Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Global 5G WIFI Will Be INESCAPABLE - What You NEED To Know!
Press For Truth
Published on Jul 1, 2018
"The entire world will soon be tapped into the global 5G wireless system whether we like it or not!
The powers that ought not to be are currently putting together a global wifi system that will be impossible to escape but the good news is there are still ways that one can protect themselves and mitigate any adverse health effects they may experience and/or the surveillance they will most certainly be under. In This video Dan Dicks of Press For Truth speaks with John Sneisen of World Alternative Media about this soon to be implemented system and more importantly what we can do about it to protect ourselves moving forward."
To learn more from John visit:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCLd..._z2IQZSmD8Iy0Q
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Anyone ever researched the inverse square law and it's relation to frequency?
802.11b was the "og" wifi.. used 2.4ghz... what is the range of 2.4ghz vs 5ghz... is this significant.. what does the inverse square law mean? what is radiation?
if these questions are not immediately and easily answered; do you feel that you know enough about this topic to make a judgement on it?
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Quote:
Posted by
TargeT
I would have thought that Friis Transmission Equation, to which I'm guessing you are referring, would be more useful in a case where the receiving antenna was significantly smaller than one wavelength in size. In such cases, there will be a strong relationship between the wavelength and the power received.
However, in the case of 5G, we're dealing with sub-centimeter wavelengths, being received by a body that is approx 2 meters long and 1/4 to 1/2 meter wide (sometimes wider). In such cases, the gain of the receiving antenna (our body) is approximately 1 ... no gain ... all sub-centimeter radio emissions are received from all directions about equally, regardless of wavelength, for all wavelengths substantially shorter than the body's width. In such cases, the total power received by a human body from a 5G cell tower or antenna will depend (almost) only on the power emitted by that antenna towards that body, which will be a function of the antenna's total power and its gain in the direction of the body.
The wavelength dependent term on which Friis equation focuses is not significant in this case for determining the total power received by the body.
Instead what will matter will be the reactivity or sensitivity of various atomic, chemical, molecular, genetic, and cellular processes to specific frequencies, and whether those processes are close enough to the body's surface (skin) to receive sufficient power, at a particular frequency, to adversely (or beneficially, as the case be) effect that process to a significant degree.
One frequency (wavelength) might be quite harmless (or useless), even in large doses, whereas some other, near by, frequency might be quite noticeable, for better or worse. The relation of frequency to degree and quality of effect will be highly non-monotonic, unlike the calculations resulting from applications of Friis Transmission Equation.
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
I sense some substantial, deliberately misleading, propaganda going on here.
However, I am the designated tin foil hat conspiracy theory nutcase (rather like being a designated driver) for my family, so one might expect that I would sense such <grin>.
Be that as it may, I observe over the years that both my warnings of impending doom, and my wondrous forecasts of bounty, fall increasingly on deaf ears. I am the false prophet, of both heaven and hell.
Thus we who would alert our fellow humans of impending danger, or of promises of bounty, are being setup, once again, with these 5G warnings.
Ordinary people will see more antenna going up in their neighborhood, if they even notice that much, as the new antenna styles will blend in well.
They will then notice better reception (faster video and such) on their phone, and no particular immediate ill effects. If most people can ignore the connection between vaccines and damage to the guts and brains of our children, then surely they will have no difficulty ignoring the usually more indirect connections between cell phone radiation and the various physical harms it causes.
Those of us who cried wolf will once again be discredited. Our warnings of vaccines, tyranny, false flags, fluoride, glyphosate, pollution, economic collapse, etc, etc, will also go increasingly unheard, even when those warnings were spot on and easily verified.
Meanwhile, the global surveillance and control grid, the "Internet of Things" and of 5G antennae, in the sky and on the ground, will deeply integrate human civilization into a Brave New World.
Both our (we, the self assigned watchdogs) warnings and our analyses will continue to go mostly unheeded, as they have for millenia.
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Quote:
Posted by
Hervé
How Tavistock got a stranglehold on the US and using it as their play/test ground:
DIPLOMACY BY DECEPTION
by Dr. J Coleman (1993)
Reese discovered that with social engineering comes the greater need for information that can be rapidly collected and correlated.
Quote:
Posted by
Paul
Meanwhile, the global surveillance and control grid, the "Internet of Things" and of 5G antennae, in the sky and on the ground, will deeply integrate human civilization into a Brave New World.
I sense a strong connection, between the above quoted snippets fromThe global surveillance network will build upon both the Internet of Things and upon the 5G network.
It will also build upon the next generation "Bitcoin" cryptocurrency networks that I've been following in other posts, such as in my Bitcoin, the war on cash, Clif High, and the NSA's long range plans thread.
It will also build upon the massively parallel computer centers, such as at NSA's Utah Data Center, to which I might have contributed, unknowingly, in a small way, with my "big iron" contributions to the Linux kernel. The extensive satellite communications and surveillance grid, that is part of the Secret Space Program that Catherine Austin Fitts and others speak of, is another vital component of this global infrastructure.
This technology will provide the global social engineering project with the pervasive surveillance and control grid, of unparalleled capacity and capability, for which our overlords lust.
1 Attachment(s)
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
There was a discussion about the surveillance of the new LED lights that are being installed locally. One science expert explained the light spectrum effect of the blue lights, appearing white, diminish melatonin and adversely affects the pineal gland, in addition to the surveillance, not just by pictures but recording sound.
These all seem connected to fusion center data collection: smart meters, 5G, streetlights, etc.
Attachment 38448
The Shadowy Side of LED Streetlights
Sarah Holder
Mar 8, 2018
https://www.citylab.com/equity/2018/...ng-odd/554696/
As LED streetlights proliferate, they come with the promise of more efficient smart city service. But they also raise new opportunities for surveillance.
Blinking down at passersby in traffic intersections and lining dark alleys, sleek, energy-efficient LED streetlights have begun to replace old-fashioned, glitchy ones. It’s part of a wave of smart city initiatives sweeping the country: Already, LEDs are strung above parts of places like Baltimore, San Diego, Kansas City and Bethlehem. Now, Portland, Maine, is in a race with Schenectady and several other cities to become the first to convert their entire light grid.
But as more communities adopt government-funded, eco-friendly LED lights as an environmental measure, some worry that the eyes on these bulbs may be a bit too literal. As they illuminate the streets, they could be watching—and recording—what happens below with attached cameras, microphones, and other devices.
The biggest appeal of LEDs is their efficiency and cost-saving potential: They aren’t designed specifically to surveil. But the bulbs’ complex wiring and strategic positioning make recording devices an easy addition. When LEDs started brightening the halls of Newark Liberty International Airport in 2014, and malls across the country soon after, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and community members were unsettled to discover that hidden inside some of them were cameras. Others, microphones.
“I think rather than call them smart bulbs in smart cities I’d call them surveillance bulbs in surveillance cities,” said Chad Marlow, advocacy and policy council for the ACLU. “That’s more accurate.”
In Portland, 6,100 LED streetlights will spray across the city over the next two years, reducing light pollution and potentially saving the city $1 million in annual maintenance fees the local utility once charged to fix up old light fixtures. Touting Portland’s plans, city manager Jon Jennings calls the city “very progressive” on climate change.
Jennings says the city provided opportunities for community input before the LED conversion plan commenced, and that the city is not at all interested in outfitting the smart lights with cameras right now. But in Portland, as in many cities across the U.S., there are no laws in place ensuring that residents have to be alerted if (or when) they do add cameras or other surveilling equipment. The city council would have to approve the line item in the budget to fund them, but their installation will never put up to a vote.
The ACLU has launched a national campaign called Community Control Over Police Surveillance (CCOPS), encouraging cities to build public oversight into decisions about smart city technologies with surveillance components. Laws have been passed in Seattle, Nashville, Somerville, and Santa Clara County, according to the ACLU’s website, and are under consideration in other cities like New York, St. Louis, and Oakland. Bills were introduced in Maine’s last two legislative sessions that would have applied the CCOPS model to every state agency, but they were denied both times. No municipal-level laws have been passed in the rest of the state.
Language in Portland’s proposal leaves the door open for future installation of “environmental sensors, [and] video cameras installed in strategic locations.” Scarborough, a town to the south of Portland, is installing LEDs too, and Scarborough Public Works Director Mike Shaw told the Portland Press Herald that theirs may also include “other technology such as cameras.”
Other cities have been less oblique about their intentions. In the upstate New York community of Schenectady, mayor Gary McCarthy is still in the process of lobbying the city council to free up funds to convert all 5,000 streetlights to LEDs. First, LEDs will be implanted with optical sensors that could pick up infrared signals, get traffic counts in intersections, and take pictures of the street surfaces to more effectively plan pavement maintenance.
But McCarthy says eventually, he envisions more sophisticated recorders lining the streets. The city already has a comprehensive wireless camera system, used specifically for police surveillance; and cameras in front of city hall. Adding more video streams would provide valuable business and traffic intel, McCarthy says. “The actual surveillance, if you’re really deploying it correctly, is a very small component of the potential application,” he said. “The pavement management, sequencing and traffic control devices are more practical.”
Portland and Schenectady’s conversion projects come on the heels of several other cities’ switches to greener lighting technology. Many LED grids are outfitted with smart sensors that can track noise modulations, traffic patterns, and environmental pollutants. “The lights might be a ubiquitous presence,” but each city, and each neighborhood, can add and subtract certain extras, said Jim Schriver, director of innovation at TEN Connected, the smart city technology company spearheading Portland and Scarborough’s conversions.
"We’re not looking for data collection on our residents or city—we’re looking to do things that make sense to move a city forward in the 21st century.”
As the menu of data collection options for cities increases, so too does the trepidation from privacy advocates that’s been building for decades. “It’s not that there’s anything wrong with LED lights,” said Fred H. Cate, Senior Fellow at the Center for Applied Cybersecurity at Indiana University. “It’s that they’re a signpost on the way to more particularized, more granular sensors.”
Portland’s Jennings argues that smart city technologies will vastly improve urban quality of life, if only worriers stopped worrying, and intervening. The lights’ intricate digital coding means they will soon fit into Portland’s larger smart city plan—to equip the growing downtown and beyond with responsive traffic signals, universally available wireless internet, high speed fiber, and mapping infrastructure for autonomous vehicles.
As for the ACLU’s resistance, “that tends to be somewhat of a hysterical reaction to trying to move the city forward by the use of innovative technology,” he said. “We’re not looking for data collection on our residents or city—we’re looking to do things that make sense to move a city forward in the 21st century.”
Traffic flow data can be crucial for increasing Department of Transportation efficiency, for example. But, the ACLU notes, indiscriminate AV streams also capture conversations, habits, and interactions. Two friends sitting in a park, discussing their plans to attend a Black Lives Matter rally later that day. A woman leaving a mosque, joking with her husband. In the wrong hands, those private moments can be used for future persecution. And eventually, with city approval, police might want to look at footage to track crimes like speeding or illegally parked cars; to stop street violence; and to identify suspects.
That might start happening soon. By May, San Diego, California, will convert 14,000 of its 40,000 streetlights to LEDs, and expand its network test of 50 smart lights to 3,200. San Diego’s deputy chief operating officer told IEEE Spectrum that the city’s new sensor-enabled lights could eventually be hooked up to the city’s ShotSpotter network, helping to identify the source of gunfire and “automatically alert police to dangerous situations” by picking up audio from the ground. The sounds of violence are defined as breaking glass and shots fired, but it’s not hard to imagine that raised voices could be linked to real people, and draw similar scrutiny.
“We think streetlights are the place to do this because they have power, ubiquity, and the perfect elevation to capture a lot of important data,” Austin Ashe, smart city technology company Current’s general manager for intelligent cities, told IEEE Spectrum.
“I would say that installing these light bulbs makes your city a less safe city, especially if you happen to be poor or a person of color.”
The operation of these automated data collectors can’t be divorced from the human decision-making patterns that govern all police actions, though: There are choices driving where to start deploying cameras; whether to equip them with audio or video collection, or both; which to maintain—and, most significantly, which to check. Civil liberties advocates fear that the personal biases that seep—insidiously or innocently—into police enforcement will grow more heads, and be allowed to flourish in new venues that never used to exist.
“If it’s anything like surveillance technologies we see around the country, the bulbs in communities of color or lower income communities or that happen to be on a corner where a Mosque is located—those are going to be the bulbs subject to maximum monitoring,” said Marlow. “Whereas those in the white upper class segment of town aren’t going to be watched.”
These use cases may sound far-fetched in a place like Portland, which is largely liberal and relatively small. But already in Oakland, a sanctuary city, the seemingly routine data collection of license plate identification information ended up aiding ICE in their hunt for undocumented immigrants. The data passed from the city’s transportation department into a Fusion center, and from there into ICE’s hands.
“[Portland] should not call itself a safe city. Safe from whom?” said Marlow. “I would say that installing these light bulbs makes your city a less safe city, especially if you happen to be poor or a person of color.”
Civil liberties advocates fear that the personal biases that seep, insidiously or innocently, into police enforcement will grow more heads, and be allowed to flourish in new venues that never used to exist.
Outfitting a city with unregulated, government-controlled “dragnet surveillance,” as Marlow calls it, opens up more privacy issues than some of the cameras that already watch shopping malls and gas stations: Police need to obtain a warrant or permission to get ahold of the privately owned tapes, but not necessarily the city-owned ones. Any such project “should at a minimum [be] subject to public hearings and strict regulations from outside auditors,” said Marlow.
Before CCOPS legislation is passed in more places, and absent a U.S. privacy commissioner, it is up to city planners, managers, and mayors to formulate responsive public policy surrounding what kinds of data will be collected, how long information will be retained, and who can gain access to the information once it exists.
Schenectady Mayor McCarthy wants to allow businesses that might want to locate in the area to access information on traffic patterns and daily counts, to set up a public webcam showing pedestrian traffic through a bustling farmer’s market as a marketing tool, and to allow local news stations and papers to view past recordings through public records requests. But he says he will work to develop clear policies surrounding retention and access before cameras are installed.
Portland is working with TEN Connected to anonymize the data LEDs will collect, says Schiver. “It’s very disappointing to have entities call into question or create conspiracy theories,” said Jennings. “We’re not looking to spy on our people, but some people are never going to believe that.”
Portland’s LED conversion plan is too far gone for the ACLU to legally intervene. They can only step in to defend people if data is used to violate their civil liberties. Marlow says the ACLU is not suspicious of the city leaders’ intentions, but believes that the cost-benefit analysis they’re making is misguided. “There are certainly other methods for dealing with urban issues like traffic and trash collection that do not pose a significant of a threat to civil rights and civil liberties,” he said.
It’s part of a broader consciousness shift city-dwellers are starting to have to grapple with. “We’ve built up most of our privacy laws around reasonable expectation of privacy: That if you do it in public you have no reasonable expectation of privacy,” said Cate. Of course, we often don’t act like we believe that to be true: We have personal conversations in parks; on the street; and in cars, windows down.
“This bright line rule—if it’s in public we can do anything—it both doesn’t make sense, and we’re starting to see it crumble,” said Cate.
************************************
MM
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
.
I have a very different take on the dangers of 5G.
I'm not so much worried about the higher frequencies. Rather I am worried about the longer term monopolization of the "air waves", in this case of ordinary access to the Internet.
The "Internet" has become, like the printing presses of prior centuries, or the radio/tv air waves of the last century, a "new frontier", into which ordinary people could move in and make a little space for themselves. Eventually however most of the "land" is claimed by profit making corporations, or reserved and kept off limit by their hand maiden, big government.
When I was a child, back in the 1950's, a couple of my neighbors (geeky old men) had ham radios. If phones (land lines those days) and roads failed for some locality, say due to storm or war, then ham radio operators around the world provided a reliable alternative backup. Also if the big newspapers and news agencies (such as AP and UPI) weren't letting out all the news in some troubled region, the ham radio operators provided a more honest, and difficult to suppress, way to get the news out.
Nowadays, most of us no longer know any ham radio operators amongst our local neighbors, unless we're one ourselves. Like horse shoes, ham radios have not vanished, but they have become increasingly marginalized
My sense is that, like the geeky old ham radio operator neighbors of my childhood, I am becoming the geeky old wired Internet user on a hand built and configured PC of my time.
I doubt that my (still in the future) grandchildren will use PC's running their choice of software, attached to Internet over a landline, though they will still have childhood memories of their grandfather's odd hobby.
My great-grandchildren, still decades away from this life, will live in a world of mobiles and "things" (Internet of Things, IOT, gadgets from light bulbs to surveillance cameras to cars and trains) that are all still connected over the Internet, but that Internet will be almost entirely wireless outside of data and comm centers, and the high speed backbones connecting them.
===
What "5G" is, in my view, is "Wi-Fi for the World."
Right now, in the US (well, in my trailer park in North Texas, at least) mobile data plans are running at about 1/4 to 1/8-th of the speed of land line data plans, and mobile data plans are quite a bit more expensive per byte, with data caps or monthly limits that normally are not seen on land line (such as over the cable TV coax lines) Internet plans.
Moreover, any "smart light bulbs" that I want to use, or other such "Internet of Things" devices (which are being heavily promoted on the end-aisles of my local hardware stores) have to be connected into my Wi-Fi. They cannot just be "on the web", all on their own, connected by the cell network, as cell phone data is too scarce.
Any of us (and there are still many of us) who are running a desktop PC connected to a land line, can, if we have a mind to mess with the software, run our own Web server, and we can certainly, even if we're just an adventurous explorer, wander around all the corners of the Wild Wild Web. Quite a few of us, especially those of us running Linux, still build, and even write, whatever software interests us.
It's difficult for major corporations to reliably extract profits, and for elite bastards to reliably control content, in such a Wild and Woolly Web. If they get to heavy handed with their efforts to surveil and control, such as with Skype, Google, Facebook and Youtube, some portion of users will wander "off the ranch", to greener, or at least freer, pastures. See for example the recent ruckus over on the YouTube, Facebook, Apple and Spotify all ban Alex Jones & Infowars thread.
===
Mobile and IOT devices are more controlled. Most people only run the apps that their "apps store" (Android or iOS) provides. Fewer people each year "root" their mobile phone to run a non-approved app, as the approved apps in the apps stores are good enough. If it were not for the higher cost and lower speed of mobile data plans, most people would not even connect their mobiles to an existing Wi-Fi network. I'd be quite sure that there are fewer people who can build and run their own choice of software, from the operating system and hardware device driver on up, on mobile phones than there are those who do this on Linux desktop PC's.
===
From what I can gather, from my initial cursory readings of various Qualcomm and Ericcson 5G Rollout explanations, most of the new 5G bandwidth will be at frequencies similar to existing Wi-FI frequenies. For example in the following chart (found on various web pages, such as https://www.techuk.org/insights/opin...map-towards-5g), we see that all but one of the new bands currently being prepared for 5G use are in the range of 700 MHz to 3.6 GHz (the 3rd, green, column).http://thepythoniccow.us/4G_5G_spect...lysysMason.jpg
My quite ordinary Wi-Fi router provides frequencies of 2.4 GHz and 5.0 GHz ... quite similar frequencies, so I presume quite similar biological effects.
Only one new significantly higher 5G frequency, at 26 GHz, is currently being prepared for roll out. The wavelength of a 26 GHz radio signal is approximately 1 cm (just under a half inch), whereas the wavelength of a 2.4 GHz radio signal is about 10 times longer (as 2.4 is about 1/10-th of 26).
Frequencies such as 26 GHz are quickly getting up into the range where they are useless for mobile data networks. See for example this article, which goes into some length explaining why 60 GHz signals are useless for mobile data networks (too directional and too poor penetration.) A 26 GHz signal, about half of that 60 GHz, is still well along that path towards being of limited usefulness in neighborhood Wi-Fi networks.
So I would expect that the other bands being prepared for the initial 5G rollout, in the range of 700 MHz to 3.6 GHz, will be the most heavily used, and most useful, bands, for this "Wi-Fi for the World" wireless buildup.
===
About the only intense, short term, biological effects of radio emissions in this Wi-Fi range of 2.4 GHz and 5.0 GHz are heating. These are the frequencies that are also used in microwave ovens and are on the lower end (lower frequency, longer wave length) of the frequencies used in military and police Active Denial Systems that can cause the skin to become almost instantly painfully hot.
There are longer term biological effects from such frequencies, such as the increased brain tumor rates noticed, over spans of years, in heavier cell phone users.
But I would not expect most people to suffer seriously adverse effects from "neighborhood Wi-Fi's" (such as 5G rollouts in the 700 MHz to 3.6 GHz range), so long as:- they keep cell phones away from the heads of children (with thinner skulls), and
- they avoid prolonged usage of cell phones up to their own heads.
Hazardous effects fall off rapidly with distance, so a Wi-Fi router a few feet away, or on a pole outside one's house, is far less harmful than a cell phone up against one's head.
Just as now with Wi-Fi routers, some people will suffer adverse effects from "neighborhood Wi-Fi" (aka 5G). Unfortunately, it will become increasingly difficult for those people to avoid these emissions. If I were in that predicament, I would look to refine my diet, and perhaps other life style changes, to strengthen my tolerance, and I would try to make local changes to my living arrangements to minimize my exposure.
===
But my key point in this post is that such harmful impacts on a modest subset of the population are probably NOT the primary motivation for the aggressive rollout of 5G that is upon us. Those impacts are just collateral damage.
The primary motivation, I figure, is to drive most users of (and IOT devices on) the Internet into a more easily controlled environment of mobile and IOT devices running approved apps.
As with printing presses and radio communications, the transition from the difficult Wild Wild West phase, to the deeply controlled and controlling phase, will take a few decades to realize its full potential.
But 5G, Wi-Fi for the World, is a key step in that process.
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
5G from Space
http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/5g-from-space/
"On Valentine’s Day, 2018, Elon Musk announced an audacious plan to launch 12,000 low-orbit satellites “to beam an ultrafast, lag-free Internet connection” to every square inch of the earth. They will contain PHASED ARRAY ANTENNAS and will operate in the MILLIMETER WAVE SPECTRUM. In other words, 5G FROM SPACE. The first two test satellites were launched on a Falcon 9 rocket one week later. News reports say “The initial satellites in the network are expected to come online next year.”
Each satellite will be the size of a mini-refrigerator and weigh about 400 kg. 4,425 satellites will be at an altitude of about 700 miles and 7,518 satellites will be at an altitude of only 210 miles.
To give you an idea of just how radical of an assault this will be, as of September 2017 there were a grand total of 1,738 operating satellites in orbit. About 1,000 of them were in low orbit (less than 1,000 miles above the earth). None of them were lower than 250 miles in altitude. Only 208 low orbit satellites were used for communication. Only 125 (Iridium and Globalstar) were for cell phone service. None of them provided high speed data. None of them were phased arrays.
The earth has never experienced anything like this. Even if Musk’s Falcon Heavy rocket could launch 100 of these satellites at a time, which is likely, that still means 120 rocket launches. If he wants to get them all up there in a year’s time, that’s one launch every three days. And there are other companies that want to launch thousands of satellites each to do the same thing. OneWeb plans to launch the first ten of its planned 4,560 satellites in May 2018. Boeing plans a fleet of 2,956 satellites.
The earth’s protective ozone layer is still being depleted, scientists have just discovered, even though everyone thought the problem was solved by the Montreal Protocol. With so many rockets blasting holes in the atmosphere these days, that could be the reason. But nobody is talking about it.
The most current satellite database, kept by the Union of Concerned Scientists, is here: https://s3.amazonaws.com/ucs-documen..._9-1-2017.xlsx
Musk’s scheme alone could cause catastrophic ozone loss, and it could also destroy all life on the planet. Musk’s company, SpaceX, is calling this project “Starlink.”
GUARDS (Global Union Against Radiation Deployment from Space (http://stopglobalwifi.org) is actively opposing this project. We need people with ideas, connections, and skills. Contact me if you want to help."
I think of Elon Musk as something of a hero, given his warnings about AI, his Tesla technology, etc. but this article has given me second thoughts as I am a canary-in-the-coalmine EMF sensitive, even though I have always kept a very clean diet, spend time in Nature and do many of the "right things" to protect myself. More and more satellites being launched into our atmosphere, which is already in deep trouble, doesn't seem like a good idea either. I'm becoming more of a Luddite every day. Are we really better off with all this technology? I don't think so.
More here from an activist group in Santa Fe:
5G from Space; Santa Fe lawsuit; Urgent needs...
http://www.hopedance.org/home/energy...t-urgent-needs
Created: Saturday, 24 February 2018 14:10
by Arthur Firstenberg
"Dear Friends,
The Santa Fe Alliance for Public Health and Safety filed a lawsuit against the City of Santa Fe in federal court on January 11, 2018. The Alliance includes doctors, health care practitioners, psychotherapists, artists, teachers, a Health Department official, a city planner, a world class athlete and others who have lost jobs and homes to cell towers, or who have patients who have lost jobs and homes to cell towers. We are asking the court to declare Santa Fe's 5G ordinance unconstitutional, and to rule that neither the State of New Mexico nor the U.S. government may prohibit a city from protecting its citizens. As far as I know, this is the only litigation of its kind in the United States at the present time.
Our litigation is assuming greater importance by the day, because the assaults on our planet are rapidly escalating, and we haven't much time to stop them."
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Max Igan: Gatekeeping the Smart Grid
Max Igan - Surviving the Matrix - Episode 345 - American Voice Radio, August 17th, 2018 -
"'The illusion of freedom will continue for as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion. At the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will take down the scenery, move the tables and chairs out of the way, then they will pull back the curtains and you will see the brick wall at the back of the theater.' - Frank Zappa
'Who controls the past controls the future, who controls the present controls the past.' - George Orwell
'When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty and there is nothing to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader.' - Plato
'I would rather have questions that can't be answered than answers that can't be questioned.' - Richard Feynman
'I have lived on the lip of insanity, wanting to know reasons, knocking on a door. It opens. I've been knocking from the inside.' - Rumi
Universal Law/sovereign law trumps all others.
1. No man or woman, in or out of government shall initiate force, threat of force or fraud against my life and property and, any and all contracts Im a party to not giving full disclosure to me whether signed by me or not are void at my discretion.
2. I may use force in self-defense against anyone that violates Law
3. There shall be no exceptions to Law 1 and 2.
TURN OFF YOUR TELEVISION!
THROW AWAY YOUR SMART PHONE!"
I think Igan makes some very good points, though as he says himself, no one is all-knowing.
The widespread insistence on the correctness of one's views is part of the problem, contributing to the huge amount of division that is being fostered by the psychopaths in control who think they are profiting from it.
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Good site here with lots of info and updates re 5G, EMFs, etc.
EMR Health Alliance of BC
(Based in British Columbia, though they are covering the problems globally)
http://emrabc.ca/?p=7867
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
I was just wondering whether ExoMatrix can speak to the issue of 5G waves not being able to penetrate wood, as asserted by TargeT in another thread (who does have some experience in these matters), thus the health risks of 5G are over-hyped?
And Exomatrix, if you do take the time to read this during your web travels, please do respond with actual text that you type, as opposed to another video cross-link, or a copy & paste article.
I'm sure you understand that given Project Avalon is a discussion forum, I am trying to invite you into a back-and-forth discussion as a forum member-- not a debate or argument. Thanks in advance.
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Quote:
Posted by
Joe from the Carolinas
the issue of 5G waves not being able to penetrate wood
5G covers several frequency bands that are between 0.6 GHz and 86 GHz, give or take.
By way of comparison, most Wi-Fi is 2.4 or 5.0 GHz, in the middle of the various bands used (or planned to be used) by 5G.
The lower frequencies in these ranges go through wood, walls and skin easily.
The higher ones don't, being stopped by increasingly thin materials.
The initial frequencies that are now being rolled out for 5G are mostly frequencies near the existing 2.4 and 5.0 GHz bands used by Wi-Fi. So I think of 5G as being "Wi-Fi for the planet", and I suspect that the same people who are sensitive to Wi-Fi will be sensitive to these initial 5G frequencies.
I find it easier to think of this in terms of wavelengths, not frequencies. They are directly (inversely) correlated: higher frequency radio waves have shorter wavelengths. A 600 MHz (0.6 GHz) signal has a wavelength of 0.5 meters (50 cm), and an 86 GHz signal has a wavelength of 0.0035 meters (0.35 cm).
Radio waves more easily go through or around objects that are significantly smaller than their wavelengths, but interact more (absorb or reflect) with objects that are similar to or larger than their wavelengths. However, what looks like "an object" of similar size to one frequency, such a few tens of GHz and my body, might look like a large number of smaller objects (mostly water molecules) to a higher frequency. So it is not easy to anticipate which wavelengths will have which noticeable effects on which aspects of a complex electrically active entity such as a human body.
The higher 5G frequencies, between 24 and 86 GHz, are not included in the initial 5G roll out. Given how easily these higher frequencies are blocked by ordinary construction materials (e.g. wooden walls), I doubt that these higher frequencies would be used much when antennas are outdoors, expected to reach people both outdoors and indoors.
Just moving one's cell phone to the other side of one's body might be enough to block some of these higher frequencies, so I honestly don't know why such frequencies are even included in the specification except either to allow the (false) promise of even higher Internet bandwidth, or as a covert way of weaponizing every light pole in the nation. Perhaps I'm missing something regarding these higher 5G frequencies ... Perhaps there are some line-of-sight uses, between stationary Internet aware items on the "Internet of Things" (IOT) that can use these higher frequencies.
P.S. -- On looking at Ericsson's latest Mobility Report, for June 2018, on their 5G rollout, it does seem that IOT device connectivity is a key factor, and I can imagine that these higher frequencies could be useful for interior connectivity between say your light bulb and your refrigerator. The IOT devices inside your home could all network together, over these higher 5G frequencies, and only one of those devices would need to be strong enough, and low enough frequency, to reach the 5G cell network in the outside world. No longer would you have to provide your own Wi-Fi access to your IOT devices. Oh Joy!
Personally I worry more about the weaponization of the impact of these technologies on the higher levels of human activity, such as surveilling and controlling all the communications and activities of ourselves and all our Internet connected devices, rather than I worry about the lower level health effects on our physical bodies. Both are of course a problem, but most people, most of the time, will be able to remain healthy enough to tolerate the low level physical effects, just as most people tolerate Wi-Fi these days. The global surveillance and manipulation of human and Internet attached device activity is more pernicious, in my view.
P.S. -- Meanwhile, in addition to the 5G rollout on the surface of our planet, they're planning on putting over 10,000 satellites in low earth orbit to connect this all up. See for example Why we’ll soon have 10 times more satellites in low earth orbit. We currently have about 1000 satellites operational in low earth orbit; with this 5G rollout, we'll have over 10,000 additional satellites in low earth orbit. Looking at Ericsson's latest Mobility Report that I linked above, I see that they expect to have over 8 Billion broadband data subscriptions (more than one per human on the planet) active, within five years. This really is "Wi-Fi for the World, all our people and all our "smart" things."
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Quote:
Posted by
Paul
The higher 5G frequencies, between 24 and 86 GHz, are not included in the initial 5G roll out. Given how easily these higher frequencies are blocked by ordinary construction materials (e.g. wooden walls), I doubt that these higher frequencies would be used much when antennas are outdoors, expected to reach people both outdoors and indoors.
Just moving one's cell phone to the other side of one's body might be enough to block some of these higher frequencies, so I honestly don't know why such frequencies are even included in the specification except either to allow the (false) promise of even higher Internet bandwidth, or as a covert way of weaponizing every light pole in the nation. Perhaps I'm missing something regarding these higher 5G frequencies ... Perhaps there are some line-of-sight uses, between stationary Internet aware items on the "Internet of Things" (IOT) that can use these higher frequencies.
This Qualcomm podcast, Episode 22: 5G, you had me at beamforming, explains to me what I was missing regarding these higher 5G frequencies, also known as 5G New Radio (5G NR).
You may have noticed that home routers have starting sprouting lots of antennas in recent years, such as this Asus RT-AC5300 model:http://thepythoniccow.us/asus-rt-ac5300-11.jpg
One of the things that all these antennas are used for is to direct the beam. By transmitting the same signal out of several antennas at the same time, but slightly out of phase, they can get the signal to be stronger in one direction, where the phases all line up, and weaker in another direction, where the phases cancel.
This same "beam forming" is coming to a cell phone near you, in the next few years. Instead of one antenna, your cell phone will be increasingly likely to have several antennas, such as in the following proposal (from https://www.researchgate.net/figure/...fig5_315882425). Such phones, along with 5G cell network connected IOT's and all the cell towers and infrastructure, would have both these multiple antennas, as well as the smarts to dynamically reshape the beams and frequencies, as you walk or drive around, in order to bounce beams around corners, reflecting off objects, and reconfiguring the network of which devices are connected to which, in order to get the data where it is wanted.http://thepythoniccow.us/Proposed-DP...-back-side.jpg
Yes - that's a proposed cell phone antenna layout, with 8 antennas!
The rich connectivity of over 10,000 low earth orbit satellites, the massive and world-wide rollout of 5G infrastructure, the extensive world wide array of IOT's in every car, home and whatever, and the smart phones receiving broadband data access in almost every human's hands ... will bath us in a surveillance, communication and control grid, like fish are bathed in water.
What could possibly go wrong?
(This is why, in my estimation, that the "blockchain" technology is being rolled out. Blockchain is far more than digital bitcoin currency, just as the cell phone network is far more than just high tech voice phone calls. All our transactions, activity, property and other long term records will be digitized in ways that can no longer by controlled by separate stovepipe corporations and governments, each of them hoarding and secretly (often not so secretly) acquiring its own stash of valuable information, about its customers.)
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
CELL PHONES IN SCHOOLS? FRANCE SAYS NO, SAN FRANCISCO EDUCATORS URGE CAUTION
MONDAY, AUGUST 20, 2018
By Olga Naidenko Ph.D., Senior Science Advisor for Children's Environmental Health
https://www.ewg.org/childrenshealth/...3#.W4Q2ouhKgdX
This is encouraging news!
"As the school year begins, the movement to exercise caution in students’ use of cell phones and other wireless devices is gaining international momentum.
The French Parliament voted last month to ban cell phones in nursery, elementary and middle schools. More than 5,000 miles away, San Francisco educators are urging the school district to make sure that students and teachers know about the state of California’s guidelines for safer use of cell phones.
The French restriction on wireless devices in schools was a campaign promise of President Emmanuel Macron, who was swept into the office with a wave of popular support in 2017. It is primarily concerned with battling students’ “screen addiction.”
Meanwhile, the United Educators of San Francisco, which represents more than 6,000 employees of the San Francisco Unified School District, passed a resolution calling for safer wireless technology standards for all schools in the city. Three years ago, a small district in Ashland, Mass., instituted district-wide “best practices for mobile devices,” but the San Francisco resolution is believed to be the first such action by a large U.S. school district.
“Peer-reviewed research has found that radiofrequency radiations emitted by cell phones and Wi-Fi routers and other wireless devices can impact the brain and the reproductive system,” said Sarahn Aminoff, a teacher in the San Francisco district. “We are concerned about the health of the city’s educators and about the students whose growing bodies may be more susceptible to the effects of wireless radiation.”
The latest research from the federal National Toxicology Program has linked long-term exposure to cellphone radiation with brain and heart cancer. And a recent study from Switzerland linked cellphone use with decreased memory performance in teenagers, joining a growing number of reports finding that wireless devices can affect brain function. Scientists, physicians and educators have called for caution given that most Americans, including children, use electronic devices like cellphones, tablets and smartwatches, for hours every day in a pattern that resembles addictive behavior.
Since 2016, the Maryland State Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council has recommended decreasing school wireless exposures “as much as feasibly practical, without negatively impacting education.” The council’s report included suggestions on ways to reduce exposure, such as sitting away from Wi-Fi routers, turning off Wi-Fi on smartphones and tablets when not surfing the web, and switching tablets to airplane mode to play games or watch videos stored on the device
The San Francisco resolution draws upon the California Department of Public Health cell phone guidelines released in December. When the state guidelines were made public, California Department of Public Health Director Karen Smith said:
Simple steps, such as not keeping your phone in your pocket and moving it away from your bed at night, can help reduce exposure for both children and adults… Children's brains develop through the teenage years and may be more affected by cell phone use. Parents should consider reducing the time their children use cell phones and encourage them to turn the devices off at night.
Barbara Sattler, a professor in the University of San Francisco School of Nursing and Health Professions, expressed support for the resolution, stating, “The health science regarding cellular technologies suggests the need for caution. A very first step would be to apply the California State Health Department Cell Phone Guidelines, particularly in settings where there may be children or workers whose exposures last their whole work day.”
Other jurisdictions in the United States have explored policy options for limiting cell phone use in schools. For example, for 10 years the New York City Department of Education maintained a ban on cell phones, a restriction that was lifted in 2015, in response to concerns from parents who wanted to be able to reach their children in school in case of an emergency. Yet, research conducted in Great Britain by the London School of Economics supports the notion that limiting cell phone use in schools decreases student distraction and improves academic results.
EWG scientists are continuing to study the issue of wireless radiation exposure closely, scrutinizing all new research on wireless safety, including the research on different RF-emitting devices and networks such as 5G. Now that electronic devices have become an essential tool in everyday life, it is important for parents and educators to teach children to use these devices safely and respect limits on their use."
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
This is a video well worth watching. Techtopia 1 is a wake up call, Techtopia 2 is scarier. It seems the real war is technology vs spirit. If spirits lose we become robots.
"Bill Gates" city and other weird stuff...
https://hooktube.com/G2f7KNunTJQ
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Quote:
Posted by
James Newell
It seems the real war is technology vs spirit. If spirits lose we become robots.
Technology vs spirit....
The Devil's Advocate thinks my own spirit could just as easily be some kind of advanced technology which I am calling my "spirit". I mean - it's not magic, so it must be something. I'm just running out of words.
Sitting here typing this with my fingers, using only the powers of my mind.... ;-)
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
Well my friend, you don't have a spirit YOU are a spirit.
And it appears electronics/frequencies can affect us.
Re: Stop 5G before it's irreversible!
REALLY GREAT TALK by Senator (may have been posted before, but worth another round)
These hellish technologies are making us spacy, crazy, sick and depressed
