- Forums - Sign Up - Reply - Search - Statistics -
www.mast-victims.org forum / General discussion / Global warming and the Mobile base stations
Author Message
# Posted: 21 Jun 2005 19:06

Why is it, that when causes of global warming are summarized, then nobody dares to mention, that the hundreds of thousands of base stations that are littering countries, heat the environment?

# Posted: 22 Jun 2005 16:56

Do basestations heat the environment to a degree where they contribute to global-warming? Well, the carrier frequency of fx. 3G/UMTS is uncomfortably close to the water-resonant frequency of a microwave oven, but as we all hear repeatedly: basestations radio emission intensities (ICNIRP) are far too low to create a heating effect (at least on human tissue). On the other hand I do remember reading about reports of technicians getting inner burns after working extremely close to basestation antennas.

Maybe the emissions from a radiation source (like basestations) can bring the surrounding molecules into resonance even at low intensities. For example: If you tune sound waves to a particular materials resonance frequency you can bring the material into resonance, even at low intensities, which must create a heating effect however small. Maybe even the low-frequency power amplitude variations in 3G/UMTS signals can cause material resonance and subsequent heating?

Surely the equipment itself (power generators etc.) generates localized heat but to actually contribute to global-warming, I think, is a consequence of the planets decreasing ability to expel heat due to greenhouse-gasses (like CO2). Any heat source on the surface of the planet will contribute to global-warming as long as the heat is trapped by the greenhouse effect in the atmosphere.

# Posted: 24 Jun 2005 15:35

Global warming by Telecommunications masts/basestations!

Of course they contribute, and massively for that matter!

Dont forget one very important thing?

If nothing else, the mast/basestations run on electricity, even when they are idle, that means 24/7/365, and the electricity is made by power stations creating tons and tons of harmful greenhouse gases, and THAT contributes massively to global warming.

At a time the UK Government is telling us, that if we all just turn off our TV`s, computers and domestic appliances at the main switch instead of leaving them on standby, we can save enough electricity to power a city the size of Birmingham for a year. (Official figures believe around a million tons)

BUT AT THE SAME TIME they are allowing/FORCING installation of houndreds of thousands of mast/basestaion "electricity guzzlers" all over the world, so PLEASE SOMEONE EXPLAIN TO ME HOW IT IS POSSIBLE TO TAKE THEIR "Climate Change is the biggest threat mankind faces" CRAP SERIOUSLY!!!

Environment Minister Elliot Morley, say´s the Government is leading efforts to tackle the problem.
So let´s see him tackling "The Zappers" as well as our appliences!

# Posted: 15 Sep 2005 01:26

The Global Warming of UMTS

Life Cycle Assessment of the Mobile Communication System UMTS: Towards Eco-efficient Systems

Goal, Scope and Background. Goal of this study is an evaluation of the environmental sustainability of the UMTS mobile communication system in Switzerland by means of a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). A baseline environmental impact profile across the full life cycle of the UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunication System) and its predecessor, the GSM (Global System for Mobile Communication) is presented. The baseline assessment was a necessary first step to evaluate the environmental impacts of the mobile communication systems use and growth, thus permitting the evaluation of its environmental sustainability.

Main Features. Two functional units are defined: a data set of 1 Gbit (1.000.000 kbit), and the yearly mobile communication of an average customer. In the UMTS, both data packages and calls can be conveyed. In order to be able to standardize the results, an equivalence between these two kinds of transmission is formed.
Two different options are defined, which represent different ways of transferring the data: mobile phone to mobile phone, and mobile phone to fixed network. All components of the UMTS network like the mobile phones, base stations, antennae, switching systems and the components of the landline like cable system and switching centers, are assessed. The environmental impacts are assessed taking into account all major life cycle phases like raw material extraction, manufacturing, use, disassembly and disposal of the product and the needed infrastructure. Electronic components like printed wiring boards and integrated circuits are assessed using a simple model based on the size (for IC) or number of layers (for PWB), respectively. Mining of precious metals (gold, silver) is included.
The study was carried out by ESU-services, Motorola, Swisscom and Deutsche Telekom. Thanks to the industrial partners it can rely on primary data for the production of mobile phone and base station, and for the operation of the networks. As the UMTS network is still being built, no actual data of network operation is available. Data from the GSM (Global System for Mobile Communication) were used in case of data gaps.

Results and Conclusions. About 25 kg CO2 are emitted and 800 MJ-eq (non-renewable) primary energy are required for the transfer of 1 Gbit information from mobile phone to mobile phone in the UMTS network. For a transfer from mobile to fixed network, these values are 20 kg CO2 and 640 MJ-eq, respectively. On the other hand, the fixed network requires more resources like copper (0.07 kg for the mobile to mobile option vs. 0.12 kg for mobile to fixed network).
From an environmental point of view, the mobile telephone is the most important element of the mobile communication network (UMTS and GSM). The short service life of the mobile phone plays a substantial role. Increasing the utilization period of the mobile phone (e.g. by leasing, re-use, extension of the innovation cycles, etc.) could thus represent a large potential for its improvement. The second most important components are the base stations. In the assessment mainly the use phase proved to be important. The lower environmental impact (per Gbit data transfer) as compared to the mobile phone can be explained by the longer service life (around factor 8). Main impacts are caused by the electricity consumption, in particular the energy needed for cooling the base stations. By choosing an environmentally benign electricity mix and/or by increasing the portion of renewable sources of energy, the network operators have a substantial potential of lower the environmental impacts (in particular the greenhouse gas emissions) of mobile telecommunication. Furthermore, the manufacturing of electronic components, the life time of the appliances and energy consumption are key parameters influencing the environmental profile of the networks most.
Given its larger data transfer rate, the UMTS is ecologically more favorable in terms of data transfer rate than its predecessor, the GSM system. The higher energy consumption and the more complex production of the devices in the UMTS system are compensated by the faster data transmission rate. Per customer, the result is inverse, however, since the higher efficiency is compensated by the higher data communication per user in the UMTS system. The UMTS network in its state of 2004 according to the 2001 planning and with the accordingly calculated number of customers and data transfer causes 2.1 times more CO2 emissions and requires 2.4 times more (non-renewable) primary energy per customer than for the GSM system in its current state. It must be noted, however, that the UMTS technology supports other services than the GSM system. The development of the UMTS is accompanied with an increased consumption of resources and emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases regarding the entire system for mobile telephone communication.
The GSM system is a mature technology, while the UMTS is still at the beginning of its learning curve. Thus, it can be safely assumed that large improvement potentials are still present for the UMTS network components concerning expenditures and emissions both at production and by the use of the devices. This study provides the necessary information where such improvements are most effective in environmental terms.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1065/lca2004.12.193

Life Cycle Assessment of the Mobile Communication System UMTS: Towards Eco-efficient Systems (12 pp)
Faist Emmenegger, Mireille; Frischknecht, Rolf; Stutz, Markus; Guggisberg, Michael; Witschi, Res; Otto, Tim
Corresponding author: Mireille Faist Emmenegger, ESU-services, Kanzleistr. 4, CH-8610 Uster (faist@esu-services.ch)

LCA Case Studies

# Posted: 4 Oct 2005 22:00

3G/UMTS is uncomfortably close to the water-resonant frequency of a microwave oven..

Henrik, that´s quite untrue. Microwave oven´s 2.45 GHz have nothing to do with any resonance frequency of water.


Eileen O'Connor
# Posted: 16 Dec 2005 17:15

Electro-Magnetic weapons: Today's Newest Military Development
Nuclear Weapons

Electro-Magnetic (EM) weapons are one of the newest and most serious military developments in the world today. Enormous secrecy surrounds their development, which is helped by the fact that they rely on the complex physics of non-ionizing radiation and on bio-electromagnetics. They can be broadly broken down into two categories - those aimed at the environment and those aimed at living systems, or in reality the human central nervous system.
In the case of the environment, very large quantities of energy can be literally 'broadcast', like radio, to create certain special environmental effects - radical changes in the ionosphere to affect communications, and possibly even the weather, as well as reflection to earth to perform such feats as x-raying the earth to find underground installations, possibly large transfers of energy to power equipment, or to apply destructive forces anywhere on earth, including EMP effects (Electro-Magnetic Pulse, associated with nuclear explosions), and simpler tasks like submarine communication, using very long waves.
The more sinister aspect concerns the ability to use low energy density waves of particular frequencies and special waveforms to literally 'tune into' the human central nervous system (CNS), something that has been achieved in the laboratory, according to publicly available scientific literature. This might be done on an individual scale, to temporarily or perhaps permanently alter psychological states, so as to elicit certain behaviours from human beings. It is alleged that many victims have been tested involuntarily for decades now with this technology. It is also suggested that these weapons have been used in some actions, most especially the Gulf War and against the Greenham Common women in the UK. In this case they would have a mass effect, in that they are aimed at large groups. This use is sought not only by the military, but, alarmingly, by the police forces as well, clearly for the purpose of controlling unruly domestic populations.
The subject came to the attention of the Green Group of the European Parliament in 1996, and we have slowly developed a knowledge base and large archive in this highly specialized area. Several special meetings culminating in a Foreign Affairs Committee Parliamentary Hearing have been held at the European Parliament as a result, and finally the Group managed in early January '99, with the help of interested Members in other Groups, to have Parliament pass a resolution referring very critically to this subject. This subject also has very serious implications for standard setting for non-ionizing radiation, because the levels of exposure at which one can manipulate the human being are very low indeed, since it is the tuning and the waveform which matter, not the levels, which is the reason that Russian exposure standards are apparently 1000 times lower than the US standards. Setting standards suited to the use of mobile phones and power lines, so as to avoid the long term health effects, while very desirable indeed, may not even be low enough to prevent the use of these weapons, and may even legalize their use, something the Greens must be very careful of, since we have been responsible for this subject to date in the European Parliament (Lannoye, Belgium and Tamino, Italy).
Ideally, for now, we should exclude military sources, specifically weapons, as opposed to communications equipment, from EU legislation on non-ionizing radiation altogether.
It is worth comparing the standard setting processes for non-ionizing and for ionizing radiation, as they are remarkably similar. The military, via the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), played a major role in originally setting ionizing standards at ridiculously high levels by burying or ignoring the science, leading to the need for continuous reductions in the acceptable exposure levels. Something similar appears to happening with non-ionizing radiation, in that a very similar unelected 'independent' advisory committee (ICNIRP - International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) has offered advice in this area, which is accepted blindly by the European Commission, despite the fact that, once again, much of the science is being ignored, and the precautionary principle, for some odd reason, seems not to apply.
The fact that two of the US representatives on ICNIRP are associated with the military has echoes of the past, and is most suspicious. The focus of public attention so far has been a project in Alaska called HAARP (High frequency Active Auroral Research Program), which is a massive 'array' transmitter designed to manipulate the ionosphere for military purposes - communications effects, earth x-rays, and possibly weather manipulation (despite conventions banning this). But the range of uses of this basic technology is very wide, much wider than its predecessor, ionizing radiation (nuclear). The primary difference is that electromagnetic waves can be 'tuned' so as to have certain effects on living systems, whereas the 'chaotic' nature of ionizing radiation does not facilitate this and the result of exposure to it is normally direct damage only.
As stated above, scientists have been able to 'tune' EM to facilitate remote direct communication with the central nervous systems of living creatures, and they are of course especially interested in using this fact to manipulate human beings. According to their own official documentation, the military and the police use them to control populations. They were used in a crude form by the Soviets against the US Moscow embassy in the '60s with fatal consequences for the ambassador himself, and it is believed that they were used in what is called a 'superfence' against the Greenham Common women, and also to demotivate the Iraqi troops during the Gulf War. The Soviets tried in the 70s to prevent an arms race in this area by means of a Convention, but the US rejected these efforts, and has moved ahead very rapidly, also within NATO, into a dominant position.
Unless this development is stopped, we are entering an Orwellian '1984' type scenario, which could potentially permanently transfer enormous power to those in control of the technology. It must also be seen in the wider context of the one-sided arms race currently underway, where the US is re-arming, by continuing with 'Star Wars', and is aiming to be totally dominant in 'Space Power' by 2020. Electromagnetic weapons play a key role here, alongside ABMs, lasers and particle beam weapons.

# Posted: 4 Mar 2006 23:28

It would be interesting to know what the total annual output in terms of CO2 emission is for the UK 2G and 3G networks?
Maybe this information would get F o E to join us?

# Posted: 15 Mar 2006 03:52

You´r forgetting TETRA, which is very much like 3G, and due to be installed on every police and firestation, plus god knows where els, in Britain and elsewhere.

And then we get the new "WI-FI" cloud in all larger urban areas.
After that we get Digital TV (next year is it?)
And Ofcom is looking very hard to try to find some left over frequencies to sell for the highest bid, to whoever wants them for whatever purpose.

Underwater microwave frequency sonar is driving whales and Dolphins up on dry land, so.
Yes, I am sure that in the end FOE and Greenpeace will see the light and join.
The SMOG is getting thicker by the minute.
Best regards.

# Posted: 17 Mar 2006 03:51

Letter on 3G & Global Warming
From Jenny -
here's my letter to the Andover Advertiser our local paper.
With huge thanks to Andy for all the facts and figures!

As global warming is at the top of the world political agenda, it is disturbing to learn how much hypocrisy exists within the Government, where saving our planet is concerned. The Government / Telecom Alliance is deliberately hiding the environmental dangers of the latest 3G mobile phone technology. The £23 billions paid in licence fees and the further billions in revenue, pay for a lot of sins and a lot of cover ups. Human life and fragile resources are worth little by comparison.

Industry sources say that 3G will place a significant additional burden on the national electricity supply. Running 24 hours a day all year round, the huge energy and climate burden of this technology is being ignored. Furthermore, Industry calculations are that the whole system requires 2.4 times the non-renewable energy per customer than the existing 2G network. More 3G masts are needed as their coverage is less than 2G. The Government’s requirement of 80% coverage of 3G throughout the country, means that tens of thousands more masts will be necessary for each of the five operators. That’s a mast coming near you shortly! The numbers speak for themselves, even taking into account mast sharing. The Telecommunications Industry, however powerful, cannot be allowed to be so profligate with precious, dwindling resources.

Mast Sanity believes a moratorium on 3G is urgently needed if we are to pull back from the environmental and health disaster that threatens us all.

Everyone is painfully aware of the controversy surrounding the latest round of the mast roll-out - the increasing numbers of people obliged to live near them, the increasing numbers who complain of adverse health effects, the devaluation of property, the absurd absence of any democracy in their siting, the irrelevance of safety guidelines and the misinformation on base-station research.

Now we have it reliably that the power requirements of 3G is a serious supply issue, especially so in the current “energy-crisis” context. It is appalling that efforts to combat global warming are being cancelled out by this money driven product promotion.

This Government must be challenged over its iniquitous Telecommunication planning guidance which is causing irreversible damage to our society and to the planet itself.

Sir George Young has joined MP’s across the UK, in recognizing that there is universal controversy on policies that take no consideration of the human and environmental impact. If we want to protect our children, our health and the value of our homes, we should all refuse to buy 3G phones – they are an anti-social luxury, not a necessity. Videoing Big Brother is NOT more important than people’s health or saving our planet.


# Posted: 31 Mar 2006 01:46

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain on Thursday said its emissions of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas blamed for global warming, crept up last year in the third consecutive annual increase.
The provisional estimates came after ministers said on Tuesday the UK would miss its own target to slash CO2 emissions by a fifth by 2010 from 1990 levels. Britain is still on course to meet its greenhouse gas reduction goals under the Kyoto Protocol.
The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) said CO2 emissions rose 0.25 percent in 2005 to 153 millions tons.
"The increase is due mainly to the rise in energy consumption, coupled with a small switch from gas to coal in power stations," said Defra in a statement.
Gas prices surged last year, encouraging utilities to burn cheaper but dirtier coal in power stations, despite extra costs related to complying with Europe's emissions trading scheme.
Gas prices rose partly on reduced supply from Britain's aging North Sea fields.
Thursday's data confirmed the UK is struggling to meet its domestic CO2 reduction goals. Emissions in 2005 were about 5.5 percent below 1990 levels.
Emissions of a basket of six greenhouse gases in 2005 were provisionally estimated to have been 14.5 percent below 1990 levels. Under Kyoto, the UK is committed to cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 12.5 percent from 1990 levels by 2008-2012.

Britain says CO2 emissions rose in 2005
Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:53 AM ET

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?storyid=2006-03-30T1052 52Z_01_L3073063_RTRUKOC_0_US-ENVIRONMENT-BRITAIN-CO2.xml

# Posted: 31 Mar 2006 02:25

What a load of hypocrisy!

The British Government is telling us in expensive TV adverts to remember to shut down our domestic appliances on the wall, and not to leave them on Stand-By!
They are threatening us with a National Grid “Melt Down”
And, that If We Don’t turn the TV, Dishwasher, and Percolator off Stand-By on the wall, and turn off the outside light bulb when we retire for the night, we will exhaust the power and the Grid will have a “MELT DOWN”.

What a load of rubbish. and hypocrisy!
Just think about it.
If you read the Reuters article at the link you will see, that the reason for the Over-Spend of power is that Electricity consumption has gone up.

So who is surprised about the acceleration in electricity consumption?

Think Mobile Mast!
Britain already has about 50-60000 mobile masts, and we are not even counting the TETRA masts in that number, as we cannot get information on them, how many, where, whatever, but they keep allowing new masts of every kind to be installed every day.

Some say End Quantity of masts will be 100-150000.
But they tell us the National Grid is suffering now, and there are only 50-60000.

The add the WI-FI´s which is still in their Baby-Shoes, but are predicted to be installed on every lamp-post, and every telephone booth in the country, Urban or Rural, as Local and County Councils can earn BIG Money selling rights. (BT has already started installing them in City phone boxes). And they all carry their own Cute Little Base-Stations.

And as we all know by experience, Councils are perpetually short of cash, so that will go down a treat, and before I can count to three there will be one on the lamp-post just outside my rural hill window.

Remember that ALL these things are Microwave Radiation Spewing Monsters “THAT ARE ON STANDBY 24/7/365, THEY ARE NEVER TURNED OFF”!
And I Cannot Remember Ever Having Heard A Warning To The Companies Who Run These Things, For Profit, to remember to, when not in use, “TURN OFF, AND DON’T LEAVE ON STAND BY”!
If anyone has, please use the “Answer” space to put me right.
Best regards.

# Posted: 25 Apr 2006 17:33

Check this article at REUTERS news:
Global warming behind record 2005 storms: experts

Adam Lea, a postdoctoral student at Britain's University College London in Dorking, Surrey, presented research based on British, German, Russian and Canadian studies that concludes half of the increased hurricane activity in the tropics could be attributed to global warming.

Holland, director of the Mesoscale and Microscale Meteorology Division of the federal research center, said tropical storm anomalies in the 1940s and 1950s can be explained by natural variability.
But he said carbon dioxide started changing traceable patterns in the 1970s and by the early 1990s, the atmospheric results were affecting the storm numbers and intensities.

# Posted: 18 Nov 2006 04:11

How the wrong sort of radio adds to C02 emissions

Digital broadcasting is increasing the threat of global warming by pumping massive amounts of extra carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, official figures suggest. The millions of Britons who listen to the radio through their power-hungry digital televisions and computers together release an extra 190,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year.
According to the Stern review of the economics of climate change, that amount of carbon pollution will cause £8.5m damage to the planet.
Figures from the industry body Rajar show that 22% of people in Britain now listen to the radio through their digital televisions at least once a week. About 12% listen to stations through their computer.
Computers and TVs consume significantly more electricity than radios. Assuming a power rating of 200W for a TV and 250W for a computer, if one in five of the population listens to the radio via those devices for two hours a week, they will produce about 210,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide each year.
A 20W radio turned on for two hours a week by the same number of people would produce about 18,000 tonnes a year; digital and traditional radios use roughly the same amount of power.
Keith Marsh, of the Energy Saving Trust, said the new LCD and plasma-screen TVs were rated at up to 390W.
The extra emissions from digital listening account for almost a fifth of the estimated 1m tonnes a year that could be saved by replacing every traditional lightbulb in Britain with a low-energy version.
A government study estimates that the rise in gadget ownership and the switch from analogue to digital TV could boost the electricity usage of the consumer electronics sector by 60% by 2010.
David Adam, environment correspondent
The Guardian. Monday November 13, 2006
http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1946253,00.ht ml

# Posted: 18 Nov 2006 04:12

To: The Guardian
Att: David Adam, environment correspondent
Re: article: How the wrong sort of radio adds to C02 emissions (131106)
http://environment.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,,1946253,00.ht ml

Dear sirs.
To David Adam, Guardian, and Keith Marsh, of the Energy Saving Trust.
In the article you have counted in the Digital TVs, Plasma Screens, Low emission Computers and Screens, but have´nt you forgotten the Mobile Telephones and their Masts and Base-stations?
TVs and computers tend to be used only during peoples waking hours, and turned off, when people go to bed.
The Mobile masts and Base-Stations are on standby 24/7/365, so let’s get some figures on the table from the Energy Savings Trust!

How does that energy waste compare with the "savings" of switching to low energy light bulbs??

Lets get some answers here!
Or is this just another load of Hot Air, for the benefit of terrorizing the ordinary concerned citizen, as usual, but leaving a lot of chosen things out of the equation?
Agnes Ingvarsdottir.

# Posted: 18 Nov 2006 11:04

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1065/lca2004.12.193
Goal, Scope and Background. Goal of this study is an evaluation of the
environmental sustainability of the UMTS mobile communication system in
Switzerland by means of a Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). "The development of
the UMTS is accompanied with an increased consumption of resources and
emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases."

By the time the next generation of mobile communication debuts, which is
expected to occur beginning in the year 2015, the need for transmission
capacities for voice, data, image and multimedia is conservatively
anticipated to rise by a factor of 10.

# Posted: 20 Nov 2006 04:12

Hi anonymous.
We have a study here which was made a couple of years ago:
study on the Feasibility of Future Epidemiological Studies on Health Effects of Mobile Telephone Base stations.
Is this the one you mean?
http://www.mast-victims.org/forum/index.php?action=vthread&forum=3&top ic=31
Let us know.
best regards.

Agnes Ingvarsdottir.

P.S. Next time you post, pls. , put your name (or a pseudo-name in the box below) but we Do like to have a name to relate to and answer.

I know we do not demand idendification, but

# Posted: 20 Nov 2006 12:45

2.45GHz (2450MHz) was only used for microwave ovens because that's one of many ISM bands (Industrial / Scientific / Medical) that can be freely used without licences or worries about interference. Water resonance is elsewhere in the frequency spectrum.. it's purely the sheer amount of power (hundreds of Watts) in a small confined metal box that heats up your food. Don't forget to factor in TIME into the equation too, heating up food still isn't exactly *instant*.

Hopefully that's a misconception cleared up for some of you.

Dances Alone
# Posted: 13 Dec 2006 17:39

Posted for your information with permission from Dr Goldberg. This was a private email but contains useful information for all.

gerald goldberg to dances.alone@googlemail.com
show details Dec 9 2006

Read your article in omega news. I am an advocate against some of the misuses of the technology which is affecting all life on this planet. I have included an article I am working on.
I recently published a book on the health effects of emf,” Would You Put Your Head in a Microwave Oven”. You can google it. I am interested in sharing this information.
Sincerly Dr. JG

As concerns the pineal, the role of calcium in general and the role of crystals within the pineal gland reveal some interesting points. As in radio and other transmitters, crystals act to convert certain discrete frequencies into electrical signals. Before we had all of the electro-pollution,
animals could simply orient themselves to the earth’s electromagnetic signature. Additionally animals could store into memory at a subconscious level the discrete signatures of subtle variations in electromagnetic signalling from various regions. This would explain the highly
specific nature of migratory behaviour seen in certain animals. What has not been appreciated
is the ability which has probably evolved over time to see, complex patterns that are generated from the earths electromagnetic signature.

So not only do animals have the ability to sense electromagnetic patterns but they also may
see them in great detail. I will use an analogue. Imagine if someone told you the eye senses light. Well that is a very interesting observation. However you know from your own personal observation that you are accustomed to seeing whole patterns and the patterns themselves have personal meaning for you. The brain does translate these simple appearing signals and, if you will, extracts the information contained in them.

Another question would be what might be another effect of a piezoelectric device. Well animals might have the ability to see the difference that is produced by seasonal variations in the earth’s magnetic fields that initiate for instance hibernation. What does that mean? In colder weather,
animals make a switch from a high metabolic rate based on generating electricity when food is abundant to a slower metabolic rate when the weather is cooler. One difference is the amount of light but also in cooler environments the relative amount of electromagnetic radiation goes up.
This effect is seen with superconductors when they reach incredibly low temperatures they become more efficient as conductors.

So the pineal is a switch, much like a motion detector, that response to signalling.
In evolution the signalling was kind of constant so that the signals made sense. However in this environment people are going into instant states if you will of hibernation. What does that mean? Well generally a hibernating animal is in a state of sleep and has shut down the generation of electrical activity. Their muscles become weak, Thyroid and gonadal hormone levels drop. The blood becomes a little more thick.

So the pineal acts as a electromagnetic sensor that regulates electrical generation in the body. It is a highly efficient device. The pineal functions as a electromagnetic thermostat if you will that regulates, total body charge in the organism.

The ability to oversee electrical energy generation from a single point is extremely important. Secondarily shutting off the pineal has a profound effect on calcium metabolism in the body as a whole. Blocking calcium entry tends to decrease energy and electrical activity on the cellular and
organ evel.

It is a pretty straight forward proposition. One has down regulated energy production and electrical signalling in the body. No wonder individuals can not function.

If you are interested, I can revise the text and perhaps you can post it.

Let me know what you think. It is important to see the overall principle.

Emf frequencies or microwave frequencies are overriding normal control mechanisms in the body and shutting off energy production.

Another correlation is the effect of emf on the weather patterns. So global warming could simply be another manifestation of the increased emf in the atmosphere. This was suggested by the French findings on Next up. If you put superheated air above the upper stratosphere and above the jet stream it will tend to settle. This can be demonstrated with a simple model that could be made by a high school student. The dropping of the jet stream will have an overall effect on weather patterns. Also since the earth is a large semiconductor it still has a finite capacity to store charge. If one cannot dissipate charge from the atmosphere then it will have an overall effect in the production of weather patterns. One will see an increase in the generation of storms, and other phenomena related to increase charge in the atmosphere. Thus there would be an increase not only in global warming but an attempt to neutralize charge production through rain.

This accelerant affect may be part of the explanation for some of the increased storms and flooding that have been witnessed in semitropical regions of the world. You have to use your god given common sense to sense if this is real. These issues need to be explored and expanded upon. The public is the last to find out and they will suffer the most.
Academics are often the last to respond.

So with the introduction of a single variable which is the increased frequency generation, you throw off or confuse the ecology of the planet and the organisms which live on it and depend on that signalling to live in balance with the earth. In essence life has evolved, if you will, with the Earth as an electromagnetic guide or a clock. Life cycles of different organisms are coordinated to live within the rhythms of that system. Now man has come along and thrown off the clock mechanism.
There are many different mannerisms of the problem. Bird populations shift, the number of insects decrease. Plants or trees may have longer or shorter growth periods. But underneath is a single disturbance in the relationship to the planet which was established a long time ago.

Gerald Goldberg, MD
Author:"Would you put your head in a microwave oven-emf an emerging
healthcare crisis"
It is not polite to make a living eating other people's children.



Dear Gerald Goldberg, MD

William O
# Posted: 20 Dec 2006 00:27

Thank you Erik for starting this post.

You have raised a crucially important question.

It is certainly most evident that the rapid proliferation of microwave/ radio/ scalar, and associated electromagnetic equipment has a significant effect on Global warming.

From research to development and maintenance of the so called “communication base stations” is heavily compartmentalized.

This is so that no one involved has a complete understanding of the technology and its intended use, except at the very top of the chain. This raises another important question, “who is at the top ?”

It is clear to anyone involved in 3G / UMTS / GMS / TETRA and associated technologies that they go way beyond “normal” communication requirements.

You only have to ask some small Town African villagers in the middle of the Saharan
Desert, why they have giant ELF microwave transmitters situated next to their settlements? And what is their real purpose, as no one within a 1000miles has a mobile phone.

Maybe it’s for underground military purposes, and not for the native locals.
The reinforced military bomb proof “base stations” is quite a marker.

As Eileen O'Connor points out, this equipment is part of a global military apparatus designed to exert complete control over the eco-system, as well as the entire population.

This is a weapon against humanity, not a civilized communication system.

The sooner people realize this, the better.

Why do you think scientists and researchers involved in the technology are being killed off or silenced into oblivion ?

Everyone knows what happens when you overcook scrambled egg in the microwave.

1x 1000 watt mast per 1000 people in the UK, you can guarantee the power output is more than that, and you can be assured by your local Government there are more coming if we don’t STOP THEM.

Best regards
~ William

# Posted: 21 Dec 2006 12:21

Let's not head into the paranoid realms of conspiracy theories. The world's militarys aren't THAT powerful! The US can't even find Bin Laden, took ages to find Sadam... still can't control Iraq any more than they could Vietnam!

Follow the Money - it's the best litmus test. Digital radio systems were developed to make the manufacturers MONEY. That's it, pure and simple. Any old 3rd-world sweatshop can churn out amazingly cheap analog radios now (look on eBay for £15 handheld radios that compete very favourably with the usual £300 offerings from the likes of Motorola, Kenwood, etc). Only by advancing the technology can they stay ahead of the game and keep their shareholders happy. Plus there's been a great push from the regulators to cram in as many effective channels as possible into each MHz off allocated spectrum. If Europe decides they want a digital system, they'll work with the industry to develop the new standards. It's all published and there are sound reasons behind each parameter - all the tech details are there for a reason. There is *NO* shady behind-the-scenes conspiracy to control our minds!

Even if there's some small EFFECT on our minds, that's a LONG way from "mind control"! What do you think they can do, flip a switch somewhere and we'll all turn into zombies and kill each other? Hardly! No, it's a health issue because they simply haven't accepted the damage causing potential yet.

If there's a mast in the middle of nowhere it's probably because some big company won a big contract to provide national telecoms coverage, and have to make sure than a certain percentage of the country gets a signal. Reinforced equipment housings are to stop vandalism, theft or acts of terrorism.

If there *is* an adverse effect on people nearby the masts it's almost certainly unforeseen (never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence!) and it's up to websites like this one to SENSIBLY explore, educate and expose the situation without scaring off Joe Public with kooky stuff that they'll link together with "the moon landings were faked", "Diana was murdered", and so many more weird distortions of reality. I don't know WHY people WANT to believe in such things, but there's always a minority who do.

No, I wouldn't put my head in a microwave oven, but there's a HUGE difference (many orders of magnitude) between 800W contained in less than a cubic metre of metal box, and the same power spreading out in all directions from an antenna. Work out the surface area of a sphere of even 20 metres radius, and then see how much power is evenly distributed to each square metre of surface area. It's 4 x pi x radius_squared for the surface of a sphere, it that helps; that 20m sphere is 5026 square metres, which would take quite a few tins of paint to cover, wouldn't it? So if there's an 800W transmission in the middle of a ball 40m wide (assuming the impossible 'isotropic' antenna that transmits evenly in all directions) the power density would be no more than 0.16W/m2 on the surface of that impressive beach ball. This could be 40 times greater in real life, if a 16dB directional panel antenna was used instead.

Agnes may have found herself uncomfortably close to a mast, but most of us would be hard-pressed to spend much time much closer than that. That's just the heating effect of course (that's what the microwave oven scare tactic relates to, isn't it?) and there's still the potential for ill effects down through the next 1000 to 10,000 times drop in power levels, but these (if proven to be true) are not due to oven-like heating.

Let's try to stay scientific (it's the only way people accept things, outside of religion!) if we can, that's all I'm saying.

I'll wish you all a Merry Christmas now, because I'll not be online much until after then. Cheers

# Posted: 16 Feb 2019 20:02

I think the time has come to re-open this item which originally questioned why heating from basestations are ignored when global warming are discussed. Two days ago british schoolchildren skipped school to demonstrate against no action being taken in the battle against global warming by government.
This action got immense media attention with groups of schoolchildren being interviewed and questioned about their reasons and demands.
The usual CO2 and exhaust gasses were aired, but at no point was the immense energy pumped out by the mobile phone communication and wi-fi providers mentioned.
Still the protest was carried by a group, which presumably uses this energy for education and leisure, unaware that here is a contributor to warming which they feel strongly about.
And the coverage was provided by an industry which usually ignores any questions asked about possible harm caused by the wireless communication industry.

yours truly: Erik Petursson

# Posted: 17 Feb 2019 01:48 - Edited by: ericgeneric

Erik, you are absolutely right. This fundamental aspect occurs to me, every time climate change is talked about in the media, and every time "air pollution" is raised as a problem in today's world, causing everything from cancer to dementia to mental illness and bad exam results for children.

Never is the main reason - blanket EMRs throughout our society - even given a mention.

This technology does not run on thin air. Neither is it magic. There is a deliberate disconnect going on here, for the past decade the links between technological "progress" and the "wonder" of what everyone can do on their phones now is never set against the backdrop of overwhelming, heat-generating, toxic, radiation-emitting, DNA-altering mobile base stations, antennae and other devices that are necessary to keep this going.

So we have the pitiful sight of children genuinely conditioned into believing that the big bad wolf out there is something else.


# Posted: 14 Apr 2019 13:59

Well done Erik and Eric for re-opening this important topic which really does need to be discussed more openly.

Sadly there is alot of sleight of hand going on the global warming industry, and while it is good that the serious health impacts of vehicle emissions are beginning to be seriously discussed, and loss of biodiversity and natural habitats as well, the "CO2 ONLY" lobby is backed by the so-called mainstream media" in focusing away from other environmental concerns such as the impact of global EMF pollution.

In my younger days I was a founder member of Friends of the Earth back in the late 1970s in my area, and have always been an environmental activist in many ways since then.

It seems that when we fast forward to today, many once multi-focused environmental groups have deteriorated into the mish-mash of C02 ONLY focused groups we see today.

These groups organise everything on social media, via text messaging and any other way they can using their mobile phones. They simply do not realise that they are a major part of the problem of EMF and especially RF pollution generally.

I have other thoughts on this which I will post shortly

But well done again for re-opening this topic.


# Posted: 14 Apr 2019 14:24

Over the past 25 years or so there have emerged what seems to be two distinct types of environmentalists:

Natural Environmentalists and Virtual Environmentalists.

Virtual Environmentalists seem to believe anything that comes from a computer model, no matter how unlikely.

While Natural Environmentalists simply look at our planet in its own Natural Environment.

As an astronomer I understand that Space Weather impacts out planet's weather, the long-term trend in which we call our climate. And as Space Weather is continually changing so are Earth's weather and climate.

20 something years ago I wondered about an old proverb, "Don't pour oil on troubled waters".

Well, the oil was a no-brainer - it's oil and other fossil fuels. What no-one seemed to be asking was "What are the troubled waters we are pouring the oil on?".

Our planet, like all the others and their moons, revolve around our Sun, which, like all other Suns are stars which, in turn, revolve around some focal point or other in their respective galaxies.

Since the 1950s or thereabouts our Sun has taken our solar system into an area of inter-stellar space which is a much denser medium than what it had been traversing for many millennia, maybe hundreds/thousand of millennia in the past.

Traversing this denser medium is causing some form of 'friction' that is having observed effects on every planet and many of the larger moons in our solar system. This denser medium is 'donating' massive new amounts of plasma into out solar system and causing disruptive atmospheric anomalies on all bodies within it.

I will trace the main source of studies into this phenomena and post extracts from it later.


# Posted: 16 Apr 2019 13:08

I have now found my source of the material I introduced in the posts above and made a short summary for comments by others as it relates to the electromagnetic state of our solar system and has had observable effect here on Earth as well as throughout our solar system.

How this may effect us who suffer from ES/EHS is something that has never been discussed to my knowledge. If it has been discussed elsewhere I would really love to be sent the details and links.

The "CO2 ONLY" industry dismisses the very idea of EMR pollution, especially if it involves RF pollution, and this important paper from a Russian Academy of Sciences member offers a much broader perspective.

If the state of the ambient EMR in our solar system has been radically ramped up as suggested by the author, then what we are adding with wireless technologies is a different kind of 'oil' onto very troubled waters.

I appreciate this is cutting edge astrophysics, but I ask people to bear with it as it gives us a wider perspective on the many problems we currently have.

Planetophysical state of the earth and life


Professor of Geology and Mineralogy, and Chief Scientific Member,
United Institute of Geology, Geophysics, and Mineralogy,
Siberian Department of Russian Academy of Sciences
Expert on Global Ecology, and Fast -Processing Earth Events

Published in Russian, IICA Transactions, Volume 4, 1997


Current Planetophysical alterations of the Earth are becoming irreversible. Strong evidence exists that these transformations are being caused by highly charged material and energetic non-uniformities in anisotropic interstellar space which have broken into the interplanetary area of our Solar System.

This "donation" of energy is producing hybrid processes and excited energy states in all planets, as well as the Sun. Effects here on Earth are to be found in the acceleration of the magnetic pole shift, in the vertical and horizontal ozone content distribution, and in the increased frequency and magnitude of significant catastrophic climatic events. There is growing probability that we are moving into a rapid temperature instability period similar to the one that took place 10,000 years ago.

The adaptive responses of the biosphere, and humanity, to these new conditions may lead to a total global revision of the range of species and life on Earth. It is only through a deep understanding of the fundamental changes taking place in the natural environment surrounding us that politicians, and citizens alike, will be able to achieve balance with the renewing flow of PlanetoPhysical states and processes.

Current, in process, geological, geophysical, and climatical alterations of the Earth are becoming more, and more, irreversible. At the present time researchers are revealing some of the causes which are leading to a general reorganization of the electro-magnetosphere (the electromagnetic skeleton) of our planet, and of its climatic machinery.

The climatic and biosphere processes here on Earth (through a tightly connected feedback system) are directly impacted by, and linked back to, the general overall transformational processes taking place in our Solar System. We must begin to organize our attention and thinking to understand that climatic changes on Earth are only one part, or link, in a whole chain of events taking place in our Heliosphere.

The most intense transformations are taking place in the planetary gas-plasma envelopes to which the productive possibilities of our biosphere are timed. Currently this new scenario of excess energy run-off is being formed, and observed:

In the ionosphere by plasma generation

In the magnetosphere by magnetic storms

In the atmosphere by cyclones

This high-energy atmospheric phenomena which was rare in the past is now becoming more frequent, intense, and changed in its nature. The material composition of the gas-plasma envelope is also being transformed.

The Heliosphere [solar system] transition through this structure has led to an increase of the shock wave in front of the Solar System from 3 to 4 AU, to 40 AU, or more. This shock wave thickening has caused the formation of a collusive plasma in a parietal layer, which has led to a plasma overdraft around the Solar System, and then to its breakthrough into interplanetary domains [5, 6]. This breakthrough constitutes a kind of matter and energy donation made by interplanetary space to our Solar System.

In response to this "donation of energy/matter", we have observed a number of large scale events:

A series of large PlanetoPhysical transformations

A change in the quality of interplanetary space in the direction of an increase in its interplanetary and solar-planetary transmitting properties

The appearance of new states, and activity regimes, of the Sun

1.1 A Series of Large PlanetoPhysical Transformations.

The following processes are taking place on the distant planets of our Solar System. But they are, essentially speaking, operationally driving the whole System.
Here are examples of these events:

1.1.1 A growth of dark spots on Pluto [7].

1.1.2 Reporting of auroras on Saturn [8].

1.1.3 Reporting of Uranus and Neptune polar shifts (They are magnetically conjugate planets), and the abrupt large-scale growth of Uranus' magnetosphere intensity.

1.1.4 A change in light intensity and light spot dynamics on Neptune [9, 10].

1.1.5 The doubling of the magnetic field intensity on Jupiter (based upon 1992 data), and a series of new states and processes observed on this planet as an aftermath of a series of explosions in July 1994 [caused by "Comet" SL-9] [12]. That is, a relaxation of a plasmoid train [13, 14] which excited the Jovian magnetosphere, thus inducing excessive plasma generation [12] and it's release in the same manner as Solar coronal holes [15] inducing an appearance of radiation belt brightening in decimetre band (13.2 and 36 cm), and the appearance of large auroral anomalies and a change of the Jupiter - Io system of currents [12, 14].

Update Note From A.N.D Nov. 1997:

A stream of ionized hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, etc. is being directed to Jupiter from the volcanic areas of Io through a one million amperes flux tube. It is affecting the character of Jupiter's magnetic process and intensifying its plasma genesis. {Z.I.Vselennaya "Earth and Universe" N3, 1997 plo-9 by NASA data}

1.1.6 A series of Martian atmosphere transformations increasing its biosphere quality. In particularly, a cloudy growth in the equator area and an unusual growth of ozone concentration [16].

Update Note:

In September 1997 the Mars Surveyor Satellite encountered an atmospheric density double that projected by NASA upon entering a Mars orbit. This greater density bent one of the solar array arms beyond the full and open stop. This combination of events has delayed the beginning of the scheduled photo mission for one year.

1.1.7 A first stage atmosphere generation on the Moon, where a growing natrium atmosphere is detected that reaches 9,000 km in height. [17].

1.1.8 Significant physical, chemical and optical changes observed on Venus; an inversion of dark and light spots detected for the first time, and a sharp decrease of sulfur-containing gases in its atmosphere [16].

1. 2 A Change in the Quality of Interplanetary Space Towards an Increase in Its Interplanetary and Solar-Planetary Transmitting Properties.

When speaking of new energetic and material qualities of interplanetary space, we must first point out the increase of the interplanetary domains energetic charge, and level of material saturation.

I have put the URL for people to access the full paper at the top but cannot yet find out how to make it a live link.

I would love some feedback from anyone on this forum regarding Dmitriev's work, and any comments from others of how they feel about this radical change in the ambient and ever-changing electromagnetic properties of our planet's natural environment.


# Posted: 23 Apr 2019 11:39

Thanks for posting, M. The coverage of this whole "climate change" issue in the media is very telling. There is definitely an ulterior agenda, to steer discussion and awareness away from EMR and its effects on the environment, and people.

Only this morning the BBC took an opportunity to peddle the old "there's more radiation from the Sun" chestnut, and assured us that said radiation "does more harm than wi-fi devices".

The climate is being affected by man-made tech, but no mention is given about the proliferation of EMR-boosting satellites and all the other junk that's been flown up into the atmosphere in the name of progress and making sure we can download Game Of Thrones that bit quicker.


# Posted: 24 Apr 2019 22:01

Thank you for that response EG. Yes the BBC are still pushing their BS about anthropogenic EMR, and throwing in a sideswipe about the radiation from the Sun also from what you say. I rarely watch their news so thanks for bringing that to our attention.

Every broadcaster and satellite operator has a tech team dedicated to monitoring Space Weather 24/7/365 as they know fully well that it affects our ionosphere and therefore their operations, as well as our weather on Earth and the longterm trends we call climate - itself always changing.

The donation of highly charged particles referred to by DR. ALEXEY N. DMITRIEV in the paper I quoted from above, and which are also EMR, and flooding into our solar system since it entered this new area of inter-stellar space, has seriously ramped up the "natural" EMR environment in which our planet exists.

Yet greedy corporations still encourage everyone daft enough to listen to get stronger and stronger signal strength for better and faster downloads as you say.

We cannot predict what this ramped up Space Weather environment will do to our planet, or even how many more people it may make EHS. But we can stop pouring oil and EMR on these 'natural' troubled waters.

Only a change of govt. here in UK will tackle the problem of these out-of-control corporations, as all the others over the past 30 years and more seem to be beholden to many of these big tech companies - especially the current conservative govt. The same crap as in the USA and much of Europe.

The Maunder Minimum, also known as the "prolonged sunspot minimum", is the name used for the period around 1645 to 1715 during which sunspots became exceedingly rare, as was then noted by solar observers. It became know as "The Little Ice Age"

We are currently in a major Solar Minimum again. The worst for over 100 years. During the Maunder Minimum it became so cold that the Thames River regularly froze over, and the famous "Frost Fairs" were held on it. Prior to that we had "The Medieval Warm Period" when I have read reports that French wine producers were complaining that wine imported from northern England vineyards were hampering their trade.

These facts have been airbrushed out of the climate change debate, so you are right to be suspicious of the protagonists.

None of their climate models are worth a damn because they do not factor in Space Weather. Many Western scientists deliberately ignore the excellent Russian research for geopolitical reasons, as well as petty jealousies.

Meanwhile in Russia every GP surgery and every hospital has many leaflets warning about the dangers of exposure to non-ionizing radiation. I do not possess any of the leaflets, but have been told they give examples of the sort of tech toys to avoid.

Might be worth a trip to St. Petersburg just to visit a few doctors and/or hospitals to pick some up?

RE: Space Weather I suggest a visit to the NASA site:


is a good enough place to start appreciating how importance it is.

The Australian Space Weather Agency is at:


ESA Space Environment Information System is at:


and here is an interesting report on our vulnerability

"Getting Ready for the Next Big Solar Storm" at:


Some disturbing reading I'm afraid, but not to be shied away from.


Your reply
Bold Style  Italic Style  Underlined Style  Image Link  URL Link 

» Username  » Password 
You can post anonymously by entering a nickname with no password (if that nickname has not been taken by another member) or by leaving both fields empty. If you have an account you can also log in from this page without posting a message.

These forums are running on online community script miniBB™ © 2001-2024