>>6815461 and also >>6815307 (LB)

ETS is a shill/LARP, true, but…

>Microwaves are not fit for human use

You've been bathed in microwaves since birth. They are "not fit" at power levels used in your oven. What's on the ground is literally 1/1000 (or lower) the power level. Even towers only broadcast at a few watts.

>why has Trump banned 5G at his places of residence indefinitely?

Sauce? Bet that contains "reasons" you don't like…

>Why did the recent NTP study show rats got malignant cancers from mere 2G and 3G signals?

"Mere"… methinks you don't understand what these "signals" are. I'll give you a hint: 2G and 3G "signals" are the same RF as 4G and 5G. The # refers to which generation the technology is, not the signal intensity, e.g., 5G is "5th generation." The primary difference is in the waveform (which is irrelevant to health effects) and requisite processing, also irrelevant. For that matter, 3G was primarily around 2 GHz, which is near actual microwave oven frequencies. 5G will be used in higher frequencies, which actually have LOWER penetration capability, i.e., they tend to stay on the skin (hell, high humidity is enough to stop them).

Of course rats get cancer from RF when bombarded with levels 1000s of times higher than normal exposure. That's how these studies work, and that's why they're all so badly broken that they are otherwise useless.

The fact that you are posting this multiple times indicates an agenda…

>>6815670

> Microwave levels have skyrocketed since the early 00's, before that they were lower (unless you lived near a transmitter) and much less modulated

So you've been bathed in them since birth, like I said. Damn you shills aren't very smart.

>https://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/20170503/official-palm-beach-exempt-from-5g-wireless-law

The "reasons" are aesthetics. In other words, I'm right again.

>NCORRECT. you have NO IDEA what you're talking about.

They're RF - non-ionizing no less. I absolutely know what I'm talking about. Even the damned "fact sheet" at the NTP says the exact same thing. They tested "different modulations" which does not change the fact that the carrier is RF. Again, you're an idiot.

>see bioinitiative.org and wi-cancer.info to actually learn what Microwaves do to the human body.

I know exactly what microwaves do to the human body - at high power levels it's a problem.

Do some actual research and stop believing the propaganda.

>>6815670

>https://www.palmbeachdailynews.com/news/20170503/official-palm-beach-exempt-from-5g-wireless-law

NOt only what I said above… but the literally state they want to take advantage of 5G IN YOUR OWN EVIDENCE.

"Bradford said that to position itself to take advantage of 5G wireless technology, the town needs to lay additional conduit as part of the town-wide undergrounding project."

Fuck you people are stupid.

>>6815855

Of course she is. McSally got herself a warning: never-Trump never wins.

>>6815867

You said Trump had it banned indefinitely, but that's not true. So you admit I'm right… again.

You aren't very good at this logical argument thing.

>>6815888

Except that it's a colloquialism that means "use the same tactics they use to show how stupid they are."

There's no reason to be pedantic, anon.

>>6815896

No, I don't "know this," and a quick scan of the press also seems

to be oblivious to this claim. Even your own evidence disagrees

with you (on top of being 2 years old). You're beat. Give up.

>>6815934

Actually running at similar (FCC wants lower) power spectral density on average, however.

The real problem with 5G, IMO, is the ability to track people. It will be possible to use interferometry to map just about everything, and your phone pinging the cells will provide locations down to meters, not kilometers (without GPS enabled even).

>>6816009

She's actually what we need out of the so-called "left." She's reasonable opposition

to extreme conservatism, arguing positions that are more thoughtful than the

typical liberal ideologue. McSally was a never-Trumper. That kind of ideology doesn't

do anybody any good.

My opinion has been that McSally was given an option: give up the stupidity and we'll

give you No-Name's seat. She's been off of her high horse since.

>>6816209

Because now they're going to dig like mad to uncover whatever they can

find on the two, and all of it comes up bad for her. He's already been exposed

as a serial accuser, and she's pretty insane on top of that.