Cell phones and wifi use microwaves
As in, they're going to jack the signal and microwave your ass
Get rid of it before it gets rid of you
>NSA chief says 'when, not if' foreign country hacks U.S. infrastructure
reuters.com
>Cell Phones, Microwaves And The Human Health Threat
>The microwaves that cell phones emit can interact with human tissue in an entirely new way, says theoretical biologist at a government lab
technologyreview.com
>THE EFFECT OF MICROWAVES ON THE CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM
Nigger skulls are offensive
Have a look at the 2 examples near the end.
theperilousfight.us
...
People are too addicted to entertainment electronics to learn about their negative impacts on daily life and especially health. Almost everyone owns a cellphone and computer, some (me included) think they are doing their health a favour by not owning a television. This needs to be taught on the same system that is doing the harm and that seems unlikely.
>Cell phones and wifi use microwaves
what if I use bluetooth?
>2.4 to 2.485 GHz
Quite near the same frequency. The upshot is it's meant for short-range transmission, but if you stick some bluetooth thing in your ear or whatever you're probably already too retarded to have to worry.
why don't we power everything with this miraculous microwave technology?
Because it was more important to select this particular frequency band and its harmonics to give away to the public to blast themselves with, apparently.
user has no idea about the electromagnetic spectrum...
>Thinking a microwave/2.4Ghz is high frequency
>Not realising you're living in a wash of megawatt broadcast band radio waves, oth radar and ISM band radiation everyday
>Being this fucking retarded
It's fucking non-ionising, a light bulb emits wavelengths in the terahertz range and they dont harm you.
>(((foreign country))) hacks U.S. infrastructure
Sure.
Incandescents are based around an inductor that emits something much closer to black box radiation in the first place.
And in the case of broadcast radio, nobody holds the transmitting antennas up to their brains any more than they do with lightbulbs. This is common knowledge for anybody who works with radio transmission.
Hold a cell phone Tx at a milliwatt up to your face vs your stock standard UHF repeater used by emergency services Tx at 50Watts just up the road on a hill... grab a spectrum analyser and tell me which RF wave has the most power when it hits your face.
You are indeed retarded mate.
>a light bulb emits wavelengths in the terahertz range and they dont harm you.
Or do they?
I didn't say anything about a UHF repeater. I thought we were talking about listening to the golden oldies on your transistor radio.
Besides, even if you put the probe in your brain to factor your face out, it still wouldn't tell you what the effect of the radiation is. It just helps you imagine what it is at frequencies you can understand through your direct sensory perception.
Wavelengths above the UV frequency (think x rays, gamma rays etc) have loads of energy that knock electrons off atoms and cause damage leading to cancer etc... we don't use frequencies this high for radio because we don't have the tech to modulate the carrier in any useful way. Stuff like cell phones and wifi use frequencies so low they can't ionise atoms and thus cause harm. They can heat up fluids at high enough power (like a microwave oven)...
Are you suggesting some kind of mental or psychotropic manipulation of populations via common communication frequencies? I don't see how that could be possible short of using really low frequency sound waves.
Yes, they heat up fluids like water. What do you think that does?
I wasn't looking to start up discussions about low frequencies, but I guess we could go on to speculate what's going to happen as EEG helmets for vidya gaems get popular for getting people to basically retrain their brain waves with biofeedback like rats on the dopamine lever.
Microwave ovens use very high power... like kilowatts... your phone uses milliwatts. Even so I don't see how vibrating water molecules could influence behaviour.
Say your idea that vr helmets or whatever were influencing dopamine reward psthways... wouldn't using drugs be more effective? It's targeted, you can put them in water supplies, vaccines, food etc. Unavoidable short of being some prepper dude up in the mountains.
its non-ionizing radiation
and at infinitesimal levels
modern science intrustments that can detect 1 atom in quintillions still has not detected any chemical disturbances AT ALL from MWs at cell phone energy levels
Do you stick your head in a microwave? Microwaves have shielding anyway and are designed to reflect them as much as possible. They don't even have rotating dishes anymore. Christ.
The point here is the difference between what you intend or measure and what the actual effect is. That's the biggest gap for technology people. I work in a different field these days, but a lot of the guys are older so they come out of an EE background because that was the latest and greatest when they were going to school. The most alarming part is how they fail to recognize the obvious failings in their ideations until years after the fact (if you're lucky) and then I have to pick up the slack doubletime to compensate for what I told them was going to happen.
Why do you think most people think the russians are hacking the government or have fallen prey to being made numb to the spying and transhumanism and having videos of their underaged kids being the best source of public porn ever? It's because they're fucking stupid.
As for the VR helmets, you've named many other effective vectors. But the march of technology always needs to maintain technological superiority over what is already known. It's part and parcel with the financial jewy of usury loans.
>some (me included) think they are doing their health a favour by not owning a television.
>It is therefore possible to manipulate the nervous system of a subject by pulsing images displayed on a nearby computer monitor or TV set
Nobody ever calls me so I'm fine.
>implying that's what he meant
I think you're the one on a spectrum. Prolonged exposure (years/decades) to these waves can have adverse effects like tumors in the brain.
nowhere did I say anything about "high frequency". not the point.
Microwaves are particularly bio-effective, precisely because they are not too high frequency and not too low
how much power do cell towers use? Dr. Bruno's warnings include towers too, not just phones and tablets
from Dr. Bruno's paper;
>It has been argued repeatedly[Park 2001, 2002, 2006, 2009, 2010, 2011, Shermer 2010] that cellphones must be safe because a single microwave photon does not have enough energy to break a chemical bond. This argument would perhaps be convincing if the photon flux were less than 1 photon per square wavelength per photon period (equivalent to a photon density of < 1 per cubic wavelength). However, this condition, which holds for some common sources of ionizing radiation, does not hold for cellphone exposures (Table 1). This means that while ionizing radiation is typically in the pure quantum limit of low photon density, cellphones and cell towers operate in the classical wave limit of high photon densities. In this situation the energy of each photon is often irrelevant.
Just use a headset or whatever. Yes, it's an antenna, but it's a shitty one and you've taken the correct approach of factoring out most of the problem so you can go on to worrying about more important things.
>hurr durr let's use a frequency band where a human body tends to absorb the radiated power instead of passing right through it
>lolk
>and then let's have arguments only about radiated power derp
Next step: don't keep it right next to your ballsack if you want to make babies, but it sounds like you don't want to do that anyway.
Has anybody looked in to heat shock proteins? I stopped going down this rabbit hole after I found out how retarded all the people pontificating about it were.
That would be funny if somebody were to demonstrate that the absorbed energy in the brain (most of which is water, heated by microwaves) caused heat shock proteins to trigger neuron suicide. I bet that would be immediately popularized as fake news 24/7.
People believe shit like Russian hackers and think Katy Perry's music is awesome because they're bombarded with the ideas from media and popular culture and can't think for themselves... not because siemens have some secret sect of engineers hiding mind control in communication devices.
It's far easier to force an idealogy on the population by manufacturing the zeitgeist and demonising the dissenters.
I respect your ideas though, good to see someone who can break through the bs and think independently.
I haven't factored out anything, nobody calls me so I don't use my phone beyond Sup Forums.
If you want to be afraid fo engineers hiding mind control devices just let email spammers start sending you IoT newsletters. It's happening with no particular intent.
In one case, a young lad by the name of Barnaby Jack was murdered very soon after he demonstrated at the Las Vegas show how trivial it was to hack into IoT pacemakers and the like. Expect more mysterious deaths in the future.
I tried to use a phone for Sup Forums once during a prolonged power outage. I don't know how people put up with it. It was shocking to contemplate that there are people out there that much more miserable than I am.
And then I kept doing it for like an hour and came to understand how much wanton suffering there is in the world.
You may want to read this
stopthecrime.net
You may find this interesting / alarming
stopthecrime.net
>theoretical biologist
Not a science.
There could be 54 genders, you know.
The site sucks ultimate ass, I use an app (clover)
Phones suck ultimate ass. I keep one around as an emergency tool, basically.
We can already see that cellphones are damaging your brain.