What’s wrong with this picture?  It is full of lies.

Click for enlarged image.

Click for enlarged image.

Please bear with the math, you’re going to see how it can be used to inform you or confuse you, and how to tell which one is being done.  The problem is the smart meter exposure could be as much as 30,000 times higher than shown there.  HUH?  Read the fine print at the single asterisk on the bottom of the chart.  The smart meter signal has been averaged over 30 minutes.  A common spike of microwave radiation from a smart meter is 4 milliseconds (4 thousandths of a second).  The chart does not tell how many spikes were measured, but a low-count smart meter of 740 times a day and a high-count smart meter of 10,000 times a day are used here for comparison.  Some meters are broadcasting that microwave radiation as much as 190,000 times a day.  [Results are rounded to even numbers.]

The signal strength of the smart meter when it is broadcasting is the crucial point.  It’s not right to average in a whole lot of time when it isn’t broadcasting, and use that lack-of-signal time to make the signal strength look unnaturally low, and claim that it is safe.

If a Honda Civic weighing 2500 lbs
ran over your foot for one second,
that = 2500 lbs per second.
Let’s say you averaged that over 30 minutes:
30 minutes x 60 seconds = 1800 seconds.
2500 lbs divided by 1800 seconds
= 1.4 lbs per second
But if that Honda Civic ran over your foot
for one second, it wouldn’t matter how many
other seconds you averaged it with.
During that one second,
your foot is crushed by 2500 lbs, not 1.4 lbs.

All we’re going to do with this math, is remove from the average the time when there is no smart meter signal, just like you would not count all the time the Civic is nowhere near your foot.  For these equations, you can skip to the colored print, the result.

So in the chart at top:
30 minutes x 60 seconds, x 1 thousand milliseconds
= 1.8 MILLION milliseconds are used to average the signals (30 minutes).
Divide 1.8 million milliseconds by 832 milliseconds, (for the high-count smart meter, because there are 4 milliseconds of signal, x 208 spikes in 30 minutes, for the high-count meter)
= 2,000 times more microwave radiation than they claim.
Divide 1.8 million milliseconds by 60 milliseconds, (for the low-count smart meter, because there are 4 milliseconds of signal, x 15 spikes in 30 minutes, for the low-count meter)
= 30,000 times more microwave radiation than they claim.

During the actual spike of its signal,
(like when the Civic runs over your foot),
what the smart meter puts out
= as much as 30,000 times the microwave radiation shown on this bogus math chart.

The effects of smart meter signals on our brains do not happen on an average, they happen in 4 milliseconds, and that damage adds up.  But some bogus math chart can average it out and tell you that you are only getting 30,000 times less microwave radiation, and they won’t add that the damage is happening 740 times a day or more.

A couple of other things to watch out for:

  • This chart says the measurements are per centimeter squared.  Some other charts may be per meter squared, which is 10,000 times more (100×100), so you could be comparing apples and oranges.
  • This chart says the measurements are in MILLI-watts per centimeter squared.  Other charts are measuring in MICRO-watts per centimeter squared.
    There are a 1000 microwatts in a milliwatt.  More fruit.
  • The distance from the device matters.  This type of microwave radiation falls off as the square of the distance, known as the inverse square law.  That means that something 2 times as far away only gets 1/4th the amount of radiation.  (Something 3 times as far away only gets 1/9th the radiation.)  But if you are close, it is much more damaging, like when a smart meter is mounted outside a bedroom wall near your head, or a cell phone is against your ear.  In this chart they compared readings from things touching the head (wireless phone and cell phone), a yard away (smart meter), and an unspecified distance away (WiFi signal, cell towers, microwave oven, etc). Fruit.
  • No exposure in the chart mentions the time length of the actual signal, only that 30 minutes were used to average it.  How’s that for apples and oranges?  These radiation measurements are not standardized for comparison, they are mathematically rigged.  It is only a matter of time before the damage from smart meters and other ‘dirty electricity’ becomes as obvious as brain tumors from cell phones now are.  Are you getting the idea that this math is as dirty as the electricity?
  • The cell phone industry got away with similarly rigged results about the effects of cell phones on the brain.  Their trick was to use a model of the human head with a solid shell filled with liquid, like water in a jar; and like water in a jar, the liquid tended to evenly distribute the heat coming from the cell phone.  But the human head has a lot more solid matter in it than the model.  That meant there were hot spots on the side of the head where the cell phone was held, and tumors developed there.  So tricks to mask health effects are not new.
  • Our brains have not evolved a specific sense organ which registers this radiation, like ears register sound or eyes register sight.  That may confuse the issue, but the damage still happens.  Please watch Dr. Klinghardt’s YouTube here.
  • Lastly, the safety standards of the FCC have been shown by many competent medical authorities to be grossly inadequate and out-of-date; check the info in the excellent, award-winning documentary Take Back Your Power.

Please be careful, we need to keep an eye on this stuff.
It does not matter how many manufacturers or utility companies claim it is safe.
Notice the math, and you’ll know better.

Advertisements