To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
Microwaves are like trying to move a quarter across the table with the energy levels of blowing on it. X-rays are like doing the same, only with hurricane energy levels.
They're just not anywhere near the same. But if I blow on the quarter, imagine someone freaking out, telling me to stop because I'm going to make a hurricane. That's what this irrationality sounds like.
I guess that's the butterfly effect, you could make a hurricane somewhere else with that little move, 5G might cause hundreds of cancers somewhere else. lol
I think it's not that thermodynamics laws prevent it, but that it's not applicable to many systems that we work with. This explanation from the guy who developed the concept could help: some complex dynamical systems exhibit unpredictable behaviors such that small variances in the initial conditions could have profound and widely divergent effects on the system’s outcomes.
They can't scramble your brain because they cannot get through your thick skull.
LOL. What about mind control? I see enough zombies wandering about seemingly controlled by their 'smart phones' and 'data plans' 5g is only gonna make things worse.
5g is definitely created by humans.
I don't see how the natural ones can be any better for you than the unnatural. The ones made by humans just have codified patterns machines can recognize.
The health risks are extremely rare and nothing to worry about. However, because it is invisible and seemingly powerful (it can transmit lots of data quickly), people worry.
You have a much higher chance of falling down the stairs yet people want these in their houses because they understand the causes and effects and see the benefits.
It's simply fear of the unknown.
5g tech will enable things that will save lives, especially for road safety and dangerous jobs with autonomous vehicles.
Interesting Topic. As you said EM radiation with a lower frequenz then infrared light can not damage our DNA because the energy of the photons is to low.
But EM Radiation with lower Frequenzy can penetrate our bodys deeper, so i think microwave radiation can penetrate your head skull. But the frequenz is definetly to low to damage DNA.
For example with infrared light you can not cause a sunburn and also your skin wouldnt get brown, because "Frequenz=Energy" is to low.
UV-A and UV-B radiation can damage our skin and DNA (UV-B more because higher frequenz=higher energy) (melanocytes gets "activated" through UV radiation, because our skin knows it needs to protect itself only against UV radiation)
Suncreams also use physical filters (lower the light frequenzy through scattering) and chemical filters who absorbe the uv radiation.
It seems you know a lot about this subject. I never really thought about how sunscreen worked.
Did you know aloe vera and sunscreen are classified at the same danger level as microwaves and sunscreen is proba ly worse because it encourages uv exposure.
In most cases em passing through people is harmless except in very high energies.
As far as I know microwaves cannot penetrate the body very far.
The ovens are good at heating water and lower eneries penetrate further. So at the 2.5ghz frequency which is the oven or 4g, a wave will go around 2 cm into your skin. This should be enough to penetrate all but the thickest skulls.
However 5g typically has 20 to 100 ghz and this penetrates 1mm to 0.3mm which will barely penetrate your skin.
The army actually designed a microwave weapon at around 90gh, but it isn't even that dangerous and was considered non lethal.
I just wouldn't want a concentrated powerful beam aimed at my eyes.
Some weeks ago i wrote an article about "what is light" (physics), therefore i did a lot of research and read something about suncreme too.
Did you know aloe vera and sunscreen are classified at the same danger level as microwaves and sunscreen is proba ly worse because it encourages uv exposure.
I think some years ago some of the chemical uv filters which was used in suncremes were unhealthy and caused allergy...
Today the chemical filters are better and in general are not unhealthy for you (except you have allergys etc then you can only use suncremes with only physical filters).
chemical filters convert the uv radiation into heat.(difficulty is that no unhealthy substances result after this absorbation) some years ago chemical filters release oxidative radicals or something which also damaged DNA (i think this is what you meant?
But i think today these chemical filters in suncremes are safe.
Normal suncreme works with chemical filters and physical filters like titandioxid which scatters the uv light which physically means, that the frequenz gets lower so that the energy of the scattered light is too low to damage DNA.
The SPF Measurement of suncreme is only based on Erythema (when you skin gets read because of UV exposure).
its basically very simple:
SPF= time until your skin gets red with suncreme/time your skin gets red without suncreme
So with 2 SPF you can stay 2 times longer in the sun than without the 2 SPF suncreme until your skin starts getting red.
Its not the best measurement because it did not include how much your DNA gets damaged, because the radiation which mainly causes erythema is UV-A radiation, but the higher frequenzy UV-B radiation damages your DNA more.
In most cases em passing through people is harmless except in very high energies.
Yes so only EM Radiation with high frequenzy (above infrared).
As far as I know microwaves cannot penetrate the body very far.
The ovens are good at heating water and lower eneries penetrate further. So at the 2.5ghz frequency which is the oven or 4g, a wave will go around 2 cm into your skin. This should be enough to penetrate all but the thickest skulls.
However 5g typically has 20 to 100 ghz and this penetrates 1mm to 0.3mm which will barely penetrate your skin.
Youre Right
In the end your article perfectly showed, that EM Radiation in the microwave frequenzy is not that dangerous and there is no need for us to block the "5g Revolution".
I didn't realize A caused surface damage but B caused molecular damage. Makes sense giving the logic we have been following to this point. It does suddenly stop with xrays though, i guess out bodies are like a screen for them and they are small enough to have a decent chance of passing through.
Sometimes I see cheaper, but more powerful sunscreens on sale, but I avoid those. I tend to wear long sleeve reef gaurds and sombreros at the beach like everyone else in Asia since the protection is more obvious.
Great show
If you read too many articles about dangerous of EM that's what happens. I prefer that one cause it seems somewhat serious unlike tinfoil hat people.
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 3.788 which ranks you at #5077 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 25 places in the last three days (old rank 5102).
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 132 contributions, your post is ranked at #25.
Evaluation of your UA score:
You're on the right track, try to gather more followers.
Nice article! I guess for the average person that doesn't have a basic understanding of energy than it can seem scary having all of these waves bouncing around!
I think one of the only things missing here is the basic idea of "ionizing radition" vs. "non-ionizing radition". (Ie., basically waves with enough energy to modify atoms and waves that just vibrate stuff - which can still cause burns, etc...).
Even still though, I don't think i'd like to live anywhere near those huge power transmission lines lol.
One more thing! The chart mentions that UV radiation doesn't penetrate the atmosphere... but quite a bit still makes it through and causes sunburns (and they will damage DNA)!
The chart mentions that UV radiation doesn't penetrate the atmosphere... but quite a bit still makes it through and causes sunburns (and they will damage DNA)!
Yes, the UV-C Radiation is blocked by the atmosphere, but UV-B and UV-A Radiation as you said penetrate the atmosphere.
I noticed the chart was fuzzy around the edges as well. However I recall seeing that the chart won an award so someone liked it. I do know from reading sunscreen labels that uv-c isn't as much of a worry. I guess that's why.
Just took a look, that video is really good. There is no conclusive data saying it's bad or harmless, we should know by now if it is really bad. There are lots of things like pollution that are really bad that we should be worried about. We should also spend less time on our phones and more time with our loved ones (I didn't mention that issue). People suffering from Radiation fear shouldn't be laughed at because it doesn't help (I laugh, but I don't know anyone close to me who suffers and never met anyone in person). Anyway cool video.
To call weak EM harmful, you basically have to call everything harmful. Also, it's so important for the modern world the alternative is much worse. I think some of the argument focuses on things like 'do we really need 5g? Why isn't 4g enough. But trying to argue 5g is somehow more harmful runs into the same trap where people are arguing to limit things because they may not be perfectly safe. That says a lot for alcohol, recreational drugs, guns, extreme sports, processed meats, and automobiles, etc.
Thank you! What an informative and well written article on the subject of 5G! I am glad to have come across it since I know very little about these waves, but now I'm feeling much better about 5G :D
It's complicated, but from a physical point of view, it is basically the same as 4g.
Your only concern with 5g should be the costs and the network instability. Unless its built by Huawei, then you need to worry about communist spies from china trying to steal your thoughts and mind control you.
People are saying 5G is bad? I hadn't heard that. So they're afraid of a few waves they can't see? Do they think it will cause brain cancer? This is weird.
They just want nore studied and don't seem concerned nothing will get done if we have to do a long term effects study for every minor change.
I remember a story where eople were protesting wifi routers at a school one month after they were protesting a cellphone ban at the same school. These devices emit the same EM waves.
Nice article. I think many are skeptical of science because they don't really understand how it works. Our schools in the US do a terrible of job of teaching this--mostly focusing on scientific theories and facts, not on the actual methods of science. Our daughters were even in a science magnet program, but that too was really just a veneer of science--it was too rushed to be anything else.
Consider, for example, when people who don't understand science hear that hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is great for certain women for a decade, then suddenly hear that it is not recommended because it increases the risk of heart attacks and breast cancer. With a near total understanding of science, it is easy to dismiss all scientists as quacks, or as people with some hidden (bad) agenda. What people don't realize is that science uses the best methods possible to get at the "truth" (in scare quotes to satisfy the philosophers), but that as evidence accumulates, our understanding changes. Yes, in fact, HRT is beneficial, but yes it does increase risk of certain diseases. What this means is that we must be more selective about who receives it--weighing the risks and benefits. One of the best short essays I've read to explain science to a non-scientist is Isaac Asimov's The relativity of wrong. It still doesn't get the scientific method across, but it does explain how science progressives, even though it is almost always "wrong".
I agree, science and math are poorly taught. Hollywood and media focus on evil and Nobel scientists which isn't realistic. Hopefully with the drive to get girls into STEM they will look at their methodology and revise it. Definitely needs to m9ve away from theory and science fair only model.
I finally got around to reading that. Asimov has always been a favorite writer of mine. That essay is short and to the point. I agree, things nowadays are less wrong. However, with each step progression slows down as the amount of knowledge required to take the next step increases. Fortunately, research and the amount of scientists is increasing.
They say we stand on the shoulders of giants, but nowadays most Nobel scientists work among giants and have giant research teams and giant budgets, too. Think of things like ITER and CERN these aren't basement projects.
There are definitely people in history who stand out, but I fear it is diminishing and I think computers, Internet and now more recently, AI are progressing things beyond what a single person is capable of doing.
The problem with 5G is not the danger that it may or may not pose to human health. We humans have a remarkable ability to adapt to our surroundings and so even if 5G is dangerous, it won't be for too long. However, 5G is indeed very dangerous in the sense that it will facilitate the rise of an unprecedented level of surveillance that is more than likely to be utilised towards abusive ends.
5G aside, the language that you use in this post is most interesting to me. You claim that one ought to be very, very sceptical. But go on to imply that this scepticism should be reserved for only specific facets of public information. You seem to think that it is wise to be sceptical in regards to mainstream media, but that one ought to take everything emanating from the scientific community as gospel. This is not a sceptical mind. It is a biased mind. If you believe that politics and science are separate from one another, and that only the former need be scrutinised with a sceptical eye, then perhaps you ought to consider that scientific researchers largely depend upon corporate and governmental agencies to source their funding, and consequently, the nature of modern science and the information shared by it is indeed political.
In short; a sceptical mind is sceptical all the time. If there is any source at all that you trust implicitly then you're not sceptical, you are biased, and open to manipulation of the mind. Also, it is unproductive and unbecoming to be ridiculing others for having a different opinion from you. If your goal is as you say it is, then perhaps you ought to speak to those you are attempting to change the minds of in a less condescending manner. In my experience, people are far more receptive to new ideas when they do not feel they are being insulted.
It's not often I offer unsolicited advice nowadays so I hope you're not offended by my choice to do so here today. It would be worth considering my words closely, I feel. Have a pleasant day.
I agree the issues with privacy violations are concerning and it may become worse with 5G. However, that is a different topic that has nothing to do with EM waves, it is just faster technology which already exists with fibre optics.
Governments and people who abuse privacy will continue to do so with or without 5G. North Korea has a 3G network and is miles ahead in terms of invading privacy than more technologically enabled despotic regimes.
I understand you have concerns that I am ok with political debate/conspiracy and not with science debate. Please carefully read the first few paragraphs of what I wrote.
I stand by my statement that science conspiracy is stupid. I mentioned in my post that I respect the scientific method, end of story.
To clarify what that means (there is always someone who needs explaining here) I am not skeptical of science that ignores the scientific method, I am simply saying it isn't science or a scientific debate.
When someone blatantly ignores the scientific method in their arguement (it's hard to call it research or experiment), pointing out flaws in their method (professionals call it peer review) is the first step. This isn't science, it is come back to debate science when you are prepared to debate science.
I also said scientific debates are usually best left to experts who know what they are talking about.
Skepticism in science is very different than in social science, politics or history. I am most certainly skeptical of bogusbscientific claims. There is a famous youtuber called thunderf00t that likes to call these people out.
Thank you for your comment and I hope you see the difference and understand I basically agree with you.
Always welcoming curators! I think the issue with stem is the same as with leo, if they allowed a rating system like tasteem from 1 to 3 for difficulty level it would be good.
Howdy again sir abitcoinskeptic! Very interesting. I agree, the people who are against 5G must have alternative reasons because they have no scientific ones. Well done post on these topics, I look forward to whatever ones you tackle next!
Definitely, the understanding and education of scientific ideas and principles is completely out of whack at the moment... wish you the best of luck with this, I've given up on it... I focus on the next generation and helping to equip them with the analytic and critical skills to understand the ideas at hand.
Bravo for this! More people need to be debunking the conspiracy theorists instead of jumping on every single bandwagon that lumbers past on the road to nowhere. Kudos!
Yeah it always starts with something harmless like a superstition, then absolute mistrust of government then society and finally rejecting important science.
To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.
Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.
Microwaves are like trying to move a quarter across the table with the energy levels of blowing on it. X-rays are like doing the same, only with hurricane energy levels.
They're just not anywhere near the same. But if I blow on the quarter, imagine someone freaking out, telling me to stop because I'm going to make a hurricane. That's what this irrationality sounds like.
There are websites devoted to cool experiments you can do with a mocrowave oven. None of them work with my 5g router.
My favorite experiment was microwaving the AOL CD for 7 to 12 seconds with the lights off.
Posted using Partiko Android
Ok, that is much more interesting, but RIP microwave!
I guess that's the butterfly effect, you could make a hurricane somewhere else with that little move, 5G might cause hundreds of cancers somewhere else. lol
Posted using Partiko Android
I'm not aware of any scientific basis for the butterfly effect being referred to as the direct cause of hurricanes.
Me neither, I was just kidding.
Posted using Partiko Android
Butterfly effect is more for social and psychological events not physical ones. Laws of thermodynamics prevents it.
Posted using Partiko Android
I think it's not that thermodynamics laws prevent it, but that it's not applicable to many systems that we work with. This explanation from the guy who developed the concept could help: some complex dynamical systems exhibit unpredictable behaviors such that small variances in the initial conditions could have profound and widely divergent effects on the system’s outcomes.
LOL. What about mind control? I see enough zombies wandering about seemingly controlled by their 'smart phones' and 'data plans' 5g is only gonna make things worse.
3g made zombies, 4g made super zombies and 5g will made godly zombies.
I am already mind controlled though, that's why I dont run in terror from microwave radiation
Posted using Partiko Android
Some waves are natural, others are created by humans.
I do wonder is they will have an influence on our health.
5g is definitely created by humans.
I don't see how the natural ones can be any better for you than the unnatural. The ones made by humans just have codified patterns machines can recognize.
The health risks are extremely rare and nothing to worry about. However, because it is invisible and seemingly powerful (it can transmit lots of data quickly), people worry.
You have a much higher chance of falling down the stairs yet people want these in their houses because they understand the causes and effects and see the benefits.
It's simply fear of the unknown.
5g tech will enable things that will save lives, especially for road safety and dangerous jobs with autonomous vehicles.
Posted using Partiko Android
Interesting Topic. As you said EM radiation with a lower frequenz then infrared light can not damage our DNA because the energy of the photons is to low.
But EM Radiation with lower Frequenzy can penetrate our bodys deeper, so i think microwave radiation can penetrate your head skull. But the frequenz is definetly to low to damage DNA.
For example with infrared light you can not cause a sunburn and also your skin wouldnt get brown, because "Frequenz=Energy" is to low.
UV-A and UV-B radiation can damage our skin and DNA (UV-B more because higher frequenz=higher energy) (melanocytes gets "activated" through UV radiation, because our skin knows it needs to protect itself only against UV radiation)
Suncreams also use physical filters (lower the light frequenzy through scattering) and chemical filters who absorbe the uv radiation.
Great article
It seems you know a lot about this subject. I never really thought about how sunscreen worked.
Did you know aloe vera and sunscreen are classified at the same danger level as microwaves and sunscreen is proba ly worse because it encourages uv exposure.
In most cases em passing through people is harmless except in very high energies.
As far as I know microwaves cannot penetrate the body very far.
The ovens are good at heating water and lower eneries penetrate further. So at the 2.5ghz frequency which is the oven or 4g, a wave will go around 2 cm into your skin. This should be enough to penetrate all but the thickest skulls.
However 5g typically has 20 to 100 ghz and this penetrates 1mm to 0.3mm which will barely penetrate your skin.
The army actually designed a microwave weapon at around 90gh, but it isn't even that dangerous and was considered non lethal.
I just wouldn't want a concentrated powerful beam aimed at my eyes.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microwave_burn
Posted using Partiko Android
Some weeks ago i wrote an article about "what is light" (physics), therefore i did a lot of research and read something about suncreme too.
I think some years ago some of the chemical uv filters which was used in suncremes were unhealthy and caused allergy...
Today the chemical filters are better and in general are not unhealthy for you (except you have allergys etc then you can only use suncremes with only physical filters).
chemical filters convert the uv radiation into heat.(difficulty is that no unhealthy substances result after this absorbation) some years ago chemical filters release oxidative radicals or something which also damaged DNA (i think this is what you meant?
But i think today these chemical filters in suncremes are safe.
Normal suncreme works with chemical filters and physical filters like titandioxid which scatters the uv light which physically means, that the frequenz gets lower so that the energy of the scattered light is too low to damage DNA.
The SPF Measurement of suncreme is only based on Erythema (when you skin gets read because of UV exposure).
its basically very simple:
SPF= time until your skin gets red with suncreme/time your skin gets red without suncreme
So with 2 SPF you can stay 2 times longer in the sun than without the 2 SPF suncreme until your skin starts getting red.
Its not the best measurement because it did not include how much your DNA gets damaged, because the radiation which mainly causes erythema is UV-A radiation, but the higher frequenzy UV-B radiation damages your DNA more.
Yes so only EM Radiation with high frequenzy (above infrared).
Youre Right
In the end your article perfectly showed, that EM Radiation in the microwave frequenzy is not that dangerous and there is no need for us to block the "5g Revolution".
Sources:
uv radiation caused red skin measuremt: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3734971/
everything about SPF:
https://www.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09506.x
Last source you need access for the full text (not worth to buy it, except you are really interested.)
I didn't realize A caused surface damage but B caused molecular damage. Makes sense giving the logic we have been following to this point. It does suddenly stop with xrays though, i guess out bodies are like a screen for them and they are small enough to have a decent chance of passing through.
Sometimes I see cheaper, but more powerful sunscreens on sale, but I avoid those. I tend to wear long sleeve reef gaurds and sombreros at the beach like everyone else in Asia since the protection is more obvious.
Posted using Partiko Android
Great article. I especially liked the Better Call Saul reference.
Great article. I
Especially liked the Better
Call Saul reference.
- drax
I'm a bot. I detect haiku.
Great show
If you read too many articles about dangerous of EM that's what happens. I prefer that one cause it seems somewhat serious unlike tinfoil hat people.
Posted using Partiko Android
Hi @abitcoinskeptic!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 3.788 which ranks you at #5077 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has improved 25 places in the last three days (old rank 5102).
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 132 contributions, your post is ranked at #25.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server
Nice article! I guess for the average person that doesn't have a basic understanding of energy than it can seem scary having all of these waves bouncing around!
I think one of the only things missing here is the basic idea of "ionizing radition" vs. "non-ionizing radition". (Ie., basically waves with enough energy to modify atoms and waves that just vibrate stuff - which can still cause burns, etc...).
Even still though, I don't think i'd like to live anywhere near those huge power transmission lines lol.
One more thing! The chart mentions that UV radiation doesn't penetrate the atmosphere... but quite a bit still makes it through and causes sunburns (and they will damage DNA)!
Yes, the UV-C Radiation is blocked by the atmosphere, but UV-B and UV-A Radiation as you said penetrate the atmosphere.
I noticed the chart was fuzzy around the edges as well. However I recall seeing that the chart won an award so someone liked it. I do know from reading sunscreen labels that uv-c isn't as much of a worry. I guess that's why.
Posted using Partiko Android
This post was shared in the Curation Collective Discord community for curators, and upvoted and resteemed by the @c-squared community account after manual review.
@c-squared runs a community witness. Please consider using one of your witness votes on us here
I bet you're going to say earth is round, not flat, next time. lol
Posted using Partiko Android
I won't bother with that one because modern flat earthers are either intensely stupid or trolling.
Posted using Partiko Android
Here is the recent Kurzgesagt video about this topic:
Here is the little observation I made after watching that video: https://steempeak.com/science/@ajayyy/small-observation-about-the-size-of-light
Thanks I will have a look later, I lile some of Kurzgesagt 's videos.
Posted using Partiko Android
Just took a look, that video is really good. There is no conclusive data saying it's bad or harmless, we should know by now if it is really bad. There are lots of things like pollution that are really bad that we should be worried about. We should also spend less time on our phones and more time with our loved ones (I didn't mention that issue). People suffering from Radiation fear shouldn't be laughed at because it doesn't help (I laugh, but I don't know anyone close to me who suffers and never met anyone in person). Anyway cool video.
Yea, I do like the message about worrying about more important things.
Though I do feel they were a little to generous toward the possibility of it being harmful.
To call weak EM harmful, you basically have to call everything harmful. Also, it's so important for the modern world the alternative is much worse. I think some of the argument focuses on things like 'do we really need 5g? Why isn't 4g enough. But trying to argue 5g is somehow more harmful runs into the same trap where people are arguing to limit things because they may not be perfectly safe. That says a lot for alcohol, recreational drugs, guns, extreme sports, processed meats, and automobiles, etc.
Thank you! What an informative and well written article on the subject of 5G! I am glad to have come across it since I know very little about these waves, but now I'm feeling much better about 5G :D
It's complicated, but from a physical point of view, it is basically the same as 4g.
Your only concern with 5g should be the costs and the network instability. Unless its built by Huawei, then you need to worry about communist spies from china trying to steal your thoughts and mind control you.
Posted using Partiko Android
People are saying 5G is bad? I hadn't heard that. So they're afraid of a few waves they can't see? Do they think it will cause brain cancer? This is weird.
They just want nore studied and don't seem concerned nothing will get done if we have to do a long term effects study for every minor change.
I remember a story where eople were protesting wifi routers at a school one month after they were protesting a cellphone ban at the same school. These devices emit the same EM waves.
People with common sense avoid these people.
Posted using Partiko Android
Nice article. I think many are skeptical of science because they don't really understand how it works. Our schools in the US do a terrible of job of teaching this--mostly focusing on scientific theories and facts, not on the actual methods of science. Our daughters were even in a science magnet program, but that too was really just a veneer of science--it was too rushed to be anything else.
Consider, for example, when people who don't understand science hear that hormone replacement therapy (HRT) is great for certain women for a decade, then suddenly hear that it is not recommended because it increases the risk of heart attacks and breast cancer. With a near total understanding of science, it is easy to dismiss all scientists as quacks, or as people with some hidden (bad) agenda. What people don't realize is that science uses the best methods possible to get at the "truth" (in scare quotes to satisfy the philosophers), but that as evidence accumulates, our understanding changes. Yes, in fact, HRT is beneficial, but yes it does increase risk of certain diseases. What this means is that we must be more selective about who receives it--weighing the risks and benefits. One of the best short essays I've read to explain science to a non-scientist is Isaac Asimov's The relativity of wrong. It still doesn't get the scientific method across, but it does explain how science progressives, even though it is almost always "wrong".
I agree, science and math are poorly taught. Hollywood and media focus on evil and Nobel scientists which isn't realistic. Hopefully with the drive to get girls into STEM they will look at their methodology and revise it. Definitely needs to m9ve away from theory and science fair only model.
I'll have to check out that book, thanks!
Posted using Partiko Android
I finally got around to reading that. Asimov has always been a favorite writer of mine. That essay is short and to the point. I agree, things nowadays are less wrong. However, with each step progression slows down as the amount of knowledge required to take the next step increases. Fortunately, research and the amount of scientists is increasing.
They say we stand on the shoulders of giants, but nowadays most Nobel scientists work among giants and have giant research teams and giant budgets, too. Think of things like ITER and CERN these aren't basement projects.
There are definitely people in history who stand out, but I fear it is diminishing and I think computers, Internet and now more recently, AI are progressing things beyond what a single person is capable of doing.
Yes, energy is all around us, it is free
The problem with 5G is not the danger that it may or may not pose to human health. We humans have a remarkable ability to adapt to our surroundings and so even if 5G is dangerous, it won't be for too long. However, 5G is indeed very dangerous in the sense that it will facilitate the rise of an unprecedented level of surveillance that is more than likely to be utilised towards abusive ends.
5G aside, the language that you use in this post is most interesting to me. You claim that one ought to be very, very sceptical. But go on to imply that this scepticism should be reserved for only specific facets of public information. You seem to think that it is wise to be sceptical in regards to mainstream media, but that one ought to take everything emanating from the scientific community as gospel. This is not a sceptical mind. It is a biased mind. If you believe that politics and science are separate from one another, and that only the former need be scrutinised with a sceptical eye, then perhaps you ought to consider that scientific researchers largely depend upon corporate and governmental agencies to source their funding, and consequently, the nature of modern science and the information shared by it is indeed political.
In short; a sceptical mind is sceptical all the time. If there is any source at all that you trust implicitly then you're not sceptical, you are biased, and open to manipulation of the mind. Also, it is unproductive and unbecoming to be ridiculing others for having a different opinion from you. If your goal is as you say it is, then perhaps you ought to speak to those you are attempting to change the minds of in a less condescending manner. In my experience, people are far more receptive to new ideas when they do not feel they are being insulted.
It's not often I offer unsolicited advice nowadays so I hope you're not offended by my choice to do so here today. It would be worth considering my words closely, I feel. Have a pleasant day.
I agree the issues with privacy violations are concerning and it may become worse with 5G. However, that is a different topic that has nothing to do with EM waves, it is just faster technology which already exists with fibre optics.
Governments and people who abuse privacy will continue to do so with or without 5G. North Korea has a 3G network and is miles ahead in terms of invading privacy than more technologically enabled despotic regimes.
I understand you have concerns that I am ok with political debate/conspiracy and not with science debate. Please carefully read the first few paragraphs of what I wrote.
I stand by my statement that science conspiracy is stupid. I mentioned in my post that I respect the scientific method, end of story.
To clarify what that means (there is always someone who needs explaining here) I am not skeptical of science that ignores the scientific method, I am simply saying it isn't science or a scientific debate.
When someone blatantly ignores the scientific method in their arguement (it's hard to call it research or experiment), pointing out flaws in their method (professionals call it peer review) is the first step. This isn't science, it is come back to debate science when you are prepared to debate science.
I also said scientific debates are usually best left to experts who know what they are talking about.
Skepticism in science is very different than in social science, politics or history. I am most certainly skeptical of bogusbscientific claims. There is a famous youtuber called thunderf00t that likes to call these people out.
Thank you for your comment and I hope you see the difference and understand I basically agree with you.
Posted using Partiko Android
STEM Tribe is so hard to me. Just doing curation here.
Great post for giving a new info.
Always welcoming curators! I think the issue with stem is the same as with leo, if they allowed a rating system like tasteem from 1 to 3 for difficulty level it would be good.
Posted using Partiko Android
You got a 44.77% upvote from @ocdb courtesy of @abitcoinskeptic! :)
@ocdb is a non-profit bidbot for whitelisted Steemians, current max bid is 10 SBD and the equivalent amount in STEEM.
Check our website https://thegoodwhales.io/ for the whitelist, queue and delegation info. Join our Discord channel for more information.
If you like what @ocd does, consider voting for ocd-witness through SteemConnect or on the Steemit Witnesses page. :)
Howdy again sir abitcoinskeptic! Very interesting. I agree, the people who are against 5G must have alternative reasons because they have no scientific ones. Well done post on these topics, I look forward to whatever ones you tackle next!
Definitely, the understanding and education of scientific ideas and principles is completely out of whack at the moment... wish you the best of luck with this, I've given up on it... I focus on the next generation and helping to equip them with the analytic and critical skills to understand the ideas at hand.
Bravo for this! More people need to be debunking the conspiracy theorists instead of jumping on every single bandwagon that lumbers past on the road to nowhere. Kudos!
Yeah it always starts with something harmless like a superstition, then absolute mistrust of government then society and finally rejecting important science.
Posted using Partiko Android