(07-30-2019, 08:10 PM)Below Average Genius Wrote:(07-30-2019, 07:44 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:(07-30-2019, 07:05 PM)Below Average Genius Wrote:(07-30-2019, 05:59 PM)UniqueStranger Wrote:(07-26-2019, 09:43 PM)Below Average Genius Wrote: It can be a deadly mistake to evaluate cell tower effects by relying on engineering assumptions. They assume certain wavelengths are safe and base their erroneous conclusions from there. But their assumptions happen to be wrong based on thousands of biological studies.
BTW, the video makes the same grotesque error a lot of other defenders of 5G make by confusing ionizing radiation (waves) with ions (particles) beginning at 4:47 in the video.
I'm tired of having to repeat the same critical corrections of your sources. Please search where your sources find an error in what I have said before repeating the same errors from different sources. It's still wrong regardless of how many clueless people make the same mistakes.
Also this thread started out as a thread regarding the effects of 5G on our weather. Can we keep it there?
Actually, you can't prove effects on our weather just as we can't prove anything else regarding 5G. Just saying.
If we lived in a world that denied the basics of physical science, as you are doing, what I've said would continue to be true anyway. Your position is akin to saying one can't prove turning lights switches on proves light switches turn on lights.
In a similar fashion, I have used my invention on a hundred or more cumulus and cumulonimbus clouds. In every single case without exception, the cloud is rapidly and dramatically altered, just like the light switch turns on the light every time. One time at the beach, the machine fell apart. This was during Hurricane Barry's activity in New Orleans, and we were getting the tail end of it. With 17 miles of beach in front and to the sides of me, the rain was reduced about 50%. In the time it took for me to pick up the parts, I was hit by hurricane force winds and nearly blown over while being pelted by a near deluge.
The invention is based on the same physical laws being utilized, and the results are 100%. Clouds that were relatively stationary and growing get turned into mere wisps or become small fractions of their former selves depending on how much time I spend and the thickness of the clouds.
The fact that the machine is so effective is also a proof of the ions and EMFs from 5G being the reason for the 100-fold increase in cloud formations. It is the only additional source of any magnitude for ions and EMFs unless you prefer to believe fairies have picked this particular time to make all those clouds.
But you have no proof of that scenario, do you! Meanwhile the telecom companies do in fact test their 5G systems and roll it out - unless you want to disbelieve them as well.
The problem is you are not performing tests in a controlled environment, therefore you can't make those claims.
You're completely missing the point because you're erroneously believing every process needs to have further study.
The science is confirmed regarding every aspect.
1. Clouds are made from cosmic rays, which are electromagnetic fields, striking ions.
2. 5G adds electromagnetic waves and ions to the air
3. Ions and electromagnetic waves respond to each other, not just some of the time but all the time and every time!
To require a controlled study about these already well known facts is like asking for a study to discover whether a hot stove can burn your finger. There is no study that proves hot stoves burn fingers, so I guess it doesn't happen! Or does it happen anyway?
Sometimes you can get away with touching a hot stove - but there is no time when ions and EMF's don't react.
Meanwhile, people are drowning in their cars, plus farms, businesses and homes are being destroyed because those three listed things are happening due to the addition of more ions and EMFs with 5G as the source. By the time your superfluous were set up and conducted, it's possible that most of the world's population would be starving or starved to death due to a lack of food.
I believe that for proof the experiment/test needs to be repeated by others with objectivity as well as in a controlled environment. That is just how I roll.