5G

[rocket_scientist]

I know nothing about this subject and the little I have read suggests that there may be problems with it. So I need to explore it more, and not because of the wild correlation that some guy made between 5G and Covid-19, which sounds utterly preposterous to me.

 

The little I did know was that Huawei are big believers in it but I couldn't believe that the UK would introduce 5G if there were any possible health risks. Then again, I couldn't believe that the UK would go through with Cameron's great plan of getting a foreign superpower to build new nuclear facilities so fuck knows.

 

This week, people in China are cutting down 5G masts whilst some new ones are appearing in the UK. Essential workers?

 

Any of you guys read about 5G?

[RicoS321]

Harmless to humans according to all the stuff I've read, but rife with conspiracy. I think it would be fantastic if the British public could have a rational debate about the introduction of this type of technology. It brings with it such necessities as self driving cars, projected VR, and humongous volumes of data collection and surveillance. The conspiracy nut jobs are there to distract as always. People with genuine concerns about the logic, the requirement and the bigger picture in terms of societal direction will deliberately get lumped into the same bracket.

[tom_widdows]

Harmless to humans according to all the stuff I've read, but rife with conspiracy. I think it would be fantastic if the British public could have a rational debate about the introduction of this type of technology. It brings with it such necessities as self driving cars, projected VR, and humongous volumes of data collection and surveillance. The conspiracy nut jobs are there to distract as always. People with genuine concerns about the logic, the requirement and the bigger picture in terms of societal direction will deliberately get lumped into the same bracket.

 

What is it harmful to?

All the driverless cars, virtual realtiy and data collection are worthless if all the insects, birds, trees etc arer wiped out.

Since when are projected VR, or the other two items a necessity? They don't quite fall into the same category as clean water & air or a sustainable food supply etc

 

 

[RicoS321]

What is it harmful to?

All the driverless cars, virtual realtiy and data collection are worthless if all the insects, birds, trees etc arer wiped out.

Since when are projected VR, or the other two items a necessity? They don't quite fall into the same category as clean water & air or a sustainable food supply etc

 

Ha ha, apologies, I was being sarcastic about the necessities, but reading it back it doesn't come across that way at all. I'm in total agreement with you. That's what I meant when I said I wish we could have a rational debate about these things. Because we're heading toward a world of autonomous vehicles and 5G whether we like it or not. None of us will get to vote for it of course. There won't be an opt out eventually either.

 

I wasn't aware of anything that suggested 5G itself would be detrimental to insects and birds however. Have you any links?

[rocket_scientist]

You don't need links. Just Google or search 5G on Twitter. It's full of alarming content, none of which I'd seen before.

[RicoS321]

You don't need links. Just Google or search 5G on Twitter. It's full of alarming content, none of which I'd seen before.

 

Aye, I ken about internet searching, I just wondered if there were a specific article(s) that shaped others' opinions.

[rocket_scientist]

In my experience and practise, I listen to various and then make up my own mind. This will depend on the credibility and credentials of the person or persons presenting the view but mostly whether or not the content rings true to my instinct and therefore the quality of the critical thinking and the structure of the argument are keys. I've already decided that there has been insufficient research into the possible health implications and I'm alarmed to see that these could be very considerable.

[RicoS321]

Exactly. I haven't seen/read anything that I would class as credible that suggests it is harmful to birds. I've read a lot of shite a few months back about birds dropping dead, but it was - as far as I could tell - horseshit. Hence why I was asking for links. I'm not that well read on the subject.

[rocket_scientist]

If there was any potential for harm, politicians ought to exhaustively research the matter. As far as I can tell, they've not even started in many cases.

 

The use of the term conspiracy theory annoys me. It's used primarily by the accused, an intellectually lazy generic attempt to shut down open debate and discredit the accuser. There is no doubt that some/many/most "conspiracy theories" are the product of losers with too much time on their hands and blessed with overly-fertile imaginations but genuine concerns and anomalies should be dealt with or explained. For example, what fuel and how much of it powered the astronauts back from the moon? What caused WTC 7 to collapse? In this case, the only stuff I had read about 5G before yesterday was about a year ago when the trees in the centre of Sheffield were being cut down supposedly as they interfered with 5G technology. That seemed too far-fetched to pique my interest back then but given the wild assertions arising this week - and they probably are totally wild given the losers who have been quickest to side with the Covid correlation - I thought it worth examining. After a couple of hours of research, I'm genuinely fearful of the technology and eagerly await the intelligent research into it, something I'm not able to do as I'm not expert in the field.

[RicoS321]

Here's a good one, with some of the research done in Aberdeen, so it must be ace. Bit in depth, but it basically measures the power absorption of insects at the 5G frequencies and concludes that those could result in increased body temperature, thus affecting the insect's behaviour. That doesn't sound good, but difficult to know.

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22271-3

 

I'm still no further forward! Although I'm fairly certain that the direct impact on birds and humans will be insignificant, the indirect impacts through further insect loss could be significant. That would really only speed up an existing phenomenon though.

 

As I said at the start, it's the lack of debate that's the issue. Where does 5G take us, what does it give us, what is "progress" if it has no goal and so on.

[rocket_scientist]

Here's a good one, with some of the research done in Aberdeen, so it must be ace. Bit in depth, but it basically measures the power absorption of insects at the 5G frequencies and concludes that those could result in increased body temperature, thus affecting the insect's behaviour. That doesn't sound good, but difficult to know.

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22271-3

 

I'm still no further forward! Although I'm fairly certain that the direct impact on birds and humans will be insignificant, the indirect impacts through further insect loss could be significant. That would really only speed up an existing phenomenon though.

 

As I said at the start, it's the lack of debate that's the issue. Where does 5G take us, what does it give us, what is "progress" if it has no goal and so on.

 

That's way too specialist for me to read every word far less comprehend but why are you so convinced that it would have an "insignificant" impact on humans (and birds)?

[rocket_scientist]

https://www.sciencetimes.com/amp/articles/22300/20190603/5g-technology-is-considered-a-global-health-risk-by-some-scientists.htm

[tom_widdows]

Here's a good one, with some of the research done in Aberdeen, so it must be ace. Bit in depth, but it basically measures the power absorption of insects at the 5G frequencies and concludes that those could result in increased body temperature, thus affecting the insect's behaviour. That doesn't sound good, but difficult to know.

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22271-3

 

I'm still no further forward! Although I'm fairly certain that the direct impact on birds and humans will be insignificant, the indirect impacts through further insect loss could be significant. That would really only speed up an existing phenomenon though.

 

 

That could be plucked straight from a Trump, Enron, Exxon, Tory marketing slogan.

 

Instead of 'fuck, this is going to make an existing serious problem worse. Abort!', it's 'It's already happening so fuck it lets pour petrol on it to make a buck'

 

[RicoS321]

That's way too specialist for me to read every word far less comprehend but why are you so convinced that it would have an "insignificant" impact on humans (and birds)?

 

Direct impact, not impact. I haven't read your science times article, so perhaps it's saying something different. I'm basing my logic on the fact that we've had 4G for some time now, with no associated issues for humans or birds. The differentiator between 4 and 5G is frequency. From the article I linked, the frequency is too insignificant to affect anything bigger than insects. Or, at least, power absorption rate correlates along size/frequency lines. More than happy for someone more sciencey than me to debunk.

[RicoS321]

That could be plucked straight from a Trump, Enron, Exxon, Tory marketing slogan.

 

Instead of 'fuck, this is going to make an existing serious problem worse. Abort!', it's 'It's already happening so fuck it lets pour petrol on it to make a buck'

 

That would only make sense if I'm advocating 5G, which I'm not.

 

If you could add your explanation of "worthless if all the insects, birds, trees etc arer wiped out", it'd be helpful. Do you think that 5G has a direct effect on birds and trees? Do you have any evidence/articles to back that up?

 

To clarify my position: I think 5G is a shite idea. The technology it enables is neither required or progressive. From reading the nature article, I think it could have an unknown effect on insects, which isn't worth the risk in case that effect is life threatening. My flippant comment was because there are already a number of known impacts on insects from the farming industry, building stadia on greenbelt etc that we're already ignoring that have reduced insect populations overwhelmingly. We're fighting the next battle before the previous one is resolved.

[rocket_scientist]

The differentiator between 4 and 5G is frequency. From the article I linked, the frequency is too insignificant to affect anything bigger than insects. Or, at least, power absorption rate correlates along size/frequency lines. More than happy for someone more sciencey than me to debunk.

 

I don't know if that article said - cos I'm too lazy to re-read it just now - but it's a different ballpark between 4G and 5G, a different game, a different planet. From memory it's going for 6 GHz to 120 or 300 but whatever the number, it's mentally bigger. Not that I know if this is a danger in itself but I strongly suspect that it will be.

[tom_widdows]

That would only make sense if I'm advocating 5G, which I'm not.

 

If you could add your explanation of "worthless if all the insects, birds, trees etc arer wiped out", it'd be helpful. Do you think that 5G has a direct effect on birds and trees? Do you have any evidence/articles to back that up?

 

To clarify my position: I think 5G is a shite idea. The technology it enables is neither required or progressive. From reading the nature article, I think it could have an unknown effect on insects, which isn't worth the risk in case that effect is life threatening. My flippant comment was because there are already a number of known impacts on insects from the farming industry, building stadia on greenbelt etc that we're already ignoring that have reduced insect populations overwhelmingly. We're fighting the next battle before the previous one is resolved.

 

I suspected you are not advocating it however the implicaiton of your existing phenomenon comment doesnt help your case as it suggests you don't consider the loss of insects to be as bad as it really is.

 

To clarify everything supposeldy good humans do is worthless if it means all the insects die out. We spent hundreds of years fucking up the natural order to make our lives easier for short term gain and in doing so our progress to the Disney Prophecy that is Wall-E gets faster by the day.

Killing off things at the top of the food-chain - Bears, Wolves, Crocodiles, Tigers, Lions, Pythons, etc solved one minor problem (Humans being eaten) but in doing so moved humans to the top of that chain. Problem is we are closer to cockroaches than the Bear in that we adapt and are not reliant on particular food/ prey so the natural control of numbers at the top of the chain was thrown out the window. Cockroaches at least still get eaten.

 

Insects vanish = Extinctions on a global scale: Plants and Animals.

 

I have personally been cynical about WI-FI and mobile data since they became something the masses were able to have. Part of this was based on experience of early similar technology (infra red controllers for early consoles anyone?) but the other part was in the back of my mind the premise of the air around us being filled with various frequencies, dare I say it 'radiations' everywhere you go didn't, and still does not seem right to me.

People used to flock to watch nuclear bomb tests in the American deserts as it was considered good safe entertainment. Fast forward 70 years and how many people will happily skip off for an unguided walk around Pripyat?

'Sick Building Syndromme' was a big thing when I was at Uni but seemed to mainly concentrate on commercial/public buildings. I would not be surprised if a 'new & improved' sick building syndromme or perhaps even 'sick area' syndromme appears in the next 10-20 years in domestic buildings, as the technology we use advances faster than testing & regulation (thanks to worldwide government cuts, and pressure from big corporations to have their products used).

 

I had a CPD presentation from a famous company who make a certain product used widely in kitchens.

The presentation was for a new fancier version of their main product which can effectivelly repair itself.

When asked about the recyclability of this new product the response was (I'm not kidding) 'It can't be recycled so we have made it extremely strong so it will last at least 20 years before it starts to fail.'

I then asked the presenter how they could guarantee their product would be actually used for 20years (giving the example of the flat below mine which had 3 new kitchens in the space of 5 years. One was ripped out less than 2months after it had been installed), and suggested their policy of creating new non-recyclable products all of which would eventually end up in landfill was irresponsible. The guy looked like had been slapped in the face.

 

That company will not be alone.

 

If the ordinary people of the world were crying out for 5G, then I might be able to get onboard. The only people I see crying out for it are large corporations, and Politicians. Neither of which have a strong track record in being socialists and humanitarians but do have have a long history of being in each other's pockets.

 

[rocket_scientist]

Superb post Tom. That's what I like, learning from others who have knowledge in areas I don't. My instinct is screaming red alerts over 5G. The demand for it is indeed coming from those who's motives I don't trust. I said last month that we need some intelligence in government. None of these clowns could articulate anything is as persuasive a constructed argument and with clarity in observations as you did. Tom W for PM. Then give Scotland independence (by decree), destroy the House of Lords and steal as much as you can from England up to the amounts they have been stealing from us, with interest of course. And take a shit on the floor in Buck Palace on your way out.

[RicoS321]

Then give Scotland independence (by decree), destroy the House of Lords

 

Most folk, after independence, would leave England to struggle along with a shite excuse for democracy, but you'd selflessly destroy the house of lords for them on her way oot! Good stuff min.

 

Agreed, it's a good post Tom. I'm very much with you on the insects, but I'd say that our food/farming industry is way ahead of the curve when it comes to destroying the living, pollinating creatures that their industry relies on compared to yer 4Gs. Although the nature study presents 5g as very risky without saying as much. The reason I kept saying "direct" impact is because of what you mention as the indirect impacts of massive insect loss on the food chain and especially cereal crops. However, alongside 5G, technology is giving us lab-grown meat and GM crops, thus negating the need for insects at all*. Once again, we don't vote for these things or this path. However, it is already borne out in our cities. Concrete (granite) monuments to humans with zero nature and zero life. We've paved over every inch of it, in order that we don't have to deal with it. It's so removed from the lives of the majority, that the next logical step in the highly complex system is to design and make our own food outside of it. Your kitchen example is great, but I don't see a single thing made today that could be sustained. "Sustainable" building sits within unsustainable cities, sustainable products in an unsustainable economy.

 

 

*Unless yer in a poor country, in which case you're fucked.

 

[tom_widdows]

Most folk, after independence, would leave England to struggle along with a shite excuse for democracy, but you'd selflessly destroy the house of lords for them on her way oot! Good stuff min.

 

Agreed, it's a good post Tom. I'm very much with you on the insects, but I'd say that our food/farming industry is way ahead of the curve when it comes to destroying the living, pollinating creatures that their industry relies on compared to yer 4Gs. Although the nature study presents 5g as very risky without saying as much. The reason I kept saying "direct" impact is because of what you mention as the indirect impacts of massive insect loss on the food chain and especially cereal crops. However, alongside 5G, technology is giving us lab-grown meat and GM crops, thus negating the need for insects at all*. Once again, we don't vote for these things or this path. However, it is already borne out in our cities. Concrete (granite) monuments to humans with zero nature and zero life. We've paved over every inch of it, in order that we don't have to deal with it. It's so removed from the lives of the majority, that the next logical step in the highly complex system is to design and make our own food outside of it. Your kitchen example is great, but I don't see a single thing made today that could be sustained. "Sustainable" building sits within unsustainable cities, sustainable products in an unsustainable economy.

 

 

*Unless yer in a poor country, in which case you're fucked.

 

To me that logic is up there with the best examples of human arrogance & selfishness. The idea that insects are merely something to use as we please and can be discarded using technology at the earliest opportunity with no consequence

 

Isn't there some passage in the Bible that claims humans can rule over all animals and use them as they please?

 

Insects not only pollinate crops, they also pollinate pretty much every plant, tree, shrub etc on the planet.

All the GM crops in the world won't provide clean air, natural protection against subsidance, flooding, weather etc

 

They are pest controllers

They are soil cultivators

They are a huge part of natures waste disposal team.

They are food for millions of creatures in the food chain, many of which Humans rely on.

 

The insects die, the plants die, and the animals (including humans) follow sharpish. The last things to die will be bacteria and germs etc as they will have a last field day on all the carcassas that in a controlled eco-system would gradually be broken down by insects and other carion eaters.

 

I think Ill just refer to George Carlin

 

 

 

[RicoS321]

You're indeed preaching to the choir, but that's what the folks in charge believe about these technologies. It's a direct extrapolation of where we are now. That's how this economy is designed. Do you think that there's a different plan to prevent the insect die out or the heating planet?

[tom_widdows]

I'd like to think that in light of the last 3 months all plans have gone out the window.

[rocket_scientist]

I'd like to think that in light of the last 3 months all plans have gone out the window.

 

A wifie in London approached hired grunts laying "fibre" in the last couple of days. New 5G masts have been erected all over the UK this week. This may be the most opportune time for implementation.

[RicoS321]

A wifie in London approached hired grunts laying "fibre" in the last couple of days. New 5G masts have been erected all over the UK this week. This may be the most opportune time for implementation.

 

Did it not turn out that she was shouting at open reach guys that had nothing to do with the 5G network? Or was it a different wifie? The one I read about was abusing open reach guys because 5G was spreading coronavirus. That's the type of bollocks that allows actual issues to fly under the radar. That lunatic wifie and her conspiracy are now the response to every genuine concern around it.

[RicoS321]

I'd like to think that in light of the last 3 months all plans have gone out the window.

 

Do you really believe that we won't return to work as normal within a few months? Normal service will be resumed. With a fine excuse for  the financial depression that was likely coming anyway.