Posted on 06/30/2019 11:57:20 AM PDT by Dick Bachert
That ol’ clamshell phone of mine would melt from 5G.
So why is he INSTALLING IT?
“It really depends on power. “
No, it depends on frequency.
"Five things YOU NEED TO KNOW about 5G!"
1) G!
2) G!
3) G!
4) G!, and finally...
5) G!
There are physical scientists that study and test RF effects on lab animals. There are many such scientists. They are not squelched by big bad sinister 5G lords. They have not ignored the potential dangers to the human population. They are testing now and they are not finding a solid cause and effect to report.
Here are some prominent voices from the scientific community on the subject of 5G:
Dr. Steve Novella, an assistant professor of neurology at Yale and the editor of Science-Based Medicine, understands that people generally get concerned about radiation. “Using the term radiation is misleading because people think of nuclear weapons—they think of ionizing radiation that absolutely can cause damage. It can kill cells. It can cause DNA mutations.” But since non-ionizing radiation doesn’t cause DNA damage or tissue damage, Novella says that most concern about cell phone RFR is misplaced. “There’s no known mechanism for most forms of non-ionizing radiation to even have a biological effect,” he says.
It’s easy to find claims online that the greater frequency of 5G alone constitutes a risk. RadiationHealthRisks.com observes that “1G, 2G, 3G and 4G use between 1 to 5 gigahertz frequency. 5G uses between 24 to 90 gigahertz frequency,” and then asserts that “Within the RF Radiation portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, the higher the frequency, the more dangerous it is to living organisms.”
But asserting that the higher frequency is more dangerous is just that—an assertion, and there’s little real science to stand behind it. 5G remains non-ionizing in nature.
So there is no conclusive study regarding 5G health effects but there is strong evidence that too much sun exposure is a far greater threat than the 5G hysterically asserted claims of how big bad tech is going to kill us all in accordance with Agenda 21, Agenda 30, etc. Although claims of sinister UN agendas have merit, it is the 5G internet pundit class that is associating and injecting hysteria of 5G into sinister aspects of UN globalist groups. As such pundits are want to do, they mix valid concerns into their unfounded premises to heighten the drama.
I will continue to read better sources about 5G that are genuinely concerned about possible 5G health risks and will ignore the internet pseudoscience.
Looks like the Spawn of Strzok!
“For example, radar uses an ionizing tube to block high power radar waves from the magnetron and allows the low power reflected waves to use the same antenna and waveguide.”
Source?
I’m an electrical engineer with attack radar repair training. In radar repair training, we went through every circuit on the radar. Even though it was 37 years ago, I specifically remember the special section of waveguide that ionized when the radar transmit pulse struck it to allow the same waveguide to be used for both transmit and receive.
“that ionized when the radar transmit pulse struck it”
Radar wives are non-ionizing.
I am a Nuclear Engineer with extensive training in the field of ionizing radiation.
That's why so many guys are choosing to stay single.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.