My college classmate John has what might be called a ‘superpower.’ He possesses an extraordinary sensitivity to smells. As an airline pilot, he is renowned for recognizing hazards, including fuel leaks.
Trauma expert Peter Levine notes, “In a herd of deer, we need some super-sensitive ones. They are the ones that will hear that teeniest little crack, or smell the one or two molecules of scent from the mountain lion that’s stalking them. Their job is to use their hyper-sensitivity to alert the whole group.”
At present, it’s not working out well for many seeking to alert ‘the group.’
My ‘superpower’ is that I can hear and feel artificial frequencies that others seemingly don’t detect.
My body does not appreciate being exposed to or infiltrated by artificial frequencies. Nor do others. When a cell tower was activated in a small residential neighborhood in Pittsfield MA, as reported by the Hill Country Observer, “Courtney Gilardi’s 9-year-old daughter came downstairs one morning in the late summer of 2020 and announced that she was feeling “headachy, dizzy and buzzy.” Her daughters’ symptoms began soon after Verizon powered up a new cellular communications tower less than 500 feet from her home [ ].
Late Lessons and Sandwich Terns at Texel Island
Thus far, society has been ignoring one warning sign after another that safety assumptions driving current telecommunications and wireless infrastructure decisions are inaccurate, for both human health and nature.
Arthur Firstenberg has been covering the horrific massacre of Sandwich Terns at Texel Island, Netherlands, coinciding with new telecommunications installations.
Winged Ones: Mayflies
On Sept 19, the Washington Post published the article “The World’s Oldest Winged Insect Is in Trouble. How Frightened Should We Be?’ by Robert O’Harrow Jr. ,
“Mayflies are a mainstay of the world’s many food chains. The nymphs consume algae, plant matter and decaying leaves. The nutrients and energy gained as a nymph are passed on to other animals when they are eaten by such predators as trout, bass, spiders, frogs, lizards, birds, bats and myriad other animals.[ ]
Mayflies require relatively cool, clean water to live, which makes them among nature’s best ecological sentinels. For those who know how to look, their bodies hold precise clues about the state of the water and land around them. Some scientists call them “biosensors.” Overly warm water, pesticides, silty runoff from development and other pollution will wipe them out or force them to move to cleaner environs.”
“In other words, these little-known creatures are invaluable narrators of environmental change.”
“In the mid-20th century, at a time when industrial activity sometimes poisoned lakes and rivers where Hexagenia live, their numbers plummeted in the Great Lakes region. Eventually, clean water legislation curbed much of the pollution, spurring a decades-long rebound in Hexagenia populations. In recent years, however, scientists and conservationists have been troubled by anecdotal reports that Hexagenia hatches were tailing off again. Roadways did not need plowing as often. And car windshields — an informal measure of upper Midwestern bug life — regularly appeared to be less splattered.”
“No one had enough data to say for sure what was going on, and there were not enough funds or biologists to test all the water where Hexagenia live. But a few scientists had a clever idea: Perhaps they could use weather radar to see if Hexagenia clouds showed up.  When they ran tests of the radar at night, the researchers realized they could see and record images of Hexagenia. They also could use the method to examine how the images of hatches now compare to those previously recorded by weather radar.”
Fatal Attraction; Data Scientists and Radar
In truth, there are countless ‘bio-sensors’ in the community whose bodies hold precise clues about the carnage that is unfolding, including the Gilardi sisters. They are not being recognized as “invaluable narrators of environmental change.”
Climate concern has spawned multiple campaigns that use wireless technologies, radio frequencies, radar, and satellites to gather data, (including the IOUT Internet of Underwater Things.)
Environmentalists are equating conservation and resource management with tracking a shark, bear, or whale with a transmitter.
Incredulously, dissociation reigns regarding the data that demonstrates harm being caused by artificial man-made frequencies.
Swimming in Frequencies
This brings me to the point of my superpower story. Much to my dismay, I sometimes hear high-pitched man-made artificial frequencies while swimming across the nearby lake, which is now closed due to toxic algae concerns.
Additionally, I did not see any beautiful dragonflies/damselflies this year. Previously, they would delight us when they landed on us as we entered the water.
Regarding water quality and toxic algae blooms, regulators look to factors including bacterial and chemical sources of contamination, sewage, industrial waste-water discharges, storm water overflows, bird and animal populations, and commercial and agricultural drainage.
Some communities have been measuring temperature, visibility, dissolved oxygen, acid rain, and other variables for years. This was a drought year, with high temperatures.
Yet, no regulatory agency is monitoring or officially measuring juxtapositions of radio frequencies, anywhere –not in homes, schools, hospitals, or at the surfaces of lakes and waterways.
There is an unsubstantiated presumption of safety.
Do we keep assuming, without investigation, that artificial frequencies do not have an impact on delicate ecosystems?
”Climate change” is proposed as a driver of declining water quality, including toxic algae blooms, because phosphorous is being released from the bottoms of the lakes and from exposed mud flats at unprecedented rates, due to lower dissolved oxygen counts. Both may be contributors.
But is it time to ask – Would this be happening at this rate, if some of these water bodies were not “towered over” by massive telecommunications towers and infrastructure?
Are changes occurring at the water’s surface associated with RF?
What Are the Actual RF Exposures?
I did a very unscientific research project regarding some of the waterways currently closed due to toxic algae blooms. Buzzards Bay Coalition notes: “Flume Pond , (Falmouth) is a tidal salt pond with a narrow barrier beach separating it from Buzzards Bay. The land surrounding this pond is protected by a Buzzards Bay Coalition conservation restriction, ensuring the land will never be altered”. Although it is difficult to determine an exact address, Antenna Search.com reports that there are “17 towers and 109 antennas within a 3.0 mile radius of [ ] Sippewissett Rd, Falmouth, MA.”
Should we stop claiming that “the land has not been altered?”
Very Unscientific Research
My exploration of the closed water bodies via Antenna Search is very unscientific because biological environmental exposures are not defined by how many towers and antennas are in the area, or how close they are to the lake, or who owns them, and because it is difficult to determine parameters for an exact address.
Actual engineering measurements, as well as accurate information about the power densities and juxtapositions of frequencies emitted from satellites, towers, antennas, repeaters, routers, hot spots, and extenders is required.
Unfortunately, the entire wireless safety paradigm is not based on real time measurements of anything, or investigation of reported harm, or informed communities, but instead is designed to deny harm and protect industry growth.
A new peer-reviewed paper “The European Union prioritises economics over health in the rollout of radiofrequency technologies” has just been published in “Reviews on Environmental Health, 2022.”
The Berkeley Right to Know legal decision noted, “The Court said that the argument all comes down to dealing with the fact the FCC has to consider both the health and safety of people buying cell phones and the health and safety of the cell phone industry.”
Cell phone ‘safety testing’ is conducted by measuring the temperature of an adult-sized plastic head filled with gel representing “average tissue.” Recent inanimate modeling of brain layers implies that 5G frequencies ‘vanish” before they reach the “brain layer” that does not model the brain’s newly discovered glymphatic detox system, the blood brain barrier, or the meridians.
Microbial Growth, Mold, and Bacteria
I would like to believe that I might be dead wrong about my wondering if artificial, manmade wireless signals, microwaves, and unregulated ground current could be destroying the vitality of the planet’s waters, mayflies, dragonflies, my beloved lake, and me.
I can’t say that radio frequencies are associated with recent toxic algae blooms, but there are growing questions about the effects of RF/EMF on microbial growth, mold, and bacteria from many earnest researchers, for example, this 2003 research paper from India on microwaves that concluded,
1. In this review, we have found that microwave eﬀects were established at all biological levels, from micro-bial cells to animals as well as the human system.
2. The study revealed that microwave could athermally induce diﬀerent physiological eﬀects.
3. The studies on the mechanism of microwave biointeraction showed that microwaves act as promoting agents in inducing genetic changes in biosystem.
India is one of the nations that lowered its exposure limits, as reported by the Environmental Health Trust.
The Course of Course Corrections: Resistance Reigns
When course corrections unfold, there is never a robust body of research that proves a new theory. It begins with an observation, a worry, a query, a health complaint, an environmental impact, a black swan, or a question, (for example, in 1847 when Ignaz Semmelweis proposed that doctors should wash their hands as they went from patient to patient).
As Prof. Elizabeth Glass Geltman noted, “In certain events such as the  study in response to Love Canal, the citizen science was closer to real environmental health concerns than the study developed by the experts,  putting citizen science in a new context.”
Do we need to look at whether mayflies thrive, or are decimated, by night radar? Were bats consulted?
Rising far above the trees surrounding my lake which is now toxic, high on Mt. Misery, is a fairly new cell phone tower disguised to look like a tree. The town installed the tower for ‘safety.’ The public servants thought they were doing the right thing, to address dead zones for cell phone coverage, and to address aesthetics.
Why Is It Time to Question the Claims of RF Safety with Integrity in Research?
Real research offers the potential for an immediate and effective course correction- to stop unquestionably installing wireless infrastructure, and/or to turn it down or off, for example, as was court mandated in France recently regarding damage to cows, and economic damage to farmers.
“Philippe Molhérat, the mayor of Mazeyrat-d’Allier, who had previously authorised the antenna’s installation, testified in favour of the farmer. He said that he feared “a catastrophe on a human level” and that his “concerns” were growing for the 1,500 inhabitants of his village.”
Who authorizes/enables taking no notice of the planet’s exquisite electromagnetic balancing act for the global village?
If we scapegoat ‘climate’ for yet another chapter of human hubris, we are still going to end up in deep weeds.