 12:53 AM)Below Average Genius Wrote:  
(03-20-2020, 05:04 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:  WHO put it this way:

5G non-ionizing radiation has been classified as a Group 2B carcinogen causing agent and so is caffeine similarly classified in that group. So 'everything causes cancer' is the message, which means nothing.

Then newer studies point to caffeine being a health benefit...turn that around...can non-ionizing radiation also be a health benefit? Who knows?...WHO does not know, really.
The classification you refer to is from a political body, not from a scientific one. Furthermore, cancer should be the least of anyone's concerns about 5G. Because 5G disrupts electrolyte function, it can kill a healthy person long before any cancer would be big enough to be noticed. There have been multiple examples of this happening in 30 seconds in videos that escaped from Wuhan.
You never post scientific sources, why is that? Show me electrolyte function disruption!
I almost never do that because it takes time to relook it up, and I'm working on other things - including my invention that electronically prevents the flu. You can research Prof. Martin Pall and VGCC if you're interested in pursuing it yourself. 

It's probably worth noting that citing WHO is also not a scientific source either. They don't do peer review research.

But their peers follow the same rules and methodology don't they? So what good is a peer review then?



Home 





Copyright © 2011 - 2020 kritterbox.com