A number of articles caught my eye this morning, as they well illustrate the prevailing confusion of emotions, reactions, and loyalties, but what they seem to share in common is the outright denial that we might reasonably hold in our minds (and perhaps even see fit to discuss in public!) several perhaps mutually exclusive possibilities without necessarily ascribing the certainty of absolute truth to any one of them. To take one example:
The BBC reports on “Coronavirus: Ofcom assesses Eamonn Holmes 5G comments after complaints”. It turns out that poor Eamonn had simply cast doubt on “media reports refuting the myth that 5G causes the virus” when he asserted that “they don’t know it’s not true”. Leaving aside the confusion generated by the need to disentangle so many negatives, it seems to me that he was in effect being investigated for simply acknowledging (in public!) that there are pertinent questions for which we don’t actually have any evidence-based certainty about the answers.
Apparently he was “criticised . . . by scientists who have dismissed the theories as ‘complete rubbish’” – well, that’s a challenge! I wonder if he was getting uncomfortably on-target?
Let’s think this through. On the face of it there is no obvious way that an electromagnetic signal could introduce a foreign virus into the body – but – is the matter that simple? A number of the well-qualified have made a video that suggests that the “virus” RNA may be indistinguishable from that of an exosome which is produced by the cells of the body in response to some kind of stress. Now if the “virus” is in fact very similar (identical to??) to such an “exosome” then there will be some possibility that a test for the “virus” will produce a positive result when faced with such an exosome. Might this account for the 80% false positives that the Chinese reported finding when they tested people in China for coronavirus?
Suddenly a link between 5G deployment and the coronavirus doesn’t seem quite so far-fetched at the technical level.
Nonetheless “the virus” does seem to be spread around the world by human transmission . . . hence the closure of borders and the global lock-downs. But still the worst-affected areas do seem to be associated with the 5G roll-out (northern Italy, the cruise ships, New York, London, and no doubt more). Of course, sufferers may not live within range of a 5G mast but did their work or previous travel take them within 5G range? It’s not at all clear how far this relationship works but maybe poor Eamonn shouldn’t be pilloried until somebody has investigated this more thoroughly.
We also know that since the pandemic started, medics around the world do seem to be writing “Covid-19” on death certificates at the slightest provocation, so it is likely the case that many such are not down to Covid-19 at all, and any relationship between Covid-19 and 5G is to some extent being masked by attributing non-Covid cases to Covid. Deliberate? Perish the thought!
What about the timing though? 5G was turned on quite a bit earlier than the pandemic started, so wouldn’t we have seen “Covid-19” cases earlier? Well, maybe we did, but as nobody was looking for Covid-19 at the time they may have simply ended up in the “flu-like” category – nothing to see here. After all, the symptoms of radiation poisoning may not present much differently from the usual winter “flu-like” – except in one particular: it appears that in the severe cases where Covid-19 “pneumonia” takes some unfortunates off, the “pneumonia” is reportedly unlike the usual pneumonia in that the lungs do not seem to fill with liquid, but it presents more like high-altitude oxygen deprivation . . . perhaps in fact like the pneumonitis that results from radiation poisoning . . . perhaps 4 to 12 weeks after exposure!
I think I’ll stop there. I’m beginning to suspect that I might actually be right for once, so I’ll quit whilst I’m ahead.
Photo by Evil Cheese Scientist 
I think it reasonable to conclude that there ‘might’ be some connection with Coronavirus and 5G. – It is only an idea with no facts on this, but I personally consider it to be reasonable for someone to mention it, whilst ensuring that it is stated as only an idea ! – It must not be verbally delivered as any form of ‘fact’, unless you are writing for a Newspaper, and then the door is open to any drivel that is available !
I think you’re right! Best stop there. But the point everyone seems to miss is that with carrier (rf) waves, its not necessarily or only the carrier itself that causes problems ..