Could telecommunication be a contributing factor in climate change? 5g being the one to tip it over the edge …

Professor Andrew Wood (in Nature, of all places): We believe the main biological effect of the electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones is a rise in temperature.
There are also concerns that there could be more subtle effects, such as links between long-term exposure and certain types of cancer, but while there is some evidence from epidemiological and animal studies, these remain controversial.

For “controversial” read howled down by Big (know which side-my-bread’s buttered) Science.

Prof Wood: As the frequency goes up, the depth of penetration into biological tissues goes down, so the skin and eyes, rather than the brain, become the main organs of health concern.

That’s kinda counterintuitive, but it was an in depth study. The implication is that the brain damage has already been done by the lower frequencies. Watch out for your skin & eyes.

The major hurdle is that the power levels involved in mobile and wireless telecommunications are incredibly low, which, at most, produce temperature rises in tissue of a few tenths of a degree. Picking up unambiguous biological changes is therefore very difficult.

Frog-in-boiling-water syndrome - which has proven to be a great metaphor in my lifetime for our slow-boiling predicament.

So 5g, despite it’s Covid-vaccine-like-rollout, is: potentially physically dangerous to biological matter, including humans

Now here’s the full-metal-hat extrapolation: telecommunications contribute to climate extremity

Wood says: (T)he main biological effect of electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones is a rise in temperature.

Does that rise in temperature feed into global warming?

I’ve seen extreme smog in Taiwan - same thing is going on in all the big manufacturing countries where the world’s chimney smoke comes out (China, India, Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia …). The world really is a small place in the grand scheme of thing (12,756 km wide) - it’s logical that filling up the atmosphere around it with toxic smoke will have adverse consequences.

Fact: Temps are trending up in the limited period where records have been kept (in many places less than 100 years - maximum temp records don't go much past 200 years). The cycles of flooding rains & bushfire drought are growing more extreme, more frequent, in that limited period. In the grand-scheme, however, global warming/cooling is known to happen - way beyond what we're seeing now.

So if there is such a thing as man-made global warming, which i think there likely is, could there be other factors at play fueling this heat-surge data? Concrete city heat-traps, for example, … &/or … electromagnetic radiation?

I don’t know. But it seems possible. What i do know is that the world is not going to apply the same Thought-control rigour to tamping down electromagnetic radiation as it is to fossil fuels. Or Covid draconianism, to keep us safe. Not in my lifetime. We’ve become hopelessly dependent upon the internet - I don't see us throwing our devices in the rubbish bin any time soon.

As Wood notes: Wireless technologies bring enormous benefits, and being over-cautious would potentially deny these benefits to needy communities.

Which amounts to a how-to roadmap for the world going down the gurgler.

Just about to delete the first post in embarrassment, having not searched whether electromagnetic waves can physically contribute to global warming. But ... : AI says: Yes, electromagnetic waves, or radiation, are involved in global warming through the greenhouse effect:

The full colon, according to the top rank on the internet (University of Sussex, of all places), is used to: indicate that what follows it is an explanation or elaboration of what precedes it.

But no explanation follows (for what seemed an alarming admission). It jumps straight to AI's version of Greenhouse Effect

AI hasn't got there yet with the colon, or charitably, it might indicate it's a work in progress. Which AI is.

Anyway, according to AI, electromagnetic radiation is a thing, global-warmingly speaking. I bet you could make a good circumstantial-case with graphs showing the rise of temps & the rise of electromagnetic waves. As you can with smoke pollution. Big changes are always perfect storms. An alignment of factors.

But philosophically, how would the world deal with the knowledge that the internet was plunging earth into a global-warming death spiral?

You'd have to think we're well beyond the point of no-return. Hard to see The Internet (which appeared in our lifetimes as a new God, like The Sun), suddenly fizzling out (in our lifetimes). Nothing short of a total reset is gonna do that. Maybe that's our destiny. It's how the game works.

I've been suspect of 5G from very early on. I spent a few hours researching it years ago and became convinced that this technology, like so many others, was being thrust upon us untested, unchallenged, and without any public debate whatsoever. It's startling.

Of course it could be affecting climate change. How would we ever know? How would anybody know? History is littered with technologies that have left a trail of destruction. And yet, questioning the safety of 5G is taboo.

Science has already shown that being bathed in these frequencies is not healthy. I just did another quick search and found this peer reviewed research:

Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS, microwave syndrome) - Review of mechanisms

Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), known in the past as "Microwave syndrome", is a clinical syndrome characterized by the presence of a wide spectrum of non-specific multiple organ symptoms, typically including central nervous system symptoms, that occur following the patient's acute or chronic exposure to electromagnetic fields in the environment or in occupational settings. Numerous studies have shown biological effects at the cellular level of electromagnetic fields (EMF) at magnetic (ELF) and radio-frequency (RF) frequencies in extremely low intensities. Many of the mechanisms described for Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) apply with modification to EHS. Repeated exposures result in sensitization and consequent enhancement of response*. Many hypersensitive patients appear to have impaired detoxification systems that become overloaded by excessive oxidative stress. EMF can induce changes in calcium signaling cascades, significant activation of free radical processes and overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in living cells as well as altered neurological and cognitive functions and disruption of the blood-brain barrier. Magnetite crystals absorbed from combustion air pollution could have an important role in brain effects of EMF. Autonomic nervous system effects of EMF could also be expressed as symptoms in the cardiovascular system. Other common effects of EMF include effects on skin, microvasculature, immune and hematologic systems. It is concluded that the mechanisms underlying the symptoms of EHS are biologically plausible and that many organic physiologic responses occur following EMF exposure. Patients can have neurologic, neuro-hormonal and neuro-psychiatric symptoms following exposure to EMF as a consequence of neural damage and over-sensitized neural responses. More relevant diagnostic tests for EHS should be developed. Exposure limits should be lowered to safeguard against biologic effects of EMF. Spread of local and global wireless networks should be decreased, and safer wired networks should be used instead of wireless, to protect susceptible members of the public. Public places should be made accessible for electrohypersensitive individuals.

* This implies that damage is cumulative.

The whole abstract could be highlighted.

You can find the full article here.

Unlike RSV vaccines, there has been significant research done on the effects of 5G frequencies on our health. It's clear that this is not good for us. But of course there has been no research done on what the effects on us and our environment will be by increasing the levels or coverage of this frequency by, what, tens of thousands fold? These repeaters will be everywhere, every couple of hundred feet or something. It's insane.

But philosophically, how would the world deal with the knowledge that the internet was plunging earth into a global-warming death spiral?

You'd have to think we're well beyond the point of no-return. Hard to see The Internet (which appeared in our lifetimes as a new God, like The Sun), suddenly fizzling out (in our lifetimes). Nothing short of a total reset is gonna do that. Maybe that's our destiny. It's how the game works.

That's the quagmire we find ourselves in. All major economies in the world, regardless of political system, depend on production and consumption to survive. We've even been told that inflation is good because just a little bit spurs consumption. What a crock of shit.

The best thing we could do four our survival is quit producing and consuming so much needless crap, but we can't. We're pretty much fucked.

(T)here has been no research done on what the effects on us and our environment will be by increasing the levels or coverage of this frequency by, what, tens of thousands fold? These repeaters will be everywhere, every couple of hundred feet or something. It's insane.

Yep, it's way beyond what the average person needs to get on the internet. As i recall, you pointed out once before that the dramatic increase in repeaters is not about normal people's needs - it's about automated technological needs, such as driverless cars.

It does feel like that in order to facilitate the rise of the machine, we (well, a select few humans) are simultaneously hastening to build the coffin for bio-life.

Studies do show a deleterious effect, so where are the alarm bells with increasing that exponentially? Anyway, guess we'll find out in the next 10-20 years.