5G ANTENE I STANICE SE ŠIRE NIKADA BRŽE! SVE IH JE VIŠE A EVO GDE SE TAČNO NALAZE! OTKRIVANJE MAPE! 90,712 views•May 26, 2020; 12:53 min.

5G ANTENE I STANICE SE ŠIRE NIKADA BRŽE! SVE IH JE VIŠE A EVO GDE SE TAČNO NALAZE! OTKRIVANJE MAPE! 90,712 views•May 26, 2020; 12:53 min.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zz9uLAy29-w
- Mario ZNA
48.4K subscribers
Ova godina, 2020-ta je godina u kojoj kako u Srbiji, tako i u regionu kreće omasovljenje pokrivenosti 5G mrežom, kako je i dogovoreno na Evropskom nivou.

Naš region pripada trećem "klasteru" tj. trećem nivou postavljanja 5G antena u Evropi i sa nama se završava prva faza omasovljenja pokrivenosti ovom kako je mnogi koje je promovišu zovu tehnološkom revolucijom.

Pošto je strogo zabranjeno razgovarati otvoreno o svemu što je od krucijalnog značaja jedna stvar je dobra, VI već imate izgrađen stav o svemu ovome a ja vam predstavljam DVE MAPE! Mape putem kojih ćete svakodnevno moći da pomatrata razvitak ove mreže.

Na ovim mapama koje se "apdejtuju" na dnevnom i nedeljnom nivou možete videti tačne lokacije novih antena ili baznih stanica koje svakodnevno niču u celom svetu ali i kod nas.

Možda je neka već u vašem komšiluku ali ako nije, sigurno će uskoro i biti.
Linkovi ka mapama:
1. https://www.nperf.com/en/
- Awaken Species
1 month ago
2003 - Pticiji i 3G
2009 - Svinjski Grip i 4G
2020 - Korona i 5G

22

Zoltan Krajtmar
Zoltan Krajtmar
1 month ago
Retko dobar kanal. Hvala na smernicama.

84

Mala Riječ
Mala Riječ
1 month ago
Skrivaju ih čak i u dimnjacima, u ZG postoje slike....
Dovoze ih već namontirane tegljačma u velike limene dimnjake i montiraju noću dok narod spava....
Đubrad smrdljiva !

140

Vladimir Ribar
Vladimir Ribar
1 month ago
Paliti paliti paliti

80

Nenad Bozilovic
Nenad Bozilovic
1 month ago
samo da se rusi po svetu ih ruse u veliko. ako se samo prica a neradi dzabe prica

60

Душан Кнежевић
Душан Кнежевић
1 month ago
da ne deluje lose na ljude oni bi rekli da ce postavljati antene , to je dovoljan razlog da je sakrivaju od javnosti...

54

Edib Besirevic
Edib Besirevic
1 month ago
Ja bih vrlo rado promijenio mišljenje o 5G samo kad bi se to testiralo i kad bi ponudili dokaze da nije štetno. Ali to što o tome ne smije ni da s pita je dokaz samo po sebi...

50

eli aeioum
eli aeioum
1 month ago
Prošetaš zagrebom sat vremena samo i promijetiti ćeš ih otprilike 20 glava valjda sa puta, nisu skrivene nego baš na visini ili posebnog stupa ili na krovu ili zgrada ili uz mostove pored save itd itd... svukuda glave.

40

Slobodanka Tomasevic
Slobodanka Tomasevic
1 month ago (edited)
Poštovanje Mario,

Veliko Hvala što reprezentujete kvalitetne informacije ! 👍😃

Živim u Holandiji i ne mogu da verujem šta sam videla na mapi 😱🤮 nit manje zemlje nit više postavljenih instalacija !!! 😱🙈
Zajedno sa Švajcarskom prednjače u celoj Evropi u tom pravcu. 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

Profajder telefonije Vodafone (je engleski koga ima u 42 zemljeje) do sada je "pokrio" više od pola Holandije i do kraja jula kako kažu proces će biti završen a što je nažalosnije informacije o ovoj mreži se baziraju samo na poboljšanju brzine interneta ??!! 🤮🤮🤮

Strašno šta nam se događa ispred naših očiju a mi mali ljudi ne možemo ništa učiniti povodom toga jer je iskorišćen ovaj "Cirkus" u kome je ograničeno kretanje i okupljanje građana. 😱😱😱🤮🤮🤮🤮

Za sada, trenutno u Bredi nema još nijedne antene a do kada će tako biti ?!!!!

Ako ste pogledali film
"Pad kabale" od holandjanke
Janet Ossebaard jasno je ko nam "radi o glavi" ne samo ovde u Holandiji nego i u čitavom svetu! 🤮🤮🤮🤮🤮

Dobri Moji Ljudi neka nam je Dragi Bog upomoć! 🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Mario podržavam Vaš rad i šaljem Vam srdačne pozdrave
😘💋❤️🤗🍀

Pozz Dobri Ljudi
🤗🍀

67

Maja Mracina
Maja Mracina
1 month ago
Naj....smo kao zuti...unistice totalno prirodu i zdravlje ljudi ovi bolesnici!!

57

Горан Долић
Горан Долић
1 month ago
Браво Марио, капа доле.

56

27milica
27milica
1 month ago
U Naučno-tehnološkom parku "Beograd" puštena je u rad prva 5G bazna stanica u Srbiji pre godinu dana, ali je nemau vasim mapama.

17

Mirsada Simic
Mirsada Simic
1 month ago
Hvala postovani Mario na divnom kanalu i obavestenju kako mozemo sami saznat gde su postavljene 5G antene sad cu pogledat imam li je u mojoj blizini gde zivim.Hvala i veliki od srca pozdrav.

34

djordje starcevic
djordje starcevic
1 month ago
Ovaj region je oduvek i svima bio samo mesto za testiranje i probu.Mogao si samo u videu staviti sliku Tornja 5G kako bi ga ljudi mogli prepoznati na licu mesta

16

Nemanja Barac
Nemanja Barac
1 month ago
Kod nas ovih antena ima koliko hoces.... ako nisu aktivirane znaci da ce biti aktivirane. I sta onda.... mislim da cemo biti gori od Rumunije sto se tice 5g

30

ZORICA Aleksic
ZORICA Aleksic
1 month ago
Mladi se raduju 5G jer im nikad nije dosta brze mreže. Ispirani mozgovi upste ne misle za sutra samo gledaju danas. Gospode čuvaj ovu zemlju

27

Anno Domini MCMLXXIII
Anno Domini MCMLXXIII
1 month ago (edited)
Dragi Mario, imam pitanje. Zašto neke zemlje ne žele 5g mrežu, a neke ih imaju. Čuo sam iz dobrog izvora da baš Kina i Rusija plaše zemlje iz zapada samo da ne uvedu 5g mrežu jer oni ju imaju već davno. A poanta je da se ne razvijaju brže od njih i čuo sam da baš te države ne žele da se narod još brže poveže sa ostatkom svijeta. Recimo Njemačka ima najlošiji Internet u Evropi, zar to nije čudno samo gradovi su donekle povezani, a to znaju svi koji žive tamo. Lijep pozdrav

15

Димитрије Павловић
Димитрије Павловић
1 month ago
Ova 1. mapa i tije baš tako precizna, na dosta mesta gde ja znam da ima baznih stanica, uopšte nisu označene.

11

Samko Domski
Samko Domski
1 month ago
5G je Izraelska vojno oruzije, zbog toga su odbili postavljat u svojoj zemlji kao i bisel.

12

Niccoolley Taminares
Niccoolley Taminares
1 month ago
uvedjenje optickog interneta jeste uvodjenje 5G nemoj da mislis da smo mi zaostali...mi smo vec skoro sve uveli...ne trebaju ti bazne stanice kada imas 5G rutere(: mts vec pocinje da nudi polako svoje proizvode(: ne budite naivni....5G je za koji mesec vec instaliran i pocinje da radi u fulllu kod nas.

13

John Smith
John Smith
1 month ago
Hvala ti za mape a bome i za ostalo,,pozz..👍🇦🇺

20

Nebojsa Davidovic
Nebojsa Davidovic
1 month ago (edited)
Hvala Mario,
ovo je ipak ''globalni'' i ni blizu tačan prikaz rasprostranjenosti 5G...
Evo, na ovom primeru se može videti koliko je ustrvari instalirano 5G repetitora u Beogradu ali i Subotici i okolini (info je od pre 3 sedmice)...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/255439064984037/permalink/818230368704901/

3

balkan4 life
balkan4 life
1 month ago
Najjaci si

33

black shit
black shit
1 month ago
Jeste skontali da u rusi nema ni jedne 5G mreze

7

ivan katic
ivan katic
1 month ago
Amerika Amerika zemlja velika ali metar moga sela Amerika cela 💟❤️

43

dragan andjelic
dragan andjelic
1 month ago
najsavrsenije oruzije

14

Escobar P
Escobar P
1 month ago
Pa Mario
Postavili su po Srbiji.
Beograd, Sombor itd
Kako ih nema
????????

7

dejan avramovic
dejan avramovic
1 month ago
Svaka cast Mario legendo na objavi pozdrav Batice

16

Safeta Markez
Safeta Markez
1 month ago (edited)
Mario pozz 🙂 Svedska je objavila jucer info za gradjane Svedske da 5G ce se pokrenuti krajem juna . Kako oni kazu jeste da 5G je zamisljena za tesku industriju,samoupravljajuca vozila , i da nema potrebna za drustvo pojedinacno individu . Kao navodno bice upotrebljena u zdravstvu recimo rad sa starcima koju bi zamenio robot. Zamisli koliko mnogo ljudi bi izgubilo posao ako se uvede robottalizacija . Jos su spotakli to da ce zameniti nas novcanik . A to znaci da vise nece postojati novac . Ako nastave sa ovom glupom 5G jedino ako ne zele da od nas stvore Robocop.
🤔🤔

28

Jelena Misic
Jelena Misic
1 month ago
Pre godinu,dve,gledala sam na tv-u našu emisiju u kojoj su pričali kako roboti neće ići na bolovanje. Kažu 5G,6G se uvodi zbog njih.

31

Славица Јовановић
Славица Јовановић
1 month ago
Поштовање,хвала велико!

12

Ilir Jahiri
Ilir Jahiri
1 month ago (edited)
Tako je...a ljudi bez mozga sede u kucama i spashavaju svet od "jednog gripa obiqnog"koji nije ni postojao...svi shto su dobroviljno sedeli u kuqama i pozivali druge su indirektno odgovorni za ovo..

37

Dodic Vesna
Dodic Vesna
1 month ago
Mare ima ih vise, nije samo na Sajmu..... Videla sam dve....

7

Mama Alisa svijet cuda all you need
Mama Alisa svijet cuda all you need
1 month ago
Tacno i U Danskoj SOTONI,, IZASKI NA VIDJELO DA NI OVDJE NEMA DEMOKRATI JE I DA SU KUPLJENI PRODUZENE RUKE SOTONE I MEDIJE CUTE SVO ZLO STO NAM POLITICKA SOTONE SPREMAJU

5

marco romani
marco romani
1 month ago
MNOGI IH PALJU SA DRONOVIMA , U DEUGE DRZAVE

5

lili ak
lili ak
1 month ago
Gdje god su nove rasvjete tu je 5g

17

Sasa Stipanovic Ri Brajda
Sasa Stipanovic Ri Brajda
1 month ago
U Francuskoj su Rotsildi,nece sebi da steti...zuti prsluci...???

14

Lio Plavi
Lio Plavi
1 month ago
bravo Mario bravo

https://www.rt.com/news/413401-cellphone-cancer-risks-warning/

Put the phone down: US health officials warn of cancer & infertility risk

Published time: 16 Dec, 2017 11:32Edited time: 17 Dec, 2017 07:09

Get short URL

1.5K

The California Department of Public Health has issued guidelines on cell phone exposure, warning residents to keep their cell phone away from their body to reduce potential cancer and infertility risks.

The release follows a legal battle initiated by UC Berkeley researcher Joel Moskowitz last year after he discovered draft documents on the issue had existed since 2010 without being made available to the public.

The precautionary document, ‘How to reduce exposure to radio frequency energy from cell phones’ states that while the science is still evolving some studies have suggested a link between long-term mobile phone use and cancer.

Qualifying that these studies have not established a definitive relationship between the two, and that potential health risks from cell phones are still contentious among scientists, the health department states its advisory is for those concerned about the possible risks.

The main piece of advice issued by the authority is to keep the phone away from your body. “Keeping your phone just a few feet away from you can make a big difference,” it says.

This means using the speakerphone option or a headset instead of holding the phone up to your ear and keeping your mobile device in a backpack or handbag and not in a pocket.

The guidelines also warn against a common habit for those who also use their device as an alarm clock – sleeping next to your cell phone. Unless the phone is off or in airplane mode, keep it at least a few feet away from your bed, the guidelines recommend.

View image on Twitter

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/21/mobile-phones-are-not-a-health-hazard

Mobile phones and cancer – the full picture

The Observer

Mobile phones

An article we published last week about links between mobiles and cancer proved highly controversial. Here a cancer expert and physicist argues that it misrepresented the research and that fears are ill-founded

• Last week’s article: The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones

David Robert Grimes

Sat 21 Jul 2018 17.00 BSTLast modified on Sun 22 Jul 2018 09.15 BST

‘If mobiles were linked to cancer, we would expect to have seen a marked uptick in cancer with uptake. Yet we have not.’ Photograph: martin-dm/Getty

Last week the Observer published an article by Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie on a disturbing topic – the idea that telecoms giants might collude to suppress evidence that wireless technology causes cancer. The feature was well written, ostensibly well researched, and deeply concerning. Its powerful narrative tapped into rich themes; our deep-seated fears about cancer, corporate greed, and technology’s potentially noxious influence on our health. It spread rapidly across social media – facilitated by the very object on which it cast doubt.

2017's top business stories: Whole Foods, hackers and a giant rabbit

Yet as enthralling as Hertsgaard and Dowie’s narrative might be, it is strewn with rudimentary errors and dubious inferences. As a physicist working in cancer research, I found the authors’ penchant for amplifying claims far beyond that which the evidence allows troubling. And as a scientist deeply invested in public understanding of science, I’ve seen first-hand the damage that scaremongering can do to societal health. While it is tempting to rage into the void, perhaps this episode can serve as a case study in how public understanding of science can be mangled, and what warning signs we might look out for.

Cherry-picking and misrepresentation

The opening paragraph lays bare a seemingly astounding conclusion – the US’s National Toxicology Program concluded that mobile phones cause cancer. This is, to put it charitably, a devious extrapolation. The study in question observed that rats exposed to intense radiofrequency (RF) had slightly higher rates of brain cancers relative to the control group. But far from being a smoking gun, the flaws in this study paint a muddled picture. First, the preprint reveals that the rats in the RF-exposure group lived significantly longer than those controls. As cancer is primarily correlated with age, it’s not surprising the longer-lived group would get more cancer, but it would be equally daft to presume RF increases lifespan based on these results.

The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones

As other authors have pointed out, the NTP results raise several questions about methodology and interpretation but certainly do not show RF leads to cancer. Nor could a study in isolation answer this question – studies are essentially single data-points. What matters is whether consistent trends are seen across many studies. Indeed, a multitude of studies have been performed to this end, and as the World Health Organisation states, there has been no evidence of detrimental health effects: “A large number of studies have been performed over the last two decades to assess whether mobile phones pose a potential health risk. To date, no adverse health effects have been established as being caused by mobile phone use.”

Instead of rats, we might consider human evidence. The 13-country Interphone study examined phone usage in more than 5,000 patients with brain tumours, concluding there was no causal relationship between phone use and brain tumours. And while one would expect cancer rates to increase with usage were this a cause, the dose-response curve betrayed no signs of correlation. In some instances, it registered a decrease in risk with increasing usage. Curiously, the authors are aware enough of Interphone to cite it, but utterly twist its finding by stating the study “linked wireless radiation to cancer”. This stands in stark contrast to Interphone’s actual conclusion: “Overall, no increase in risk of glioma or meningioma was observed with the use of mobile phones.”

Facebook Twitter Pinterest

Hong Kong commuters look at their mobile phones as they wait in line for a bus. Photograph: Anthony Wallace/AFP/Getty Images

Other studies have been similarly robust; a Danish cohort study followed 358,403 people for 27 years, again finding no link between phone usage and tumour rates. The scientific consensus to date is that there is no evidence linking cancer to mobile phones. To ignore strong evidence against a conjecture while inflating weak studies is textbook cherry-picking, where data that might contradict a particular hypothesis is jettisoned, and only evidence fitting the desired story retained. This is antithetical to science, where the totality of evidence must be assessed in concert.

Not all radiation is bad

Since the early 1990s, mobile phone usage worldwide has grown at an exponential rate. If phones are linked to cancer, we’d expect to see a marked uptick in cancer with uptake. Yet we do not. American mobile phone penetration increased from almost nothing in 1992 to practically 100% by 2008 and there is zero indication glioma rates have increased, a finding replicated by numerous other studies.

This isn’t surprising in one respect. We are surrounded by a symphony of invisible light, of which our eyes detect only a tiny sliver. The energy carried by packets of light is proportional to the frequency of that light, a finding that won Albert Einstein his Nobel prize. High-frequency light has sufficient energy to break apart chemical bonds, causing DNA damage. This is “ionising” radiation, exploited in x-ray therapy where high-energy photons are marshalled to kill tumour cells. Ionising radiation can also lead to cancer; high-energy ultraviolet radiation, for example, induces skin cancer through sustained DNA damage.

By contrast, RF (and indeed, visible light) are notoriously low energy and non-ionising, lacking the ability to wreak havoc on DNA. For cancers to form, a carcinogen needs to damage DNA – unless some extremely novel mechanism were to be discovered, it is extraordinarily unlikely that RF could cause cancer.

It’s not a conspiracy

Hertsgaard and Dowie insinuate the telecoms industry is obfuscating scientific inquiry, drawing parallels with contemptible efforts by big tobacco to negate public acceptance of the link between smoking and cancer, and attempts by fossil-fuel groups to enforce a sense of public confusion and inertia over climate change. It might not seem too much of a stretch to imply the telecoms industry would engage in similarly odious behaviour, but this reasonable edifice crumbles under even cursory reflection.

The crucial difference is that there was an abundance of strong evidence linking smoking to cancer, and for anthropogenic climate change too. Unlike RF-radiation, smoking is a clear carcinogen, linked to cancer experimentally as early as the 1920s. Subsequent experiments echoed this, showing clear causal links to cancer. By 1953, the weight of scientific evidence linking cancer to smoking was overwhelming. Similarly, climate-change is supported by evidence so strong as to be virtually incontrovertible. The scientific consensus is that our climate is changing rapidly, with the unmistakable fingerprints of human meddling making it clear we’re responsible for rising global temperatures. The mechanism behind this has long been known - French Polymath Joseph Fourier hypothesized human impact on climate in 1827, with effects of greenhouse gases demonstrated experimentally by Irish Physicist John Tyndall in 1864.

With RF, however, the scientific evidence points to a conclusion totally at odds with what the authors postulate. The analogy to industry bamboozling the public to ignore findings doesn’t hold if there is no strong scientific consensus from which to deflect, rendering it cynical or ignorant to equivocate the twain. This is not a case of an industry trying to distract from an inescapable scientific conclusion – the reality is there is nothing of substance from which to deflect.

Household electromagnetic radiation doesn't make you ill or give you cancer. Here's why

Shifting the burden of proof

The authors conclude by stating a “lack of definitive proof that a technology is harmful does not mean the technology is safe, yet the wireless industry has succeeded in selling this logical fallacy to the world”. Such a statement raises questions regarding their grasp of the term “logical fallacy”. The onus here is on the authors to prove their assertion – it is sheer logical contortionto present a lack of evidence as a superficial supporting argument. That the authors attribute this lack of evidence for their claims to the machinations of a nebulous big telecoms is indicative of a mindset more conspiratorial than sceptical.

The conspiratorial bent is relevant – misconceptions about wireless technology have long perpetuated. Like all the most enduring myths, fears over new technologies are built upon a tiny kernel of truth, hideously distorted. There is no shortage of websites and groups alleging all manner of damage from wifi. Disputing these narratives tends to result in personal besmirchment, with questioners labelled either a pawn of the industry or witless dupe.

While constant monitoring of an emergent technology is laudable, current evidence contradicts the hypothesis that mobile phones increase the risk of cancer. Scaremongering narratives may be more alluring than the less sensational, scientific findings, but they are not harmless. We need only look at any vaccine panic to see the cost in human life when superstition outpaces science. In an age where misinformation can perpetuate rapidly, it can be difficult to parse fact from fiction, but it’s imperative that we hone our scientific scepticism rather than succumb to baseless panics – our very wellbeing depends on it.

Dr David Robert Grimes (@drg1985) is a physicist, cancer researcher, and science writer based at Queen’s University Belfast and the University of Oxford, and is also a recipient of the Sense About Science/Nature Maddox prize

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jul/21/mobile-phones-are-not-a-health-hazard

Share this page