Simon Parkes - Genuine Or Bogus?

[Nick Matkin]

Posted by cuitlahuac (here)

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)

There is no measurement data provided showing the fall in field strength from microwaves or wi-fi when the device is active. What are the maximum and minimum frequencies at which it provides measurable protection? At what distance from the source is it no longer effective? Anyone with scientific training would need to see this data. Look up the EMF shielding data from shielding paint and fabrics. That's how you do it.

He talks of "electric field greater than 50V / meter", but that's strongly suggesting a DC filed, not an alternating AC RF field. The website has plenty of information about the claimed negative effects of EMF, but again, no actual scientific measurements proving the bioshield's effectiveness and I wonder why this is omitted.

Maybe I missed this data. If so, could someone point me to it please? Thanks.

Nick, the theory of operation of the device is that it "armonizes" the electro magnetic frequencies. It is not about blocking Electro Magnatic Frequencies.

What remains to do is duplicate the test results by other laboratories.

Thank you for that. I've never heard of 'armonizing' the electro magnetic frequencies - but I'm open to an explanation if you have one. Google didn't reveal anything. What were the upper and lower EM frequencies that the folks at bioshield detected for this effect? If armonization of electromagnetic frequencies has a real effect on real things - e.g. human cells - then it will have a real effect on other things, e.g. measuring equipment so I'd like to see bioshield's results. Without this data it looks like pseudoscience. Especially when they throw in casual figures like 50V/m to try and lend credibility without explaining how the bioshield actually affects this field strength.

As you can see I'm approaching this from a hard scientific angle, as will others. If there is a genuine effect then applying the scientific method will show this. Hope that happens soon since there are plenty of areas in telecommunications, RF welding, etc. where such a device would have multiple benefits, but its use in these areas is conspicuous by its absence. All bioshiled needs to do is approach some RF/EMF industries to demonstrate the positive effects of armonization. So what's taking them so long? That sort of take-up would support their enterprise.


Is Parkes still involved in the promotion of these bioshield gadgets?

[cuitlahuac]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)
Thank you for that. I've never heard of 'armonizing' the electro magnetic frequencies - but I'm open to an explanation if you have one. Google didn't reveal anything. What were the upper and lower EM frequencies that the folks at bioshield detected for this effect? If armonization of electromagnetic frequencies has a real effect on real things - e.g. human cells - then it will have a real effect on other things, e.g. measuring equipment so I'd like to see bioshield's results. Without this data it looks like pseudoscience. Especially when they throw in casual figures like 50V/m to try and lend credibility without explaining how the bioshield actually affects this field strength.

As you can see I'm approaching this from a hard scientific angle, as will others. If there is a genuine effect then applying the scientific method will show this. Hope that happens soon since there are plenty of areas in telecommunications, RF welding, etc. where such a device would have multiple benefits, but its use in these areas is conspicuous by its absence. All bioshiled needs to do is approach some RF/EMF industries to demonstrate the positive effects of armonization. So what's taking them so long? That sort of take-up would support their enterprise.


Is Parkes still involved in the promotion of these bioshield gadgets?

The explanation for the "armonization" of the electromagnetic frequencies is in this explanation:

How It Works
New Science Concepts About Electric Radiation Effects and Radiation Balance

https://5gbioshield.com/how-it-works/

And the study is here:

Efficacy Study
In response to a recent negative article from the BBC, Clinical Pharmacist Jacques Bauer immediately set up a double blind placebo testing protocol. Over the last few months he has conducted countless double blind placebo study tests with Dr. Natalie Calame at her well known health and prevention centre in Colombier, Switzerland.
Here is an excerpt of the complete pilot study which will be published soon, from which a substantial summary is already available under the following reference:

https://5gbioshield.com/efficacy-pil...hield-usb-key/

EFFICACY PILOT STUDY IN DOUBLE BLIND VS PLACEBO OF THE BIOSHIELD USB KEY

Nick, since you insist in being "scientific", I would want to ask you to define simple fundamental scientific terms like "Energy", "Light", "Time" and "Space". I am asking this becuse it is the real scientists that say that the definition of "Time" and "Space" are to be provided from the field of "Psychology". Needles to say, the field of Psychology has not come forward with a usefull definition of "Time" and "Space". Do you have a usefull definition of your own?

[Ron Mauer Sr]

This can be a scientific approach:

First step is a repeatable experiment.
Second step is development of a theory.

[Nick Matkin]

I don't think 'findings' by the company selling the product ever has much impact in the sceintific community. A bit like a drug company doing its own trials! But those links didn't contain evidence of anything. The double-blind test (if properly carried out) would be a start, but how many patients took part? Were the officials competent to execute the study? For meaningful statistical analysis such a study is usually over 1000 patients. It doesn't say how many, just says 'the patient'.

Quotes from Tesla and JP Morgan might be interesting, but it's not scientific data. Still no data about the maximum and minimum effects of 'armonization of electromagnetic frequencies'. Will it work at 200 kHz or 1.6 MHz or 107 MHz? I want to know. My colleagues want to know!

Science evolves, but as Ron suggests, how about repeatable experiments done by independent test labs?

Therefore here is my Top Tip for bioshiled to help get the product properly assessed. Submit the bioshield device to QinetiQ: https://www.qinetiq.com/en/ I've been there. They know their stuff. Maybe Mr Parkes could give a short presentation - or is he no longer associated with the device?

Like I said, if such a device worked - regardless of how it worked - there would be the health and safety brigade from countless industries beating a path to bioshiled's door...

[cuitlahuac]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)
I don't think 'findings' by the company selling the product ever has much impact in the sceintific community. A bit like a drug company doing its own trials! But those links didn't contain evidence of anything. The double-blind test (if properly carried out) would be a start, but how many patients took part? Were the officials competent to execute the study? For meaningful statistical analysis such a study is usually over 1000 patients. It doesn't say how many, just says 'the patient'.

Quotes from Tesla and JP Morgan might be interesting, but it's not scientific data. Still no data about the maximum and minimum effects of 'armonization of electromagnetic frequencies'. Will it work at 200 kHz or 1.6 MHz or 107 MHz? I want to know. My colleagues want to know!

Science evolves, but as Ron suggests, how about repeatable experiments done by independent test labs?

Therefore here is my Top Tip for bioshiled to help get the product properly assessed. Submit the bioshield device to QinetiQ: https://www.qinetiq.com/en/ I've been there. They know their stuff. Maybe Mr Parkes could give a short presentation - or is he no longer associated with the device?

Like I said, if such a device worked - regardless of how it worked - there would be the health and safety brigade from countless industries beating a path to bioshiled's door...

Nick, Are you going to provide the funds and logistics for a 1000 patients statistical analysis?

Tesla data non scientific? Do you know that there is no "Science" on the surface of this planet, not until workable definitions are provided for fundamental concepts like Matter, Energy, Space and Time? So far you have not provided those definitions. Does QinetiQ have them? Until we have them, the "Scientific facts on Earth" are no more than anecdotal curiosities.

You don't seem to know the history of Science on this planet. Every scientific development has been and will be suppressed and crushed, until Rockefeller and associates, have made enough money from the saling and burning of fosil fuels. And as regards to QinetiQ, you can bet that that brit military contractor gets his developments from dark agreements with non benevolent ETs.

[Bill Ryan]

Mod note from Bill:

Ahem.

The topic of the thread is: Simon Parkes - Genuine or Bogus?

THX!

[cuitlahuac]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Mod note from Bill:

Ahem.

The topic of the thread is: Simon Parkes - Genuine or Bogus?

THX!

Simon's promotion of the Bioshield devices and the study by a laboratory at Switzerland (to handle the BBC's attack) seems to indicate that Simon is more genuine than bogus.

Now, as regards the latest developments, it is hard to tell. His hiring by a US military base in Arizona, where Q is based, and the latest news about the fake government of Biden, Trump promesing to return, the exstence of JFK junior etc... all seem like a "Quantum" hodepodge of entangled timelines.

The key word here being "quantum" in the sense that several realities exist and not exist at the same time.

Has the posibility been considered that Simon Parkes is a "Chosen One" being groomed by ETs to interact and direct ET agendas on the population? That looks like a certainty. That would not make Simon "fake", but just a piece in the game.

The Game Masters (as he has described) are the Mantid ETs.

[Nick Matkin]

Posted by Bill Ryan (here)
Mod note from Bill:

Ahem.

The topic of the thread is: Simon Parkes - Genuine or Bogus?

THX!

OK. I believe Simon Parkes is bogus and makes up all sorts of stories about himself and his contacts. And he is or was peddling expensive bogus woo devices to the genuinely concerned, but who are unfamiliar with how RF energy is radiated or intercepted.

Unsurprisingly a very significant majority of those voting in the poll agree with me.

PS: Being generous, maybe he didn't understand the science either and was hoodwinked into getting involved with the bioshiled 'venture'.

[cuitlahuac]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)
OK. I believe Simon Parkes is bogus and makes up all sorts of stories about himself and his contacts. And he is or was peddling expensive bogus woo devices to the genuinely concerned, but who are unfamiliar with how RF energy is radiated or intercepted.

Unsurprisingly a very significant majority of those voting in the poll agree with me.

PS: Being generous, maybe he didn't understand the science either and was hoodwinked into getting involved with the bioshiled 'venture'.

Nick, so far you have not provided a scientific definition for fundametal concepts like Space and Time. Why are you then claiming to be "scientific"?

[Nick Matkin]

Posted by cuitlahuac (here)

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)
OK. I believe Simon Parkes is bogus and makes up all sorts of stories about himself and his contacts. And he is or was peddling expensive bogus woo devices to the genuinely concerned, but who are unfamiliar with how RF energy is radiated or intercepted.

Unsurprisingly a very significant majority of those voting in the poll agree with me.

PS: Being generous, maybe he didn't understand the science either and was hoodwinked into getting involved with the bioshiled 'venture'.

Nick, so far you have not provided a scientific definition for fundametal concepts like Space and Time. Why are you then claiming to be "scientific"?

Wrong subject man. Wrong subject for this thread. Irrelevant anyway regarding Mr Parkes and all his dodgy malarkey, as readers here can see...

Do you have some role in bioshield or Parkes antics? You appear very defensive.

[cuitlahuac]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)

Wrong subject man. Wrong subject for this thread. Irrelevant anyway regarding Mr Parkes and all his dodgy malarkey, as readers here can see...

Do you have some role in bioshield or Parkes antics? You appear very defensive.

Mick, it is you who insisted on being scientific. So, start by defining Time and Space. Latter we will go for matter and energy. This is necesary to understand the operation of the Bioshield as described by the website. And that will have a bearing on Simon Parkes being fake or not as regards the bioshield.

[TomKat]

Posted by cuitlahuac (here)

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)

Wrong subject man. Wrong subject for this thread. Irrelevant anyway regarding Mr Parkes and all his dodgy malarkey, as readers here can see...

Do you have some role in bioshield or Parkes antics? You appear very defensive.

Mick, it is you who insisted on being scientific. So, start by defining Time and Space. Latter we will go for matter and energy. This is necesary to understand the operation of the Bioshield as described by the website. And that will have a bearing on Simon Parkes being fake or not as regards the bioshield.

Nick, you're going to have to get a Scientology Dictionary to give a satisfying answer here. Hubbard called this universe the Matter Energy Space and Time universe. That's why he's asking you about each of those things. Any answer that doesn't come from Hubbard will not be well received, I fear.

[Ernie Nemeth]

I've read along here.

The question is absolutely valid. It is valid because there is no explanation for time, space, matter, or energy. Not a very comprehensive one, at least.

It is a pertinent consideration when the cult of science goes into preaching mode. The fact that words have been attributed to these concepts merely means we have acknowledged their existence, not that we have mastered the concepts, let alone the context in which they act.

[cuitlahuac]

Posted by TomKat (here)

Nick, you're going to have to get a Scientology Dictionary to give a satisfying answer here. Hubbard called this universe the Matter Energy Space and Time universe. That's why he's asking you about each of those things. Any answer that doesn't come from Hubbard will not be well received, I fear.

That is not totaly correct TomKat. I studied the area of scientific disciplines at school and the teachers were very clear when they said that so far it is not known what light or electricity is. All that they have are theories of what those things do and how do they behave. In the case of Time and Space, the current scientific agreement is that they depend on perception or awareness and have no absolute existence of their own.

Einstein said that Space and Time were relative to the observer. Same thing said Max Plank in the quantum theory. Hubbard provided a definition of Space and Time connected to the observer (spirit) and another person arround the year 2000 (Ouran) perfected that definition.

Now, are you going to be scientific and provide a definition of Time and Space that is acceptable and not a circular definition as the ones provided by "science" at Princeton or UCLA Nick?

So far, Simon Parkes has not be proven to be "bogus" on this bioshield thing.

[greybeard]

The ultimate truth by Ramana Maharshi was "No creation no dissolution" no time for anything to happen.
Idras dream.
No subject no object.
Down to the perception of the seeming individual.
However we must act as though it is real not Maya
Simon Parks I have not studied, like most spiritual teachers he may have some of it right.
Chris

[Nick Matkin]

Bioshield reviews - plot spoiler, they are just very expensive USB sticks!

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/3...s-of-snake-oil
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoe...--6-usb-stick/
https://www.engadget.com/uk-trading-...l?guccounter=1

etc. etc.

Like I said, if these devices had real efficacy (even if it appeared to break the known laws of physics) they'd be used to protect people working in and around radar facilities, the RF heating/welding business, RF communications, radio/TV broadcast stations and medical radiology/X-ray units. The fact that they are not used in these areas speaks volumes.

Why would an honest person promote these devices?

===

Edit: Also found this video. All it needs is Simon Parkes to get someone technical from bioshiled to carefully unpick all the technical content and explain why the guy at EEVBlog is talking BS.

Seems the bioshield "research" papers are were only published in the International Journal of Science and Research. Sound good doesn't it, until you discover it's just a pay to publish outfit.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=aJURlsuui4I

[cuitlahuac]

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)
Bioshield reviews - plot spoiler, they are just very expensive USB sticks!

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/3...s-of-snake-oil
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoe...--6-usb-stick/
https://www.engadget.com/uk-trading-...l?guccounter=1

etc. etc.

Like I said, if these devices had real efficacy (even if it appeared to break the known laws of physics) they'd be used to protect people working in and around radar facilities, the RF heating/welding business, RF communications, radio/TV broadcast stations and medical radiology/X-ray units. The fact that they are not used in these areas speaks volumes.

Why would an honest person promote these devices?

===

Edit: Also found this video. All it needs is Simon Parkes to get someone technical from bioshiled to carefully unpick all the technical content and explain why the guy at EEVBlog is talking BS.

Seems the bioshield "research" papers are were only published in the International Journal of Science and Research. Sound good doesn't it, until you discover it's just a pay to publish outfit.

Nick, the links you post are from may 2020. They all seem to be related to the BBC attack against the 5G Bioshield. But the BBC got sued and stop the attack after the device was tested by a laboratory at Switzerland. I have already posted the link to that in a previous post. Please stup wasting time and resources with this staldated links.

The video you post is from Dave Jones, of EEVblog. He is about electronics engineering and is from July 2020, again a staldated video. Dave Jones needs to review the study of the device from Switzerland too.

Efficacy Study

In response to a recent negative article from the BBC, Clinical Pharmacist Jacques Bauer immediately set up a double blind placebo testing protocol. Over the last few months he has conducted countless double blind placebo study tests with Dr. Natalie Calame at her well known health and prevention centre in Colombier, Switzerland.

Here is an excerpt of the complete pilot study which will be published soon, from which a substantial summary is already available under the following reference:

EFFICACY PILOT STUDY IN DOUBLE BLIND VS PLACEBO OF THE BIOSHIELD USB KEY

https://5gbioshield.com/efficacy-pil...hield-usb-key/

And let me remind you and remaind Dave, that today, scientists at Oxford or at Caltech or UCLA, have not been provided a workable definition of Time, Space, Electricity or Light. Are you going to provide those definitions yourself Nick? It is you who insists on being scientific.

[Nick Matkin]

Posted by cuitlahuac (here)

Posted by Nick Matkin (here)
Bioshield reviews - plot spoiler, they are just very expensive USB sticks!

https://www.extremetech.com/mobile/3...s-of-snake-oil
https://www.forbes.com/sites/johnkoe...--6-usb-stick/
https://www.engadget.com/uk-trading-...l?guccounter=1

etc. etc.

Like I said, if these devices had real efficacy (even if it appeared to break the known laws of physics) they'd be used to protect people working in and around radar facilities, the RF heating/welding business, RF communications, radio/TV broadcast stations and medical radiology/X-ray units. The fact that they are not used in these areas speaks volumes.

Why would an honest person promote these devices?

===

Edit: Also found this video. All it needs is Simon Parkes to get someone technical from bioshiled to carefully unpick all the technical content and explain why the guy at EEVBlog is talking BS.

Seems the bioshield "research" papers are were only published in the International Journal of Science and Research. Sound good doesn't it, until you discover it's just a pay to publish outfit.

Nick, the links you post are from may 2020. They all seem to be related to the BBC attack against the 5G Bioshield. But the BBC got sued and stop the attack after the device was tested by a laboratory at Switzerland. I have already posted the link to that in a previous post. Please stup wasting time and resources with this staldated links.

The video you post is from Dave Jones, of EEVblog. He is about electronics engineering and is from July 2020, again a staldated video. Dave Jones needs to review the study of the device from Switzerland too.

Efficacy Study

In response to a recent negative article from the BBC, Clinical Pharmacist Jacques Bauer immediately set up a double blind placebo testing protocol. Over the last few months he has conducted countless double blind placebo study tests with Dr. Natalie Calame at her well known health and prevention centre in Colombier, Switzerland.

Here is an excerpt of the complete pilot study which will be published soon, from which a substantial summary is already available under the following reference:

EFFICACY PILOT STUDY IN DOUBLE BLIND VS PLACEBO OF THE BIOSHIELD USB KEY

https://5gbioshield.com/efficacy-pil...hield-usb-key/

And let me remind you and remaind Dave, that today, scientists at Oxford or at Caltech or UCLA, have not been provided a workable definition of Time, Space, Electricity or Light. Are you going to provide those definitions yourself Nick? It is you who insists on being scientific.

"Staldated" - did you just make that word up? OK, right...

The BBC didn't co-ordinate the attack on the hoax. It just reflected the hoax that was so widely reported elsewhere, and for good reason. Anyone with a bit of RF knowledge knows it's a hoax, and in case you didn't sit through the entire video I posted, you can see clearly how he deconstructed all bioshield's claims. Sorry, but it's bollox. There is no independent evidence that the bioshield does what it claims. The research papers you posted links to are published in pay-to-publish journals. (Just look at some of the other crazy papers the International Journal of Science and Research published. Unbelievable!)

The last link you posted (https://5gbioshield.com/efficacy-pil...hield-usb-key/) is research published by bioshield them selves. (No mention of sample size - a big red flag!) How is that independent research?

I'll say it yet again. If the device had any effect there are whole branches of industry that would find it immensely useful. But they don't use it. Why is that?

And another thing. You've not even bothered to counter the claim that is widely made that Parkes device really is anything more than a $4 USB stick.

What has a definition of time, space electricity or light got to do with this anyway? We're discussing the fact that there are people selling $4 USB stick for $350 to fearful citizens, claiming qualities it clearly does not have. You seem to have a dog in this race hence you willingness to defend the un-defensible.

I think everyone reading this can see I've made my point. You may have the last word by providing any other 'evidence' you feel you can present...

[Ernie Nemeth]

There was once talk of what was termed 'MU' material. It was supposed to shield from magnetic fields.

It was said that this 'mu' material was installed in many common electronic devices, back when wafer chips were not yet in use.

I heard it was used extensively in tape recorders and playback machines to shield the magnetic tape from errant electrical and magnetic fields due to the proximity of the drive motor.

I even tore apart an old machine to investigate. But all I found was co-laminated piece of iron bent over itself. This did not so much shield against the offending fields as it bent the fields out of the way of the transport and recording mechanisms.

Not heard much about it since. Last I heard it was still being claimed as an exotic combination of elements no longer used in modern electronics. Oh, and although it was used, some claim, not too many knew what they were working with and so the high tech went unnoticed...

[Nick Matkin]

Posted by Ernie Nemeth (here)
There was once talk of what was termed 'MU' material. It was supposed to shield from magnetic fields.

It was said that this 'mu' material was installed in many common electronic devices, back when wafer chips were not yet in use.

I heard it was used extensively in tape recorders and playback machines to shield the magnetic tape from errant electrical and magnetic fields due to the proximity of the drive motor.

I even tore apart an old machine to investigate. But all I found was co-laminated piece of iron bent over itself. This did not so much shield against the offending fields as it bent the fields out of the way of the transport and recording mechanisms.

Not heard much about it since. Last I heard it was still being claimed as an exotic combination of elements no longer used in modern electronics. Oh, and although it was used, some claim, not too many knew what they were working with and so the high tech went unnoticed...

Yes, Mu-metal was used in expensive tape recorders to shield the heads from magnetic fields, usually from the mains transformer in the power supply and as you say the motors.

Mu metal is still used in various electronic devices that need to be screened from magnetic fields. It doesn't look or feel particularly exotic, so you might have had it when you thought it was just iron.

In the 1980s I bought about one square foot to put around the tube of my home made oscilloscope. But with modern electronics, particularly the demise of cathode-ray tube displays and tape recording, its use is much less common.