Fantastic 5G protest in Spearfish, SD



14 comments ↓

#1 Borglum: Not your typical "Moderate" on 07.03.19 at 10:00 pm

But didn’t Vernon say that 85% approve of 5G?

#2 Anonymoose on 07.04.19 at 3:23 pm

It’s disappointing that so many are buying into the Russian 5G disinformation campaign.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/science/5g-phone-safety-health-russia.html

https://www.acsh.org/news/2019/06/27/no-5g-isnt-mutating-killing-or-cancering-you-14120

#3 l3wis on 07.04.19 at 4:21 pm

I will admit, the health affects from what I researched, have to do with constantly having your phone near your body with wi-fi constantly on and running thru it. But will also admit that the food we eat (processed) and the water we drink probably will kill you before your phone will. My issue is with buying the equipment from foreign countries. Spyware is real and any IT person will tell you they have found it on equipment they have bought from these countries.

#4 Anonymoose on 07.04.19 at 5:00 pm

I don’t dispute that Huawei is putting devices into boards to phone home. Saying that every IT person will tell you they’ve personally found it on equipment is disingenuous at best.

I’ve been involved in the IT field for over 20 years; specifically in infrastructure, security, and most recently tech research. I’ve never personally identified compromised hardware. I’m not saying that I haven’t owned hardware that was compromised, only that I did not personally identify it. It’s not a trivial matter and the vast majority of tech workers could not identify one of these chips that are soldered onto the boards without having an intimate understanding of the schematics. Most (including myself) are not qualified to read the schematics or diagnose which of the hundreds, if not thousands, of chips on a board are compromised.

Moving on to the frequency issues with 5G, it’s clear you do not have an understanding of the technology at play. WiFi frequency is enveloping you constantly whether your phone is near or not. Same with 3G, 4G, 5G. I’m guessing you’re referring to studies about the transponders in your devices potentially causing cancer. I do believe this is true and the science backs that up. Exposure to radiation is largely dependent on strength of source and distance from source. This is why those relatively low radiation levels transmitting FROM your phone can cause issues over the long term. Obviously your head is very close to the source when you’re talking — which is why this can cause issues over time. There’s only really been one study that’s shown this. I expect future studies will probably repeat their results, but I could be wrong. Either way, the spectra involved with 5G is already in use today so if it was an issue I think we’d all be dead or severely ionized by now. You know what has a higher intensity and higher frequency radiation than 5G? Visible light. UV light is ionizing just like nuclear energy and you’re getting fried with it every time you go outside.

If you don’t believe that the health effects of 5G are significant, why keep reporting this Scott? You’re doing our country a disservice by parroting Russian propaganda.

#5 l3wis on 07.04.19 at 5:41 pm

First off, I’m not ‘parroting’ anything. I provide links to stuff, and people can believe what they want to, like I told you, still on the fence.

You seem to be concerned the Russians are putting false information out there, but you mention nothing of them meddling in our elections, which concerns me more then them spreading mis-information about 5G. Trust me, I am well aware of the BS, RT spreads.

Security issue is REAL and if you talk to several people in the government, cyber attacks are concerning.

But there has always been two things I have never understood about 5G, and why I continue to ‘parrot’ as you say.

1) Why do we need it? It has already been proven fiber optic hard wiring is a 1000x faster and more reliable.

2) Why did the telecoms specifically ask for ‘health affects’ to be written out of the FCC regulations on 5G and it’s implementation in communities?

#6 Anonymoose on 07.04.19 at 6:21 pm

Nice pivot. Why would I mention elections when we’re talking about 5G?

Moving goal posts — I did not claim that cyber attacks are not alarming. My comment was in response to your statement that “any IT person will tell you they have found it on equipment they have bought from these countries.” I don’t believe this is accurate so I said so.

So I guess I’m confused. You aren’t concerned about health issues with 5G, but you are. You’re not parroting info, but you are. Which one of your statements would you like me to believe?

You’re piling on what looks like a gish-gallop, but I’ll bite…

Why do we need it when we have fiber? Apples and oranges. If you want to run fiber optic cables to everyone’s cell phone that’s a lofty goal that some might say is unrealistic. Until we do that, we can use 5G for things like infrastructure, defense, communication networks, etc. I think you might be confusing cell tower tech with WiFi. Different tech altogether.

Question #2: No clue. I’ll have to research that to form an opinion. Can you point me to a couple sources to learn about that? It’s still a little confusing, though. I thought you weren’t concerned about the alleged health concerns?

Would you care to respond to or refute any of the technical statements I made about 5G and RF radiation?

#7 anonymoose on 07.04.19 at 6:44 pm

Scott, I forgot to mention that almost all 5G towers are fed by fiber. Lots and lots of fiber. Those contractors are probably digging to lay some fiber.

That being said, those workers are being jerks and SDN should can them and the general.

#8 l3wis on 07.04.19 at 7:17 pm

I knew what they were doing in the video, I think I liked the video more for the reason they were telling John to go away while he was standing on HIS OWN property. Maybe you missed that point. This is why the officer really couldn’t do anything. First off, if you have ever read my site, sometimes I share my opinion, sometimes I satire things, sometimes I rant, and sometimes I just share information. When it comes to 5G, I find it intriguing because it is so controversial.

As for the question, I am simply asking it, wondered if you knew the answer, you seem to know a lot of other things by reading one article in the NY Times.

Why did the telecoms have the FCC take out health affects in the regs? I don’t know, I do know that Ironic Johnny Thune Bag has gotten a lot of money from the telecom lobby to push this. Doesn’t that concern you?

#9 Too Late on 07.04.19 at 8:13 pm

It’s nice to see they have nuts in Spearfish too. My favorite part is when he mentions he goes to every city council meeting…..just like the nuts here.

Scott you have successfully aligned yourself with the living man by labeling this a fantastic 5g protest. I believe your 5G rants started with who was paying for what, blamed Thune then the Mayor, and now it’s the Chinese and compromised hardware. Sling what you can and see what sticks. Nice work dummy.

#10 l3wis on 07.04.19 at 8:51 pm

I’ll tell you what I tell other people about 5G, do your own research, I have. It is a complicated and controversial issue that has several layers. There is corruption, health, home rule rights, and spying to name a few. I don’t believe all the articles, but it certainly isn’t as black and white as you are trying to paint it. Even if there were zero health affects, or cyber spying, the way the telecoms are enforcing their dominance on local communities flies in the face of local control, and it is irritating. If you research most of the lawsuits and denial of permits across the nation, you will see it surrounds local governments really pissed off about the Feds and Telecoms telling them what to do.

#11 Anonymous on 07.06.19 at 9:04 pm

I’m not sure why you find it necessary to lob veiled insults Scott. Yes, I learned all of that from reading one article, not over 20 years experience in the field. I also found the suggestion that I don’t read your site funny. We’ve met in person several times and I was a source for at least two of your stories in the past. We’re probably closer to agreement on this then you might realize. I just saw someone spouting BS about a field that I happen to have expertise in and felt like I’d be doing everyone a disservice if I let the misinformation stand.

I don’t think you’re doing yourself any favors by being salty with regular visitors, but hey, it’s your site!

#12 l3wis on 07.07.19 at 2:06 pm

Well, I guess when someone comes on my site and chooses to be anonymous, I really can’t take much weight in what you are saying. There are many great reliable sources out there that have proven otherwise about the dangers of 5G. My biggest worry is how the telecoms have used the Feds to push back on local control. This has nothing to do with health affects or cyber spying, it has to do with constitutional rights.

#13 l3wis on 07.07.19 at 2:20 pm

Here’s a great article about the corruption of telecoms;

https://www.thenation.com/article/how-big-wireless-made-us-think-that-cell-phones-are-safe-a-special-investigation/

#14 Anonymoose on 07.07.19 at 3:03 pm

So you make it a habit to insult anonymous people or are your panties just in a wad because someone is asking you hard questions?

Well so far my devious plot to make you look like an ass, also known as “Operation let Scott speak,” is working splendidly!

Leave a Comment