5G conspiracy theories and the truth

Hi,

Has this topic been covered in a T.A.M.I forum?
I keep getting stupid shares from friends about this, clearly it is fake news but it is not stopping.
It is clear to me that radiation from a 5G antenna 100 meters away is not harmful in any, based on simple electromagnetic rules from my engineering degree.
I would love to learn more from this educated and experienced group.

Omer

There’s no known risk. No repeatable study has found a risk. There’s no known mechanism for a risk. It’s just bullshit. Not much else to say - science can’t prove a negative, as a rule, but all of the evidence so far points to a negative.

There are plenty of cases of psychosomatic reactions to WiFi and mobile, however turning the radio source off while not telling the sufferer does not make the symptoms go away, so the radio isn’t the problem.

Hi Omer,

Be careful analyzing biological systems with EE fundamentals.

An mechanics engineer may ask how does a fungal spore that weighs a millionth of the ant’s weight can push the ant to the top of a plant but it surely does so through complex biological phenomena.

Another example: Blue light is non ionizing. but it changes your physiology through the endocrine system, changing your hypothalamus signaling patterns to make the difference between your nighttime and daytime physiology and psychology.

Red light is non ionizing but without it most plants will die.

With all of that said, we do have a lot of data now to show that it is relatively safe to use.

B.R.

e@e

To generalize a little bit,

1.Ionization is not required for protein’s conformational changes.

2.conformational changes may initiate complex biological patterns (e.g. vision).

Guy - why are you even considering this stuff?
(I mean this rhetorically, you should know better with all the antenna stuff in the 90s)

Also, to who ever raised this, you are being played: https://shkifut.info/2020/04/5g/

Hi it depends on frequency and tx power.

Question: Do people wonder if the army builds a new radar system?
It is quite the same but less energy.

Cheers

Ludwig

5G has conclusively been found to engender conspiracy theories in previously-normal subjects. Given this, I cannot doubt that 5G may cause a host of other disturbing phenomena , including but not limited to: paranoia, scrofula, bilateral cleft-face, jungle-rot, rickets, red-eye, blackface, gambling addictions, gentrification, and 8-chan trolling.

1 Like

https://kapwi.ng/c/31uswsV2

המשולש בכיכר הבימה - זה גם משדר וגם מקלט, כמו כולנו - זה בתת מודע וגם בתוך המים - ה5G הינה מזימה של יאיר, זקני ציון, סורוס, הארי ריימז (כן השחקן פורנו משנות ה70) , רמי קליינשטיין וטרנס מקנה לשלוט בנו - או שחטפו את היאיר האמיתי או שהוחלף אם רובוט שלרוב מתקיים במימד ה5 - לא צירוף מקרים, חברים
The Bimamuda Triangle must be stopped
or amplfiied and used to fight injustice

It’s easy make fun of the conspiracy theorists around this issue, but the truth is pretty dark. Forget 5G, none of the newer communication systems were that well researched in terms of what they do. There are several issues. While it is true we are not talking about ionizing radiation, there are other risks to think about, e.g., the power jumps at the cellphone levels. Because there is an argument to be made that lots of this stuff not really well researched, and the powerful companies may not wanted it to have been well researched, it’s very easy for people to transpose all kinds of conspiracy theories onto the general void of information. It may be that cellphones in general are linked to infertility and a few other problems.

Truth is subjective and therefor objective truth is infinite. As a result it will always be “dark”, simply because we can not see it all.

The risk of conspiracy theories is the undermining of ability to judge reality within the listener. It is achieved in various manners but information overload, emotional manipulation and semantic attribution are key.
We are able to see this in a selection of recently new terms that arouse conspiracy theories : “fake news”, “5G”, “corona-virus” and other long standing ones.

this tr-fecta is based on Ariosto’s model of persuasion where the semantics is crucial as it undermines the listeners ethos (values and existing opinions) and gives way to a blank canvas ready to receive a biased and undermining message.

Therefor conspiracy theories are pure B.S. not because they a lie but because they do not enable the listener to make either a logical or emotional decision based on their own values in a clear and controllable way.

As for “5G” the discussion should be on “extremely high frequency (EHF) wavebands”. are they safe? well most likely they can do very good and very bad things (advanced physics… you know). the reason “5G” is BS is that it is just one application of EHF. some communication satellites and aerial vehicles use it as well - meaning IF someone can kill you with a 5G it is just another vector of death. I don’t know if that is comforting but you can also consider that a nuclear warhead is probably directed towards an urban center in your proximity.

So to sum it up, people are vermin :slight_smile: and if someone tells you something they have a deep vested interest. mine is that I think we can and should use technology for the benefit of the world and humanity. the bad will be there regardless so I would rather people just accept the now and focus on their own now hooo and remember deep breaths.

No.

Eran,
I really liked what you wrote…

חבל לי לראות שרמת הדיון נמוכה כל-כך ביחס לקהילה של אנשים שאני אוהב ומעריך ואשר מחשיבים את עצמם בעלי ראש פתוח ומדעי.

רוצים לדעת אם יש סכנה בקרינה לא מיינת - תבדקו את המחקרים ואת המדע, ותדונו אותם. תכנסו לעומק הקורה כיצד נקבעו הסטנדרטים לקרינה לא מיינת.
מה הם מחקרי הבטיחות שנעשו או שלא נעשו. האם יש בייאס חזק בין המחקרים שמומנו ע"י חברות התקשורות הסלולארית בין אלה שלא.
מי שלא מבין את הבסיס המדעי שעל פיו שופטים את הסכנות הבריאותיות של קרינה לא מיינת איך יכול לפסול אותם בבטחון?

מי שמכניס את כל תאוריות הקונספרציה לסלסלה אחת ומסכם אותם לא קשוב לפרטים.
מחשבה חד ערכית היא מפלט קל, קשה יותר לעשות שעות רבות של מחקר, להתעמק בפרטים ולהגיע לדיעה עצמית.

העדר מספק הגנה.

לו היה כאן דיון אמיתי או מפרה הייתי שוקל להכנס ולתרום לו.