RE: Correlation Between 5G and COVID-19 Cases Analyzed in Study

avatar
(Edited)

You are viewing a single comment's thread:

Correlation does not mean causality, its simply casualty... Its not strange that the most populated areas are the most affected by a rapidly transmitted virus, and that also those areas are the first to get 5G development (you wont be installing 5G in rural areas where few people use phones)... Also, its not the media saying that 5G is not dangerous, its all scientific community and experts... All studies concluding 5G being dangerous, are mostly poorly done and never published in any important scientific magazine... It happened to 4G, and 3G, and it will continue to happen, conspiracies will never end, its part of our human nature... Covid-19 is a virus, its real, and scientist been warning for years that something like this could happen, there's even thousands of movies done about it... Pandemics also happen before, when there was no 5G or any electromagnetic communication whatsoever...



0
0
0.000
13 comments
avatar

Yup, no where did I say causation. I said correlation. It's interesting to see the correlation.

0
0
0.000
avatar

There is no interest whatsoever in things that correlate if there is no causation. The reason people correlate those two, is to create conspiracy theories about the causation. That is the only possible reason you might want to correlate those two.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yes, no interest whatsoever in looking at how cigarettes correlate with negative health outcomes in the 50 and 60s. Let's just never look deeper at it and the tobacco industry was right. It's just a correlation, not causation. Nothing to even consider. Cigarettes are good, ask your doctors, they recommend Camels.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Yeah, let's behave like those two things are comparable.
Like, Corona + G5 have as much to do with each other as Homosexuality with Veganism.

0
0
0.000
avatar

There is no interest whatsoever in things that correlate if there is no causation.

You said that. Which is wrong. I was giving an example of how willfully ignorant that type of thinking is. You don't know if there is causation until you keep looking to prove or disprove it.

The 5G and COVID topic is heated, and if there was nothing there, then people could be shown to leave it alone. What's the rush with rolling out 5G when hardly any device uses it? Turn it off for a bit, show that the correlation was just that and the case is closed and people who espouse 5g=covid won't have a leg to stand on.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Good idea, how about we stop vaccinating for 10 years to see if the death count goes up significantly again. Or, how about we turn off electricity and see if cancer is correlated to that.

Or better, let's turn off internet for a time to see if that is somehow related to crimes.

Or, we could leave science to scientists and stop spreading shit we got no idea about.

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

The author of the study published it, and I wrote about it. Yeah, stop talking about things and questioning what we're told is or isn't possible. Great plan. Obey.

0
0
0.000
avatar

That's not at all what I am saying. But spreading correlations without discussing AT ALL that there are 100000 explanations that are 10000 times more likely to cause this correlation that actually being a causation is manipulating people to believe stupid stuff.

Just stop strawmanning. You want to dig into stuff, do it, research it well, make experiments. Read scientific papers. Buy lab equipment. Do whatever you want. And when you got conclusive evidence present it.

But don't read 15 blogs where no one has any scientific evidence at all and then manipulate a bunch of idiots to believe some crazy theories you came up from the questionable blog articles.

0
0
0.000
avatar

Ice cream sales correlate strongly with murder. Shouldn't we ban ice cream for a while to make sure?

image.png

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

So a guy, who has a Bachelor in Biology from 1970, that has worked since then as an Artist (Painter) put together a little pdf with some info he got from wikipedia and that's what you call a "published study"?
I call this utter bullshit.

Btw, how does he explain Brazil having so high numbers without a G5 net?

Obviously, not explaining it at all.

Edit: This is not how science works.

0
0
0.000
avatar

This is what I was intending to write while I was halfway done with the article. Air Pollution is highly linked to many diseases. You'll find a high correlation between air pollution and 5G towers as well.

0
0
0.000
avatar
(Edited)

I prefer air pollution correlation with COVID-19, than 5G. I don't think there is a strong enough link with 5G, but I could be wrong. But hey, this guys says "There is no interest whatsoever in things that correlate if there is no causation. " So don't bother looking into pollution, it's just a correlation. Move along.

0
0
0.000