Is 5G killing trees?

a reply to: paraphi

They're not trying to fry our brains, they're trying to control them.

5G is an Obama deep state last ditch effort to turn us all into liberals. lol.


Edit: Sorry, I almost forgot the obligatory "DAMNED MILLENNIALS!"

10/10 thread, would visit again.

Is 5G killing trees?

No.

Geezus.

Here look at this picture of a diseased tree as proof!

What ever.

Where the ATS aborists at ?

We have experts on everything else.



blog.davey.com...

originally posted by: neo96
Where the ATS aborists at ?

Well, it did not take an arborist to deduce from the videos that one of the trees was dead, one was half dead and one was fully alive with a withered leaf, which could be for loads of reasons. The loss of bark from a tree is just a sign that that part of the trunk/branch is fully dead. Trees can have dead bits and still have live bits, so long as the sap can flow the leaves will appear.

Trees die for a variety of reasons. Most trees die over time – over a number of years. There’s a saying I heard that a beech tree takes 200 years to grow, 200 years to mature and 300 years to die. Sudden death of trees can be for a variety of reasons, not least disease, or trauma e.g. drought or interference with roots, or stupid people with strimmer’s, poison or contamination etc…

Just like the Romans found out too late that lead water pipes were not a good idea....so too shall we find out in a couple hundred years that we nuked ourselves to death with the internet of things.....or not.

originally posted by: Sabrechucker
5G is the overloaded threshold. Their is no need for 5G. Welcome to the electronic minuplation of your soul.

thank you millenials

That's not even remotely close to true. In my line of work, those speeds available without having to run a cable to a conex or trailer would be a massive boon. Being able to provide service to a building without having to cable it would be amazing. 3 ms latency at 300 Mbps? Yes please. There are a ton of work use-cases for that technology.

But I still think it needs to be safe, and I don't think there was even close to the proper vetting before rolling it out. You can say "Oh, just a diseased tree.. one one side only.. facing the 5G tower," but obviously you don't know that for a fact. What would be helpful would be pictures of those trees prior to the towers going up. There is next to no real testing being done.

As far as 4g goes, it could be 10 more years before 10s of thousands of cases for brain disease starts to crop up. You really think even 10 years is enough time to properly test this stuff for long term effects? People who worked with roundup 20 or even 30 years ago, are now coming down with cancer, probably caused by long-term effects of the product. Who knows what long-term, never-ending exposure to 3g, 4g, and now 5g signals will do to a human. We may sadly find out far too late.

As someone in the tech industry, I look forward to these sorts of leaps in performance. As a human being, it still think it should be safely rolled out, not pushed out for $$$ gains at our risk. It's not like anyone has the ability to opt out, other than to move out of areas where the towers exist. Those kinds of forced exposure should receive heavy testing and vetting before being released.

a reply to: LookingAtMars
What a bunch of f###ing eedgits. Are you all real or what? Please, please google 5G transmitters and see what they look like, what this guy is saying is total, total BS.What you are seeing ladies and gentlemen are LED street lights with a radio receiver (not a transmitter) so the local authority can turn the lights on or off at their discretion.
They aint 5G transmitters.

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: LookingAtMars

The stupid liberals are now trying to save trees. We can't have big government telling business how to run their business. We need to create competitivity counsel to oversee liberals dumb decisions that are counter to business productivity. We can't have someone in Washington pretending to be an expert on trees.

Does anyone still read your posts?

a reply to: and14263

Research has also found a high level of damage to trees from antenna radiation. For example, a field monitoring study spanning 9 years involving over 100 trees (Waldmann-Selsam 2016) found trees sustained more damage on the side of the tree facing the antenna.

People are fooled by paid for studies

At least three studies over the years have documented that there is often a link between conclusions of studies and the source of the money that paid for the research. Science funded by industry is less likely to find health risks than studies paid for by institutions or authorities….Studies which are solely financed by industry are likely to be biased” – Investigate Europe, 2019

ehtrust.org...

a reply to: paraphi

This, like all the other conspiracy theories surrounding new technologies, are just hysterical nonsense.

Wifi was supposed to kill everyone. Before that, the card readers that started popping up everywhere were supposed to signal the end times.

4G was supposed to fry us all.

I've learned to laugh at these people while my investment portfolio grows.

a reply to: LookingAtMars

That picture looks like it is in the uk. Tell me the street and I will tell you if there is a 5g trial nearby. Trials are VERY limited. It's not hard to find their locations.

originally posted by: crayzeed
a reply to: LookingAtMars
What a bunch of f###ing eedgits. Are you all real or what? Please, please google 5G transmitters and see what they look like, what this guy is saying is total, total BS.What you are seeing ladies and gentlemen are LED street lights with a radio receiver (not a transmitter) so the local authority can turn the lights on or off at their discretion.
They aint 5G transmitters.

5G transmitters are planned to be fitted nationwide to the street lights.

cravenfreedom.com...

They ar 5G Street Lights
www.rcrwireless.com...

originally posted by: Maxatoria
Looking at that tree its the loss of bark on the left hand side thats causing the problem as its what supplies most of the tree's needs, looking at the ground its paler than the surrounding area which probably means the water supply for the tree may be a bit short.

Theres no start of the roots above ground which probably means work may have been done to make the area under the tree more level.

Its one of those things where it would of been good to of seen how things were 10/20/30 years ago.

My guess would generally be years of it being bashed by workmen in large mowers has damaged the left side which now seems to be healing itself but pretty much everything on the left hand side will probably die off over the next few years as the usual storms etc take their toll and people will complain and it'll be judged a risk and thus chopped down.

If you look at the video you will see the are has many large trees. Large trees reach deeper and actually have less water problems. The whole area is green and all the large trees fine.
Yes someone could have damaged this tree and so it is dying but that is not what it looks like.

en.wikipedia.org...

and

en.wikipedia.org...

Wifi (2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz) doesn't make us sick, nor does the plethora of TV signals being beamed around or anything else. We are bathed in RF all day both intentional from devices that use it to communicate as well as unintentional (cheap chinesium electronics) and so far there have been no credible studies that even create a tenuous link to cancer or other physical illness.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Archivalist

Let’s hope you're right because there isn’t any op-out option for this ‘technology’. Everyone is going to be bombarded by this whether they like it or not.

EMF is a two way street. You're being bombarded with stuff right now, that 5G will stop.

Let me know when you have decided which is better.

originally posted by: Helig
en.wikipedia.org...

and

en.wikipedia.org...

Wifi (2.4 Ghz and 5Ghz) doesn't make us sick, nor does the plethora of TV signals being beamed around or anything else. We are bathed in RF all day both intentional from devices that use it to communicate as well as unintentional (cheap chinesium electronics) and so far there have been no credible studies that even create a tenuous link to cancer or other physical illness.

Well, the soy growth experiment was interesting. I haven't seen any continuation or confirmation of the findings though.

Some school had soybeans growing on wifi routers, and early results appeared to show the 5GHz router had soy plants growing at an inhibited pace.

Haven't seen anymore about it. :/

Realistically there must be some interaction. Whether it's good or bad is the question.

Wifi radiation can be harmful not directly but indirectly, in ways that you may not know. There is a lot more to than just transmitting a signal. There is directional and power levels of signals. The FCC regulates that and ensures that products adhere to it. So that most devices do not output anything beyond 1W. If you pump enough watts then yes, you can cook your brains right out of your head. The question is can a tree be harmed by radio? The short answer is yes, but there is a lot behind it. A tree is grounded well with the earth through it's wet ground root system. I imagine if the conditions are right bad things can happen. Maybe it's possible there is a electrolysis happening in the soil that is killing the tree, not just DNA being torn to pieces which is also possible. Tesla I believe figured out that you can get energy from a dipole. Sticking a copper rod in the ground a few ft off the ground and then suspend a rod above it with a antenna off it and get a voltage reading. Everything close to the ground has a negative charge all over it and around it. The higher you go up with a antenna the more positive it becomes. You can suspend a rod not grounded and nd then have a grounded rod and have a wire coming off both and put a meter between both and read voltage.

A lot of production plants don't allow cell phones because of possible interference of other equipment. Such as hospital equipment. In most cases there was chemical gas and liquid substances that are controlled with electronic pressure regulators, electronic servo's, safety monitoring equipment.

When I did work at a semi conductor plant, many harmful chemicals and gasses were contained in pressure tanks and secured inside a magnetic sealed air tight case under lock and key with 24/7 monitoring. Toxic gasses like dichlorosilane and trichlorosilane, a gas used in process of growing silicon crystals. They are toxic. A stupid mistake of mishandling of chemicals like that results in fire and death. It combusts in normal air and has corrosiveness of 8. Like breathing planet Venus atmosphere. I remember going over the safety data book we had there that was like 5 inches thick of every toxic chemical you can possibly imagine. All just for making a semi-conductor ram or cpu chip. It was mind blowing.

The biggest problem in my mind is the regulation of it all the more we become a wifi society. How do you put a stop to some nutball living down the street who is transmitting a unregulated directional signal right through your house?? You really wouldn't know it unless you was looking for it, or it harmed you and it's to late. Another concern is buying electronics from China and other countries that lack regulation.

You can find all kinds of youtube video's on people tearing down China made electronic products that are made so poorly that they can shock you to death and have no protection whatsoever. A bunch of unregulated electronic junk that can burn your damn house down.

No wonder they were cutting down trees, where they were gonna play the 5G towers at, and making fake ones....

originally posted by: fleabit
As someone in the tech industry, I look forward to these sorts of leaps in performance. As a human being, it still think it should be safely rolled out, not pushed out for $$$ gains at our risk.

This is way too sensible to ever become public policy anywhere.

But yeah.

originally posted by: sean
not just DNA being torn to pieces which is also possible*.

No, just no.

Let me put this plainly: non-ionizing radiation does not alter DNA in any way what-so-ever.

How is non-ionizing radiation different from ionizing radiation?

Put simply, non-ionizing radiation differs from ionizing radiation in the way it acts on materials like air, water, and living tissue

Unlike x-rays and other forms of ionizing radiation, non-ionizing radiation does not have enough energy to remove electrons from atoms and molecules. Non-ionizing radiation can heat substances. For example, the microwave radiation inside a microwave oven heats water and food rapidly.

Source: www.cdc.gov...

a reply to: LookingAtMars

If it kills trees, then it would stand to reason that it would kill other flora too, correct?

Why isn’t the bush directly behind it showing any symptoms of death? What about the grass surrounding it? The plant behind the tree seems to be more dead on the right side of the picture.

Correlation does not equal causation.

P.S. Look up lightning damaged trees on google images.