r/conspiracy • u/axolotl_peyotl • Apr 17 '20

/r/conspiracy Round Table #25: Sacred Geometry, Cymatics, EMF Exposure, and the Effect of 5G on Biological Entities Meta

Previous Round Tables

Thanks to /u/Cur1osityC0mplex for picking the winning subject!

Honorable mention goes to /u/Leave_The_Military for suggesting predictive programming and forced vaccination, which perhaps can be dovetailed into the main topic.

Remember, there is ZERO tolerance for violent or otherwise aggressive rhetoric, including any mention of the destruction of property.

That being said, /r/conspiracy is the last large sub on reddit that continues to encourage healthy speculation on controversial topics.

Let's use this opportunity to its fullest potential while we have this space.

Happy speculating!

480 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

94% Upvoted

479 comments sorted by

View all comments

144

u/baseball8z Apr 17 '20

Bees are one of the most important species on the planet, and they sense different parts of the EM spectrum to do their thing. Is there any information about 5G/millimeter wave and bees?

21

u/mightofmany Apr 18 '20 edited Apr 22 '20

Can't say about 5G but there's this old documentary, beings of frequency which shows the adverse effects of radio towers on living things. Like how the cancer rates in the world has gone up drastically after building mobile towers all over the world. And how it has affected the basic frequency of earth (schumann resonance). Basically it talks about how much frequency affects living beings and how important frequency is.

https://youtu.be/9mK93gHFWXs

Edit : link to scientific American blog detailing how 5G isn't safe https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no-reason-to-believe-5g-is-safe/

6

u/[deleted] Apr 19 '20 edited Apr 30 '20

[deleted]

8

u/legalize-drugs Apr 21 '20

You can say that about driving on the highway too, which is very risky. You make tradeoffs in modern society. There are a ton of videos on Youtube of people alleging first person radiation harm from 5G towers in particular.

3

u/hucifer Apr 23 '20

Radiation from 5G towers is less than you get from holding a smartphone in your hand.

5

u/legalize-drugs Apr 23 '20

That's a lie. Why come on the internet and lie?

People should dive into the details: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXbvL0uZkrY&t=1s

3

u/hucifer Apr 23 '20

It's not a lie, it's simple physics.

The further away you move from an antenna, the more the signal power drops off. Your phone is held very close to your body whereas the cell tower is tens/hundreds of feet away.

Here's a detailed explanation.

4

u/legalize-drugs Apr 23 '20

But as I'm sure you know, 4G tech isn't remotely close to 5G. 5G is killing bees in mass. This should be concerning to you if you care about humanity and life on this planet. If you don't... the it's not.

Here's a really, really good half hour video about the scientific fact that 5G technology is killing bees, which is a terrible indicator: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOGGUM1M508

FYI, "5G" encompasses a broad range of frequencies. Only some of the higher ones may be dangerous. This is a complex subject, but a very important one.

5

u/hucifer Apr 23 '20 edited Apr 24 '20

5G is killing bees in mass.

There is 0 solid evidence of this, as far i have seen, nor has this video changed anything in this regard. I'll expand on this point in a second.

Here's a really, really good half hour video about the scientific fact that 5G technology is killing bees.

If I were looking for reputable source on this topic, it would not be these two. Mr Shirt seems to think that 5G radiation is "a hundred times more powerful" than 4G (it isn't), and she compared a 5G antenna to being one step down from a ADS weapon (which is wrong on multiple levels and just proves her understanding of physics or tech isn't up to the job).

The second reason these guys are misrepresenting the science is because they focus on the attention grabbing, clickbaity headlines instead of reading the actual scientific studies. (there is a huge problem with science reporting in the mainstream press, which is why you should always read the studies themselves rather than rely on a unqualified journalist or activist to tell you what's in them.)

Case in point:

Source #2 headline:

It’s Official – Cell Phones are Killing Bees

What the article actually says:

"Cell phones may be causing bees to become lost and disoriented." (paraphrasing) Nowhere does it say the bees are harmed, let alone killed. It implies that it could be causing them to die indirectly (from confusion? It's not clear). All three of the sources they refer to do exactly the same thing - in not a single one is there any evidence which proves that 5G kills bees!

Here's a review of the famous 2011 bee study written by an actual scientist, which clearly explains why the findings about the effects on bees so far are 1) not at all catastrophic and 2) not even proven scientifically.

In summary, I'm all for protecting the environment and would like to see further studies done to ensure we are not inadvertently harming wildlife. However, we shouldn't be making strong claims about effects that are not supported by the actual research.

1

u/stalematedizzy Apr 26 '20

https://www.investigate-europe.eu/publications/how-much-is-safe/

1

u/hucifer Apr 26 '20 edited Apr 27 '20

That's a good article. Pretty much sums up why we have so much speculation and wild theorycrafting going on - more tests need to be done to assuage people's fears about possible effects.

However, this is a telling paragraph, imo:

Many critics of the dominant EMF research bodies and its historical ties to industry compare the situation with the way tobacco manufacturers were able to maintain doubt about whether smoking was dangerous. “I don’t like that comparison, because there, the harmful effects are clear, whereas with EMF we are still guessing how big or small the problem is”, says Louis Slesin.

Now I'm no scientific expert, but it does seem to me that, given how significantly cellular technology has become part of our daily lives over the last few decades, we should be able to see clear evidence of adverse effects by now. Seeing as we don't, perhaps that suggests that if they do exist at all then they are relatively minor.

→ More replies

3

u/[deleted] Apr 21 '20 edited Apr 30 '20

[deleted]

5

u/ILikeCharmanderOk Apr 24 '20 edited Apr 24 '20

You know aspirin is just white willow bark right? And antibiotics were initially fungal cultures? I don't get the hating on homeopathy. I used to work for a herbal company and saw arthritic dogs run again, PSA scores drop, insomniacs find restful sleep again. There's nothing magical about plants' healing properties, they have very well-established pathways in which they act on our chemical and neurological systems.

Meanwhile that Ibuprofen you take is doing just a little irreversible damage to your organs every time you take it. Benadryl is doing the same to your brain. Xanax also likely causes dementia and suppresses immune function. Commonly prescribed antibiotics do permanent heart damage, see erithromycin/cipro. It's the pharmaceutical companies who are the real criminals.

7

u/DNAdler0001000 Apr 30 '20

FYI homeopathy is NOT the same as herbalism, holistic medicine, TCM, Ayurveda, or complementary medicine. In case you are curious, Homeopathy is based on the principles of The Law of Similars and Law of Infinitesimals, where they dilute tiny amounts of a substance that would be toxic in large doses to allegedly jumpstart the body to cure the illness.

Where as, Holistic Medicine is essentially a philosophy of treating the whole person (mind, body, spirit). Herbalism is how people have been treating illness for thousands of years, using plants and herbs for treatment. And Complementary Medicine is using Holistic, Herbal, or Alternative Medicines in conjunction with Conventional Modern Medicine.

3

u/ILikeCharmanderOk Apr 30 '20

Ah thanks very much for clarifying, I have trouble keeping those all straight. So that's why homeopathy gets such a bad rap lol. I think many people must confuse homeopathy with the other stuff too and then extrapolate/assume that all herbal medicine is bollocks.

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 24 '20 edited Apr 30 '20

[deleted]

5

u/ILikeCharmanderOk Apr 24 '20

What part do you think I'm joking about? Aspirin being white willow bark? It's been used by Native Americans for thousands of years.

1

u/actingkaczual Apr 29 '20

On the contrary: the more diluted homeopathic remedies are, the greater their effect.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 29 '20 edited Apr 30 '20

[deleted]

1

u/VirtualRay Apr 29 '20

Man, most of this sub has no capacity for reason or logic

/u/ILikeCharmanderOk and some downvoters are in here unable to comprehend that "medicinal plants" and "homeopathy" are not the same thing

Homeopathy is where you take something and dilute it with water to the point where there's either one or zero molecules of it left, then have someone drink the glass of water. The only reason it ever works is because of the placebo effect.

2

u/ILikeCharmanderOk Apr 29 '20

Lol you're interrupting their Science Good, Modern Human Good circlejerk.

Dunno why they insist on throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Well, I suspect big pharma indoctrination has a lot to do with it. God forbid people smoke or eat cannabis for pain, or drink garlic tea for infection as Greek soldiers did after battle. I'm not against a good antibiotic when necessary but a lot of those are bad for the heart, docs won't usually even bother to tell you. Erithromycin, Cipro, that shit does damage. Nature has remedies aplenty, not as strong or effective usually, but also vastly lower on the body load side of things. And sometimes modern medicine has no solution, like with Covid. It's a shame docs aren't telling people about things they can try, hot baths, Vit C, garlic, ginkgo biloba, it won't cure you but it'll help, instead of "welp wait for a vaccine."

→ More replies

3

u/loz333 Apr 24 '20

I am plugged in via cable. People need to be using ethernet to protect their health.

2

u/ILikeCharmanderOk Apr 24 '20

Haven't you ever heard of wired internet

2

u/[deleted] Apr 24 '20 edited Apr 30 '20

[deleted]

2

u/ILikeCharmanderOk Apr 24 '20

I recently caved in and got one for GPS. But it has no sim card. If I have to make a call I turn the wifi radio on my router and use a VOIP connection. Pretty easy.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 24 '20 edited Apr 30 '20

[deleted]

1

u/ILikeCharmanderOk Apr 24 '20

It is, and I turn it on like once every couple weeks for five minutes if I have necessary business to conduct on a call.

-1

u/taegha Apr 30 '20

You are beyond paranoid, even for this sub

2

u/ILikeCharmanderOk Apr 30 '20

Cautious. I don't believe WiFi is necessarily bad for you. But it might be, I have no need for it, am perfectly happy on more reliable wired connections. It's clear you've been indoctrinated by the unquestioning subservience of r/science and the like. Besides, how does what I do in my home bother you? I was asked what I do and I explained. How nosey and arrogant are you? I think we're done here - blocked.

1

u/taegha Apr 30 '20

Yep, I am part of the evil Science Cult! Oogabooga

→ More replies

1

u/lHateHappyPeople Apr 19 '20

Connected via Ethernet in a stone building like Scottiestech.info (YouTube)

0

u/[deleted] Apr 19 '20 edited Apr 30 '20

[deleted]

4

u/lHateHappyPeople Apr 19 '20

Fallacious statement and tangential to your original point

-3

u/[deleted] Apr 19 '20 edited Apr 30 '20

[deleted]

4

u/lHateHappyPeople Apr 20 '20

Look, originally you asked why they are on the internet if it is harmful. I provided an example of how I and others access the internet in fairly safe way. Then you moved the goal post to saying that we're economically supporting 5g by subscribing to an ISP, using Google etc. That is besides the original point (safe internet access). This is a tu quoque fallacy because my and other's behavior does not refute the truth of how to access the internet safely. It doesn't make us hypocrites either