anti 5G lobby stops masts in Bath

[ik9000]

Oh joy! The anti 5G muppets are now getting traction in political circles. At what point do we have to implement IQ testing for politicians? Just because idiots spout nonsense doesn't mean we should pander to them when good science is being ignored. It's not a moral/ethical debate, it's "we concerned about health risks". There aren't any credible risks FFS. Tests have shown this, but the council...?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55399513

[[GSV]Trig]

But she said that "given the widespread concern and conversations I have had with Bath residents who claim to be extra vulnerable, I believe it may be worth applying a precautionary principle on where masts are located whilst further studies are being undertaken".

Extra vulnerable, she means "extra spesh" right?

All these people moaning about 5g yet are most likely walking around with a mobile phone in their pocket, which will do more damage to them than a bloody 5g mast will, so much stupid this year being given more media inches because there's not a lot going on and stories that are actually less and less news worthy getting recognition and picked up by idiots with nothing to do...

[ik9000]

Extra vulnerable, she means "extra spesh" right?

I would put money on it but we can't say can we? IMO she should be made to go to a university for blind tests to be made and if she isn't demonstrably affected and unable to detect when the antenna are active (as I would put money on being the case) then she should then be made to pay for the testing, and the masts should go ahead as planned. Of course if there is a genuine scientifically proven issue/medical condition then fair enough, that's different and she would be right to raise it. But any old wally can say "I'm sensitive". Indeed. We all are to something or other. It doesn't mean twiglets should be banned because Milly doesn't like the smell.

[Hoonigan]

I guarantee that burning this comms station down did far more harm to the environment and local health than any 5G tower ever will!

[Kumagoro]

I would put money on it but we can't say can we? IMO she should be made to go to a university for blind tests to be made and if she isn't demonstrably affected and unable to detect when the antenna are active (as I would put money on being the case) then she should then be made to pay for the testing, and the masts should go ahead as planned. Of course if there is a genuine scientifically proven issue/medical condition then fair enough, that's different and she would be right to raise it. But any old wally can say "I'm sensitive". Indeed. We all are to something or other. It doesn't mean twiglets should be banned because Milly doesn't like the smell.

We have this big metal cabinet sitting in a lab which was used before to test if peeps were affected by wifi and mobile signals. Not sure if it was 2G only or 3G. Anyway not one person was able to tell.

[Saracen999]

Oh joy! The anti 5G muppets are now getting traction in political circles. At what point do we have to implement IQ testing for politicians? Just because idiots spout nonsense doesn't mean we should pander to them when good science is being ignored. It's not a moral/ethical debate, it's "we concerned about health risks". There aren't any credible risks FFS. Tests have shown this, but the council...?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55399513

I keep telling you, the problem with elections is we keep electing politicians. Pretty much by definition, this self-selects people with limited mental function because the blood flow in their bodies is so heavily redirected to supporting their over-developed egos.

We probably ought to include everybody in elections, and give the power to those found hiding under rocks to avoid getting voted for.

[Saracen999]

We have this big metal cabinet sitting in a lab which was used before to test if peeps were affected by wifi and mobile signals. Not sure if it was 2G only or 3G. Anyway not one person was able to tell.

Hmmm.

Not that I give any credence to the 5G scare conspiracies, at all, but .... whether peope can "tell" is hardly a good indicator of harm being done.

Take raised blood pressure. It's doing harm, without a shadow of a doubt. It increases risk of heart attack or stroke significantly, and the first noticable sign you get (without checking it) may be getting one or other. It also hardens arteries and can lead to major and life-changing if not life-threatening, organ damage.

But you can't "tell". You don't feel it.

Similarly, I know someone that went to their GP with a sore finger, and ended up with a diagnosis of Stage 4 kidney cancer, spread to lungs and bones .... incluing the sore finger. It apparently had been there for probably 20 years or more, but they couldn't "tell".

Radio signals certainly can cause damage. It's probably not a good idea to grab hold of my transmitter mast if I'm sticking several hundred watts up it, let alone a thousand or more (which of course, I'd never do seeing as how it's illegal here). RF burns are nasty. And Marie Curie found out about radiation she hadn't noticed.

Of course, shedloads of actual tests have been done on cellular comms, right back to analog days where "brain burn" was worried about and from what I can tell, no evidence at all of damage to people has ever been established. I'm not trying to lend credence to 5G worries. Just pointing out that people being able to "tell" is hardly a good diagnostic criteria.

[Scryder]

Oh dear, and I'll bet that most of these people got into the 5G conspiracy theory using their previous gen mobile phones or tablets!

[Spreadie]

[Kumagoro]

Hmmm.

Not that I give any credence to the 5G scare conspiracies, at all, but .... whether peope can "tell" is hardly a good indicator of harm being done.

Take raised blood pressure. It's doing harm, without a shadow of a doubt. It increases risk of heart attack or stroke significantly, and the first noticable sign you get (without checking it) may be getting one or other. It also hardens arteries and can lead to major and life-changing if not life-threatening, organ damage.

But you can't "tell". You don't feel it.

Similarly, I know someone that went to their GP with a sore finger, and ended up with a diagnosis of Stage 4 kidney cancer, spread to lungs and bones .... incluing the sore finger. It apparently had been there for probably 20 years or more, but they couldn't "tell".

Radio signals certainly can cause damage. It's probably not a good idea to grab hold of my transmitter mast if I'm sticking several hundred watts up it, let alone a thousand or more (which of course, I'd never do seeing as how it's illegal here). RF burns are nasty. And Marie Curie found out about radiation she hadn't noticed.

Of course, shedloads of actual tests have been done on cellular comms, right back to analog days where "brain burn" was worried about and from what I can tell, no evidence at all of damage to people has ever been established. I'm not trying to lend credence to 5G worries. Just pointing out that people being able to "tell" is hardly a good diagnostic criteria.

The experiments were before my time and I am not privy to the finer details of the study, though from what I have heard it was quite comprehensive and a multi year study. I was just referring to one aspect which relates to what ik9000 mentioned.

[[GSV]Trig]

I cant remember what the program or documentary was called, but there was this thing about brain burn back in the days when phones had little antennas on the top which would concentrate the waves just behind the ear, they did a load of half scientific tests and the waves were actually warming the brain slightly, this improved the test subjects reaction times in the tests they were doing...

[Saracen999]

The experiments were before my time and I am not privy to the finer details of the study, though from what I have heard it was quite comprehensive and a multi year study. I was just referring to one aspect which relates to what ik9000 mentioned.

Oh sure. I wasn't implying the testing was pointless. Just that whether subjects, themselves, can detect anything isn't conclusive. I mean, if they notice, then you have a reaction and you know something, which may or may not, be harmful, happened. But the absence of noticing isn't necessarily evidence of absence of an effect, or harm.

A good few of conspiracy suspicions have some kind of grounding in logic or reason. It's just when people take the premise for doing the investigations as evidence (which it isn't) and ignore or don't check the results (which is) in order to reach a half-assed conspiracy conclusion.

[alki_pone]

Honestly if it meant faster internet I would hapily let 5G radiation melt my insides and fry my brain.

[Diabo593]

Humanity's potential for ingenuity as well as stupidity is fascinating.

[wazzickle]

I keep telling you, the problem with elections is we keep electing politicians. Pretty much by definition, this self-selects people with limited mental function because the blood flow in their bodies is so heavily redirected to supporting their over-developed egos.

We probably ought to include everybody in elections, and give the power to those found hiding under rocks to avoid getting voted for.

The greeks had it right - their system was such that running stuff was like jury duty, something you didn't get to choose to do, or even avoid without a good reason.

We wouldn't even have to implement that to improve this aspect of our political system, all we would need to do is disqualify anyone actively seeking power. Rather than people seeking to enrich themselves or their egos, we need people who are versed in the sciences, philosophy, etc etc. You know, people like me. I should have power! I'd be great at it. Elect me!

Ah crap

[Pob255]

I keep telling you, the problem with elections is we keep electing politicians. Pretty much by definition, this self-selects people with limited mental function because the blood flow in their bodies is so heavily redirected to supporting their over-developed egos.

We probably ought to include everybody in elections, and give the power to those found hiding under rocks to avoid getting voted for.

it's not politicians that's the issue, it's weak pandering self-serving politicians.
What we need is manipulative selfless politicians, which are a very rare breed unfortunately

When people are being stupid like this, you need to stand up to it and double down on the stupid to show them how stupid they are being.
so when they complain that 5g is bad, agree with the stupid then double down, have all phone masts disabled, if stupidity continues then double down, make microwave ovens and home wifi illegal.

oh and ps the only truely "fair" and democratic system would be a lottery, no opt in or opt out, you're a uk citizen then your name goes into a very big bucket.
yes we will get some very bad people but equal chance of a good person.
if you think there is a higher chance of idiots getting in, then maybe you should be pushing for getting education to a higher broad average level so there's less chance of an idiot getting in