[ SECRET POST #4934 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4934 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Bojack Horseman]


__________________________________________________


03.
[The Chicks, Taylor Swift]


__________________________________________________



04.
[The Infinite Loops]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Troubleshooter: Abandoned Children]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Star Trek: Deep Space Nine]


__________________________________________________



07.




















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 10 secrets from Secret Submission Post #706.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: How are we today?

[(Anonymous)]

I would be concerned if there's any interference with other vital infrastructure (and given that the NWS is trying to move to all-tech no-spotter modes of storm tracking and forecasting, that's a thing) but in reading general quick-skim skeptic assessment of the health risks I find that it's much more important to consult people who have done studies into electromagnetic radiation environmental effects over someone who theorizes based on the big scary words like radiation. That is, there's an awfully large field of research that bears out that the levels of radiation given off by modern technology are exponentially smaller than the levels directly imparted to lab rats in most studies so it's a matter of degree that creates so much uncertainty that we can't at present say for certain that electromagnetic radiation has any effect, let alone what that effect is.

BUT...early on I read something about how the 5G signal didn't penetrate most buildings so there would need to be antennae every 1000 meters or so up and down every street and I am so not down for that sort of intrusive infrastructure. That's not sustainable. So if that's still how 5G works, I'm not down with it solely because it requires inferior infrastruture compared to what we have.

Re: How are we today?

[(Anonymous)]

Joel Moskowitz has done published in a science journal research, though, and his concerns are with the long term effects of multiple exposures points, which doesn’t have much research behind them because of the lack of funding. The interview goes into this with this quote:

“On the one hand, they say we need more evidence, but then they don’t fund the research or they delay the production of the one study they did fund. We’ve had some agencies, the cities of Boston and Philadelphia who’ve submitted to the FCC complaints that basically there’s no leadership in the government, there’s a complete pass-the-buck attitude. The FCC doesn’t have any health expertise and it’s been irresponsible on this issue. Senator Blumenthal in a recent exchange in a Commerce Committee hearing, where industry officials presented concluded the hearing, saying, “So there really is no research ongoing. We’re kind of flying blind here as far as health and safety is concerned with regard to 5G.” We can go beyond that and we could also say with regard to 1G, 2G, 3G and 4G, we’ve been flying blind.”

Additionally I don’t feel like he was scaremongering with using the term radiation because he’s specific in what kinds of radiation cell phones do expose people to, what the mechanics behind them, and how to best reduce your exposure for the average person. Usually with kooks or frauds, they’re trying to sell you something, but he seems genuinely concerned about public health at little benefit. Furthermore, California Department of Public Health released an official guidance document about cellphone radiation because of his research.