Viewing last 25 versions of comment by O. Hancock on image #2317361

"[@Background Pony #FD22":](/images/2317361#comment_9003685
)  
Well the scientists I heard about said it has fewer risks than the previous generations of networking. Dihydrogen monoxide is a toxic chemical if it builds up too much in your body. But it's in our food, and it's in our bodies, and the government doesn't seem to care about trying to stop it. Sounds pretty scary doesn't it?


 
You can make anything sound scary if you don't have the proper context. A few scientists warning about the dangers of 5G is like a few scientists warning that you can drink too much water and get organ damage if you don't relieve yourself quickly enough afterwards. Have some scientists warned about it? Yes. Does it matter and it is it relevant to the vast majority of the public? No. By statingb that scientists have warned about 5G, you've stated a non-sequitur masquerading as an argument.


 
What conspiracy theorists have essentially done is found a few things that sound pretty damning if you don't have the proper context and expertise to fully understand them. They don't try to learn enough about networking. They don't try to learn about the proximities and extended periods of time you would have to be exposed to microwave radiation at the levels and distances that are used in 5G masts to suffer health consequences. They don't try to learn enough to realize that there is more they still need to know. It's classic Dunning-Kreuger.

"@Background Pony #FD22":/images/2317361#comment_9003685
Well the scientists I heard about said it has fewer risks than the previous generations of networking. Dihydrogen monoxide is a toxic chemical if it builds up too much in your body. But it's in our food, and it's in our bodies, and the government doesn't seem to care about trying to stop it. Sounds pretty scary doesn't it?

You can make anything sound scary if you don't have the proper context. A few scientists warning about the dangers of 5G is like a few scientists warning that you can drink too much water and get organ damage if you don't relieve yourself quickly enough afterwards. Have scientists warned about it? Yes. Does it matter and it is it relevant? No. By statingbthat scientists have warned about 5G, you've stated a non-sequitur masquerading as an argument.

What conspiracy theorists have essentially done is found a few things that sound pretty damning if you don't have the proper context and expertise to fully understand them. They don't try to learn enough about networking. They don't try to learn about the proximities and extended periods of time you would have to be exposed to microwave radiation at the levels and distances that are used in 5G masts to suffer health consequences. They don't try to learn enough to realize that there is more they still need to know. It's classic Dunning-Kreuger.

"@Background Pony #FD22":/images/2317361#comment_9003685
Well the scientists I heard about said it has fewer risks than the previous generations of networking. Dihydrogen monoxide is a toxic chemical if it builds up too much in your body. But it's in our food, and it's in our bodies, and the government doesn't seem to care about trying to stop it. Sounds pretty scary doesn't it?

You can make anything sound scary if you don't have the proper context. A few scientists warning about the dangers of 5G is like a few scientists warning that you can drink too much water and get organ damage if you don't relieve yourself quickly enough afterwards. Have scientists warned about it? Yes. Does it matter and it is it relevant? No. By statingbthat scientists have warned about 5G, you've stated a non-sequitur masquerading as an argument.

What conspiracy theorist have essentially done is found a few things that sound pretty damning if you don't have the proper context and expertise to fully understand them. They don't try to learn enough about networking. They don't try to learn about the proximities and extended periods of time you would have to be exposed to microwave radiation at the levels and distances that are used in 5G masts to suffer health consequences. They don't try to learn enough to realize that there is more they still need to know. It's classic Dunning-Kreuger.

"@Background Pony #FD22":/images/2317361#comment_9003685
Well the scientists I heard about said it has fewer risks than the previous generations of networking. Dihydrogen monoxide is a toxic chemical if it builds up too much in your body. But it's in our food, and it's in our bodies, and the government doesn't seem to care about trying to stop it. Sounds pretty scary doesn't it?

You can make anything sound scary if you don't have the proper context. A few scientists warning about the dangers of 5G is like a few scientists warning that you can drink too much water and get organ damage if you don't relieve yourself quickly enough afterwards. Have scientists warned about it? Yes. Does it matter and it is it relevant to the situation at hand? No.

What conspiracy theorist have essentially done is found a few things that sound pretty damning if you don't have the proper context and expertise to fully understand them. They don't try to learn enough about networking. They don't try to learn about the proximities and extended periods of time you would have to be exposed to microwave radiation at the levels and distances that are used in 5G masts to suffer health consequences. They don't try to learn enough to realize that there is more they still need to know. It's classic Dunning-Kreuger.