It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

A retired neurosurgeon tells the truth about the Covid pandemic

page: 5
47
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 05:53 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

1) "Developer options", 2) "Show Bluetooth devices without name", 3) switch on Bluetooth, 4) say hello to your new friends.

不不不不不不不



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 06:00 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

False.

"Undifferentiated" nanotech self-assembles i.e., specializes into antennae, microrouters etc. Antennae are long enough to accommodate THz bands. Graphene derivatives are FREQUENCY SCALERS. Let me bring this home again, lest it shouldn't sink into brain: GRAPHENE DERIVATIVES ARE FREQUENCY GHZ/THZ SCALERS.

Crimean Borg Cube [GSM, 3G, 4G, 4G+, 5G, ...] Smartphone [Bluetooth, GHz] inoculated Graphene compounds [THz] microantennae inside subject's body.
edit on 27-9-2022 by Kovalevsky because: Xatrix 'tertainment.



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 06:14 AM
link   
this guy talks ultra bull#

He constantly changes what he says as he reads google. A day ago he said the adeno viruses had spike proteins attached to them to enter cells.....then he realised he didnt know what he was talking about then pretended like he never said that and then said a completely OPPOSITE thing. He hopes nobody notices.......

This guy said ....covid virus is worse than the virus that caused the SECOND WORST PANDEMIC IN RECORDED HISTORY. Because some numbers were the same....cause the guy doesnt understand ANYTHING about statistics ..... certain analysis breakdown when you're using radically different numbers of people.....like pfizer claiming their vaccine is 95% effective based off 170 people testing positive out of 43'000 and the difference between 162 and 8 being ....95%

If any of the numbers changed even slightly ...because of this low number .......then it could easily have said 70%, 50% 20%....plus those numbers are relative risk reduction....absolute risk reduction is less than 1%...... or if you tested vaccinated veruses previously infected with immunity......vaccine has 0% efficacy...... these stats where they say you're 10x more likely to die if you're unvaxxed meaning...... you have no been infected at all, zero previous infections from ANY corona virus at all.... and they're also just drawing from stats that dont resemble the real world, anyone under 60 in good health already has a 99+% chance of not dying....without anything.......

the nano and quantum worlds dont operate on the same principles????? Light is a quantum phenomenon...... electromagnetic waves are a quantum phenomenon. All scales are occuring at once cause....the macro scale objects are made .... many of tiny objects.....

We can't see microwaves.....or radiowaves.....or x rays........

The guy will now go away and do another 10 minutes search of google and say completely different things acting like they know what they're talking about.

Graphene biointerfaces for optical stimulation of cells

www.youtube.com...

Anyway. This is all just distracting from the bigger issues. Argueing over contentious # based on 5 minutes of google searching. Go argue about this in a different topic, its just clogging this up with s-h-i-t. You're just feeding the morons, who wont touch really information with a barge pole...cause they wanna pretend they're right.

Dr Aseem Malhotra discusses peer reviewed study showing 1 in 800 chance of serious adverse event

www.youtube.com...

DANGER!!!!!!!!!!!
edit on 27-9-2022 by thethinkingman because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-9-2022 by thethinkingman because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 07:43 AM
link   
Behold, the "Graphennas*": studylib.net...




The obtained results demonstrate that micrometer-sized graphennas resonate in the terahertz band, con-sistently with theoretical predictions [5]. More impor-tantly, we have found that the resonant frequency ingraphennas increases more slowly than in metallic nano-antennas as the antenna length is reduced. In particular,the derived scalability trends show that, when consid-ering submicrometer-length antennas, the resonant fre-quency of graphennas is up to two orders of magnitudelower than that of metallic nano-antennas with the samesize.These results open up the possibility to implemen-tation of wireless communication among nanosystemsby means of graphennas with dimensions of a few弮m, thereby enabling the novel paradigm of graphene-enabled wireless communications.


How does chr0naut feel about this?

(Shouldn't these contraptions be called Graphenna[e]?)



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 07:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Kovalevsky

innovate.ieee.org...

Article form nearly 10 years ago stating the technology was around a decade away.

Slideshow

More

Even more
edit on 27/9/22 by Grenade because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Grenade

LOL! Haveya seen the bottomleft pic in your 2nd link ??
edit on 27-9-2022 by Kovalevsky because: Fatality.



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 08:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Kovalevsky

My first link also has an ad for the fourth industrial revolution.



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 12:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kovalevsky
a reply to: chr0naut

1) "Developer options", 2) "Show Bluetooth devices without name", 3) switch on Bluetooth, 4) say hello to your new friends.

不不不不不不不


Bluetooth has a wavelength of 125 millimeters. Its optimal antenna size is 62.5 mm. At that size, one end of the antenna would be immersed in the positive going peak of the waveform and the other would be immersed in the negative going peak of the waveform, giving an electrical potential difference between ends of the antenna.



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut




If the SARS-CoV-2 virus had happened in 1918, there would have been about the same number of fatalities that the 1918 flu caused.


You must be joking ? Do you really think the people in 1918 would have even noticed a chest cold ? Covid-19 statistically killed almost no one chr0 and you know it , Those death numbers are wildly inaccurate .

The 1918 Flu on the other hand killed millions out right burning them up with fevers, it didn't matter if they were old , fat or had bad hearts .

You are hanging on your Covid-19 Talking points like they are actually true mate , The Curtain is lifting on the Plandemic mate it was a joke I suggest you pull chute while you can



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kovalevsky
a reply to: chr0naut

False.

"Undifferentiated" nanotech self-assembles i.e., specializes into antennae, microrouters etc. Antennae are long enough to accommodate THz bands. Graphene derivatives are FREQUENCY SCALERS. Let me bring this home again, lest it shouldn't sink into brain: GRAPHENE DERIVATIVES ARE FREQUENCY GHZ/THZ SCALERS.


You said exactly that in a previous post. Repeating it verbatim does not make it any less techno-nonsense.


Crimean Borg Cube


I have no idea what that may be. The Crimea is a largely agricultural geographical area in Ukraine, and is currently a war zone under Russian attack. The Borg cube is a fictional class of space ship in Star Trek. What they have to do with each other is anyone's guess?


[GSM, 3G, 4G, 4G+, 5G, ...] Smartphone [Bluetooth, GHz]


These are all communication systems using radio frequencies up to Gigahertz bands, like your WiFi probably already uses.


inoculated Graphene compounds [THz] microantennae inside subject's body.


Terahertz frequencies are way higher than any of the communication standards you have mentioned. Terahertz frequencies are also very hard to generate and work with.

Graphene could be used to produce an antenna capable of working in the terahertz bands. But an antenna on its own does nothing. To engineer electronics on the scale enough to be injectable would probably be beyond modern technology. The smallest of which is currently produced by optical lithography. To make even a very basic transceiver set entirely out of self assembling graphene structures is not feasible. Graphene is usually produced by burning stuff containing carbon, and extracting the graphene products from the soot.

Graphene Production How to Produce Graphene Material

edit on 27/9/2022 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 01:56 PM
link   
Ah ... let us go through it again slowly, speaking D-I-S-T-I-N-C-T-L-Y.

1) In-vivo antennae must be small, real small, say a few micrometers. R-E-A-L * S-M-A-L-L.

2) For them to rx stuff, said stuff's Fourier analysis must yield pretty high frequencies wherein payload is to live.
THz signals enjoy just such a small wavelength, at a mere THz, such a sig. hasting at c pace will accomplish a full cycle (let us hand-wave a bit will you) having but run ~ 3e+8/1e+12 that is about 0.0003 m or 30 繕m. I repeat A-T * T-H-Z * F-R-E-Q * W-A-V-E-L-E-N-G-T-H * R-E-A-L * S-M-A-L-L.

3) Graphenna[e]* are R-E-A-L * S-M-A-L-L.

4) Graphenoids are F-R-E-Q-U-E-N-C-Y * S-C-A-L-E-R-S that is eats GHz vomits THz.

1) + 2) + 3) + 4) =

As was previously observed, these antennae need not be the same size as the routers they're appendices of, indeed they're much larger.

To S-I-M-P-L-I-F-Y: Crimean Holy Cube, the blessed She-Emperor, speaks GSM (nG sig.) with smartphones. Smartphone small-talks Bluetooth with inoculated graphenoid. Graphy-boi squishes Bluetooth to the terahertz. Terahertz is heard by graphenna, router rx command.

Now, graphenna can simulate, that is tx, GHz-like sigs. Qui peut le plus, peut le moins.

* "Graphenna" is meant as a reference. We do not believe they're graphenoids, them antennae that self-assemble in bodies.
edit on 27-9-2022 by Kowalewski because: Quartet, 穢 Sega 1986



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Kowalewski

Returned banned member?

You could have been more subtle about it?







posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 02:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Nah, too lazy.



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Kowalewski

Obviously.



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 02:44 PM
link   
Still "this is impossible" yes?

Please try this: first toggle "Developer options" on your Android smartphone, tap that and then activate "Show Bluetooth devices without name." Having done that, switch on Bluetooth.

Hexadecimals will start to pour in. Walk into a mall, an avalanche of these pop up.

Now if you were to isolate yourself, say in a sphere of 15 m radius free from human beings (except yourself), only one such MAC address would appear.

You.
But that's simply not possible right?
edit on 27-9-2022 by Kowalewski because: Truth is stranger than fiction.



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut




Bluetooth has a wavelength of 125 millimeters. Its optimal antenna size is 62.5 mm.


Thank you I too vaguely recall Nyquist. But that's beside the point. Graphene is a frequency-multiplier: receives GHz sends THz.

Buy some Shungite dude, and research "chelation."



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: asabuvsobelow
a reply to: chr0naut




If the SARS-CoV-2 virus had happened in 1918, there would have been about the same number of fatalities that the 1918 flu caused.


You must be joking ? Do you really think the people in 1918 would have even noticed a chest cold ? Covid-19 statistically killed almost no one chr0 and you know it , Those death numbers are wildly inaccurate .

The 1918 Flu on the other hand killed millions out right burning them up with fevers, it didn't matter if they were old , fat or had bad hearts .

You are hanging on your Covid-19 Talking points like they are actually true mate , The Curtain is lifting on the Plandemic mate it was a joke I suggest you pull chute while you can


Last week in New Zealand, COVID-19 caused the death of 37 people, one of whom was 10 years old, and two of whom were in the 15-35 year age bracket, out of an average of 9,611 active cases.

When people die of stuff, it is easily detectable. Even back in 1918, it was the case.



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 07:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Thrumbo
a reply to: ColeYounger

6.5 million people died from covid-19 globally, just under 1% of the 8 billion of us, the total population of the planet. A "real" pandemic would be more like 10% of the species or more.

Of those 6.5 million, the vast majority were elderly or had poor health. Nature did us a favor? That's such a weak culling of the herd that you can't even call it that.

Did you know that the global population has more than doubled since 1960? There was only 3 billion humans back then, a mere 60 years ago. If this trend continues, in 2080 there will be over 16+ billion human beings. More than that, the equation is exponential until there aren't enough resources to support life. If we have supply chain issues now, imagine what they'll be like in the future.

In the year 1700, there was approximately 610 million people on the planet. Our population has increased over 10x.



I think there is a mistake in your calculations in relation to the percentage you have given. Let's say there are approximately 6.5 million people who have died out of the 8 billion of the total population of humans. That will be about 0.0008215 which is equivalent to 0.08215% which is much less than the 1% of total population (80 million).

In addition Sars Cov-2 has a very low infection fatality rate. Approximately 0.15% and hence out of the 10,000 people who are getting infected 9,985 survive it.

The infection fatality rate was estimated by John Ioannidis from Stanford University and it's probably the most cited and influential research that exists on the subject.

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


"Conclusions: All systematic evaluations of seroprevalence data converge that SARS-CoV-2 infection is widely spread globally. Acknowledging residual uncertainties, the available evidence suggests average global IFR of ~0.15% and ~1.5-2.0 billion infections by February 2021 with substantial differences in IFR and in infection spread across continents, countries and locations"



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 07:31 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut


I haven't followed the conversation but a quick comment.

SARS-CoV-2 has an infection fatality rate of about 0.15%

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...


On the other hand the Spanish Flu had an infection fatality rate of at least 10%

www.cdc.gov...


Two very different diseases COVID-19 and Spanish Flu.

At that time and according to the CDC around 500 million people were infected and at least 50 million died. If this has happened with a population of 8 billion and let's say one third of the population was infected then you were looking at least for 265 million deaths.

Best way to compare them is the IFR
The Spanish Flu has an IFR which is at least 67 times more than the IFR of COVID-19 and could be 100 times more lethal.



posted on Sep, 27 2022 @ 07:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Asmodeus3

Cracking work.


edit on 27-9-2022 by thethinkingman because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
47
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join