NIH Admits 5G Can Actually Create Coronavirus within Human cells

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I ignore most things without paragraphs.

5G don't have the power to pull cells apart same as its predecessors. The frequencies from 5G cant harm nor penetrate your body and are made up of ""low frequency and non-ionizing radiation"".

And these conspiracy theories that attempt to link 5G to COVID don't even make sense.

Hence the reason that COVID 19 is spreading in countries that don't even have access to 5G.

a reply to: Terpene

Take it anyway you wish Terpene.

But 5G is here to stay, until its replaced with the next iteration or generation of technology standard.

a reply to: andy06shake

I ignore most things without paragraphs.

Ignore it then....but don't say everything on here is unfounded conspiracies based on pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo.

Science already tells us that 5G most lightly poses no danger to humans.

That sounds super reassuring and super scientific

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: andy06shake

I ignore most things without paragraphs.

Ignore it then....but don't say everything on here is unfounded conspiracies based on pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo.

Science already tells us that 5G most lightly poses no danger to humans.

That sounds super reassuring and super scientific

Science functions on knowns and probabilities. Good science always accepts that there might be an unknown or a slight probability of the opposite being true. So when a scientist says Most Likely, he means 99.9999 percent likely.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

But it is pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo.

Never mind the fact that such a large body of text requires paragraphs to get ones head around it without burning out your eyeballs.

One would have imagined the author should have a grasp of the use of paragraphs that is if he wished people to entertain his discourse.

If you actually bothered to know your arse from your elbow regarding the properties of the frequencies and radiation that comprise the 5G communications medium you might not entertain such nonsensical claims.

a reply to: andy06shake
Hilarious 🤣

a reply to: Itisnowagain

The fact that you fail to comprehend that non-ionizing radiation does not carry enough energy per quantum to ionize atoms thus damage cells in your body nor bothered your arse to discover such is indeed rather ""hilarious"".

Radiological properties aside for the moment, pray tell how is COVID 19 spreading in countries that don't have 5G if indeed its the cause?

Because that seems rather a pertinent fact of the matter and puts pale to such nonsense in spades.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

Science functions on knowns and probabilities. Good science always accepts that there might be an unknown or a slight probability of the opposite being true. So when a scientist says Most Likely, he means 99.9999 percent likely.

Your opinion, of what some supposed ' Scientist's™ opinion may be : is not science.
It's pure Scientific™ mumbo-jumbo, better known as a belief-system called Scientism™.

But that's just my opinion...

a reply to: Nothin

Problem being Science is the only "intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment" that we have at our disposal that may allow us to attempt to endeavour to understand the reality and universe we experience.

Else, what else ticks the box?

a reply to: andy06shake

You have been here 10 years, so must have, hopefully, trained yourself in seeing through BS.

Maybe the entire premise of this thread is BS, maybe not.
Did they really thoroughly test the effects of 5g, or did they just piggy-back it on studies for other technologies ?

But am gonna flat-out ask you if you are able to see the difference between what is, and remains, our best method for understanding materialistic reality : the scientific method. ( No capitals, and no ™ signs. ) , and Scientism™ ?

Only when we differentiate the two : will we see on which side Official™ Policies™ are.

"Fact vs. fake - why don’t we trust science any more? | DW Documentary"

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: musicismagic
5 g is harmless. l call the story hogwash.

Theories on how messages contained within 5G are able to interact with the Covid-19 vaccines, are gaining traction. These two things came into wide use at about the same time by coincidence, or accident?

Didn't it turn out that half of the supposed outbreaks happened in areas where the 5g hadn't been switched on yet, or where they hadn't even begun installation?

what part of "directed energy weapons" don't you understand?

a reply to: andy06shake

But 5G is here to stay, until its replaced with the next iteration or generation of technology standard.

Already in the plan 6g will likely be 50 times faster
than 5g and be more diverse. Supporting virtual and augmented
reality applications. I thought that part was a bit scary in and of
itself.

I can just imagine the company advertising slogans. Manipulation of reality is
just a speed dial away.

a reply to: infiniteMeow

That link is Not a statement from the FCC, it is a statement made by David Morrison who is an activist and advocate against WiFi and cellular towers and their ubiquity and raises awareness of the potential harm of EMF(radio wave) pollution.

That said, I'm not a fan of any pollution, and the FCC, as a govt agency does collude with the communication industry to "ensure safety of wireless devices".

There's a whole bunch of gobbledygook down that link tho... it's uncertain how much is true.

originally posted by: infiniteMeow

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: musicismagic
5 g is harmless. l call the story hogwash.

Theories on how messages contained within 5G are able to interact with the Covid-19 vaccines, are gaining traction. These two things came into wide use at about the same time by coincidence, or accident?

Didn't it turn out that half of the supposed outbreaks happened in areas where the 5g hadn't been switched on yet, or where they hadn't even begun installation?

what part of "directed energy weapons" don't you understand?

For starters, the directed part. 5G masts are omnidirectional, they don't include a mechanism for directing them.

Next, I don't understand where a 5G mast would get the power that it needs to act as a weapon. In order to be an effective weapon it would to run at a higher output than would be allowed by the power being sent to it, and to a higher level than a mast's components are able to take.

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

Science functions on knowns and probabilities. Good science always accepts that there might be an unknown or a slight probability of the opposite being true. So when a scientist says Most Likely, he means 99.9999 percent likely.

Your opinion, of what some supposed ' Scientist's™ opinion may be : is not science.
It's pure Scientific™ mumbo-jumbo, better known as a belief-system called Scientism™.

But that's just my opinion...

Some of us here are either scientists or were trained as scientists and operate in the commercial sector.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: Nothin

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

Science functions on knowns and probabilities. Good science always accepts that there might be an unknown or a slight probability of the opposite being true. So when a scientist says Most Likely, he means 99.9999 percent likely.

Your opinion, of what some supposed ' Scientist's™ opinion may be : is not science.
It's pure Scientific™ mumbo-jumbo, better known as a belief-system called Scientism™.

But that's just my opinion...

Some of us here are either scientists or were trained as scientists and operate in the commercial sector.

What does that mean ?

That your opinion is 'Science™', while a non-'Trained™' person's opinion is just : opinion ?
Like Fauchi™ declared, when he said attacking him was like attacking ' Science™ ' ?
He basically declared himself a high-priest of Scientism™ !

Sorry : but not all of us have ' White-Coat-Syndrome™ '.

Some folks just went to school for too long.
Although they have proven themselves to be ' Experts™ ' at jumping through hoops on command, it does make it way more difficult to engage them with critical thinking.

Nobody's opinion is more true than another.
Including mine, and all of my writing here.

Sorry : but am not interested when folks try to pull ' Qualifications™ ' on me.
There are reasons why ' Approuved™ ' and ' Appointed™ ' people get approuved and appointed, and it's not because they are the best option.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: visitedbythem

originally posted by: sunkuong
a reply to: visitedbythem

How many?

Your annecdote posits nothing.

My best friend dies 3 weeks after getting injected.
My father in law died one week after his first injection.
My daughters friend died right after getting injected, and her widower now has developed MS
My brother in laws sister dropped dead some weeks after getting injected. Her bones had all of a sudden had gotten soft. Doctors had no clue as to why.

Do they have names, or any other details to show that they ever existed?

Progressives and Satanists are liars, cheaters, and thieves. Not Conservative Christians. If my friends on here want to ask me, they are welcome to know. In fact, some of them know plenty about me, have seen me and my family, and call from time to time. Of course, they aren't Progressive authoritarian fascists either

a reply to: Nothin

And you have been here 5 years, hopefully you have done the same.

Here is the problem there, a significant percentage of people who frequent ATS these days don't wish to see through the BS, they want to perpetuate and go along with it in spades.

As to the difference between science and scientism, well science is the study of nature and behaviour of natural things. Science produces knowledge and results which tend to breed more questions than answers.

Where as scientism is a view that only science can reveal truth about the world and the reality we think we experience, essentially its a philosophical standpoint.

Now the main difference between science and philosophy is science deals with hypothesis/testing/experimentation which produces data which becomes more refined and better understood as new theories supplant the old where as philosophy deals with a persons logical analysis based on reason and experience.

a reply to: Randyvine2

The singularity is in the post Randyvine2.

You cant stop progress, nor even slow it down much in the information age in which we live.

As to scary, well it's natural to feel that change is scary, we even devised a name for such "metathesiophobia".