I've been trying to determine if there's any truth to this. I've watched vidoes of Icke, Dana Ashlie and others explain how this supposedly works. While the arguments are interesting, I'm skeptical of this theory and I'll tell you why.
The theory as I understand it is that 60GHz millimeter waves inhibit the body's ability to uptake oxygen which causes a person to slowly suffocate and die. The theory is that there is no virus or actual illness going around; what we're seeing is 5G sickness and this explains the dry cough and supposed lack of phlegm in the lungs which is always present in pneumonia caused by typical flu.
My skepticism comes from my understanding of how 5G actually works. 4G cell towers and other devices which use RF to communicate do so by emitting pulsed omnidirectional signals. Think of an expanding soap bubble which is invisble. Now, 5G towers emit constant 4G signals UNTIL a device requests a 5G signal. At this point the tower does something called beamforming, which focuses microwave radiation in a tight band like a laser in the higher GHz range, to hone in on the device and transfer information at very high speeds.
Interestingly, and ominously, Active Denial Systems, which are used for dispersing crowds, employ this same beamforming tech at 95GHz to create burning sensations on the skin. I believe 5G has weapon potential but that's beyond the scope of this topic. I mention it to highlight the beamforming aspect of the tech.
Now, for the COVID19 = 5G illness theory to be true, it would mean that every person who is sick would have to be individually targeted by 5G towers wherever they went with beamformed 60Ghz waves until they died. There would also be no recovered cases because there would be no defense against this, unless that person was removed from an area that has 5G. And obviously the 60GHz signal isn't being pulsed omnidirectionally like 4g or else everyone would be suffocating with "covid", and that clearly isn't happening.
So logically this theory doesn't seem to work. I could very well have some facts wrong; 5G is a complex and multifaceted issue. I'd like to hear other opinions or criticisms. I do know one thing - the media is having a field day painting anyone who opposes 5G as lunatics who believe it's causing "the virus", and any other aspect or valid concerns about this technology is completely ignored.
view the rest of the comments →
RoundWheel ago
Wifi is basically 5g. 5g simply isn't an issue.
Yes, there is some research which some point out, but those are in excess of safety thresholds or completely ignore simple obstructions like skin. Lab tests outside of the real world.
The high frequency stuff is backhaul. The rest is basically the same as newer wifi frequencies. The safety requirements are even higher for 5g than for 4g or wifi.
https://youtu.be/4vHx-UyIM9M
The 5g bullshit is scaremongering and distraction pushed by deep state and useful idiots. Scared brains don't think clearly. This is the purpose.
TheyLie ago
I tried to watch this for the debunk. But it's impossible. His voice pitch throughout is like nails on a chalkboard. Care to post something informational rather than a guy with a high pitch voice fake laughing, insulting, condescending through the entire vid? If something is wrong, present sources/vids without all the theatrics.
thousand-year_ban ago
WiFi isn't basically 5G. This is a laughable comparison. WiFi ranges from 2.45 to 5 or 6GHz IIRC. WiFi also doesn't use beamforming technology.
There is more than "some" research that's been done on non-ionizing EMF/RF. Research stretches back to at least the 1970's. The RF currently in use and considered "safe" has biological effects, period.
What safety requirements? How can there be when Senator Richard Blumenthal questioned telecom reps on capitol hill and they admitted that zero dollars have been invested in any kind of safety testing whatsoever?
How can 5G NOT be a surveillance, privacy and abuse of power concern for the future, when former FCC head Tom Wheeler said years ago that 5G will be the glue that holds the "internet of things" together? How can it be benign when it will enable future planned "smart" cities and "smart" everything else to function? This isn't a secret, it's openly admitted by technocrats.
If you don't see a problem with all this then you're a naive pleb and possibly a Qtard to boot.