Climate Change Conversations and 5G: There Must Be 50 Ways … to Wreck the Planet. Let’s NOT look at ONLY one!

By Patricia Burke

Paul Simon wrote;

“She said it’s really not my habit to intrude
Furthermore, I hope my meaning won’t be lost or misconstrued
But I’ll repeat myself at the risk of being crude

There must be fifty ways to leave your lover.”[1]

And instead of leaving your lover, can we talk about the 50 ways that we can wreck the planet?

Modeling vs. Data Driven Decisions

There are many conversations taking place about the recently released new climate report written by 13 federal agencies.

According to White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, “You have to look at the fact that this report is based on the most extreme modeled scenario, which contradicts long-established trends,” Sanders said. “Modeling the climate is an extremely complicated science that is never exact.” Sanders added: “We think this is the most extreme version, and it’s not based on facts. It’s not data driven. We’d like to see something that is more data driven. It’s based on modeling.”[2]

Can we take yet another look at how the FCC determines whether or not a cellphone is “safe?”

And we already have evidence that data can be spun to support a specific conclusion – by whoever has the data. [3]  Should we start to question the data dogma?

It Wasn’t Me; It Was the Dog

Accompanying the focus on the increase in temperature caused by an increase in CO2 levels, climate change is becoming the go-to scapegoat for many growing health and environmental issues.

The National Resources Defense Council reported higher death rates associated with global warming:

Today’s scientists point to climate change as “the biggest global health threat of the 21st century.” It’s a threat that impacts all of us—especially children, the elderly, low-income communities, and minorities—and in a variety of direct and indirect ways. As temperatures spike, so does the incidence of illness, emergency room visits, and death.

“There are more hot days in places where people aren’t used to it,” Haq says. “They don’t have air-conditioning or can’t afford it. One or two days isn’t a big deal. But four days straight where temperatures don’t go down, even at night, leads to severe health consequences.” In the United States, hundreds of heat-related deaths occur each year due to direct impacts and the indirect effects of heat-exacerbated, life-threatening illnesses, such as heat exhaustion, heatstroke, and cardiovascular and kidney diseases. Indeed, extreme heat kills more Americans each year, on average, than hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and lightning combined. [4] reported:

Climate change reduces male fertility, could help drive extinction

Researchers are honing in on a little-studied but significant consequence of climate change: male infertility. Could this potential cause of extinction and biodiversity loss also threaten the human species?[5]

Is it possible to develop illness and disease from exposure to more that one source?  The Answer is Yes.

Deadly glioblastoma brain tumors have been associated with exposure to the chemical vinyl chloride. [6]

Deadly glioblastoma brain tumors have also been associated with cellphones use.[7]

Corporate and financial interests continue to attempt to politic the science and the economics of both[8],[9]

Are Health and Environmental Damages Associated with Both Climate AND Man-Made Artificial Microwave Radiation?


 In a Nov. 28, 2018 interview with NECN’s Sue O’Connell, and Dr. Aaron Bernstein, co-director of Climate Change at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, both expressed dismay that the climate change report was released over a holiday weekend. [10]

(Do we all remember Memorial Day Week-end, in May of 2011, when the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer declared radio frequency exposures a Class 2B possible human carcinogen? [11])

While discussing climate change and its impact on insects, moose, sharks, Lyme disease, the food supply, the economy, and species migration, Dr. Bernstein stated, “It turns out that everything that lives on this planet is sensitive to temperature and precipitation.“



In the early 1960s scientists at the Max Planck institute experimented on college students by burying them underground to block the Schumann resonance, which is the natural frequency of the planet.  He demonstrated that interfering with the body’s ability to access the Schumann resonance caused adverse effects.


RESONANCE – BEINGS OF FREQUENCY from james russell on Vimeo.

We have no evidence to indicate that the concerns raised in the climate change discussion are not directly related to or even caused by the increase in exposure to microwave radiofrequencies powering wireless telecommunications.

For example, male infertility is linked to radio frequency exposure. [12]

The industries BENEFITING the most from the alarmingly myopic worldview that climate change is the cause of all our troubles and that wireless infrastructure is the solution are utilities, wireless industries, satellite and space, and surveillance, as well as the politicians in the pockets of these industries.

Whether one is in the camp of Democrat Bernie Sanders or Republican White House press secretary Sarah Sanders, infrastructure investment and data-driven decision-making is increasingly being proposed as the solution for societal problems. [13]

And regardless of party affiliation, one of the infrastructure plans is more wireless telecommunications, in the form of smart meters and the 5G network.

We Can Open Our Minds to More Than Just Climate Change As a Source of Inquiry, And Not Unleash Misguided, Inadequate, Short-sighted “Solutions”

If everything that lives on this planet is also sensitive to electromagnetic frequency and energy in addition to climate temperature and precipitation, we have to expand our definition of “air pollution” to include the electromagnetic environment.

If we were to focus only on vinyl chloride exposure as the cause of gliobalstomas, and work to rid the world of shower curtains, while ignoring the need to examine the cellphone paradigm, we would still be trapped in deep weeds. [14]

Just taking the temperature of a plastic skull filled with liquid really doesn’t tell us anything about human health.

Just monitoring the temperature of the planet’s climate really doesn’t tell us anything about the health of the ecosystem.

Just monitoring the temperature of the underwear region does not mean that we are protecting our DNA and genetics.


Just reducing the energy consumption of a light bulb does not make it safer, or reduce its environmental impact. [15]

We are not scrutinizing the strategies being adopted to address the health and environmental consequences of fossil fuels and climate change for health and environmental impacts.  We can’t, because it is prohibited to speak of such matters, by the Telecom Act of 1996.

It’s time to take the climate change science out of the hands of the tobacco scientists. and to bring health into the equation, [16]no matter how you view the issue.[17]

The EMF Call

Scientists and NGOs Call for Truly Protective Limits for Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz)

Make a new plan, Stan








[7] Risk for Glioma Triples With Long-Term Cell Phone Use


[9] Study of Cellphone Risks Finds ‘Some Evidence’ of Link to Cancer, at Least in Male Rats Many caveats apply, and the results involve radio frequencies long out of routine use.






[15] Toxic Light – The Dark Side of Energy Saving Bulbs



Patricia Burke works with activists across the country and internationally calling for new biologically-based microwave radio frequency exposure limits. She is based in Massachusetts and can be reached at

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

Be the first to comment on "Climate Change Conversations and 5G: There Must Be 50 Ways … to Wreck the Planet. Let’s NOT look at ONLY one!"

Leave a comment