51 thoughts on “Thursday’s Papers

  1. GiggidyGoo

    The beginning of the end for FF.
    Strong language reported above, by a FFer ‘This is the f…ing end of FF’.
    Three cheers for Michilín.

      1. dav

        I’m assuming it will make the more republican members join SF, see the ranting of Eamon O’Cuiv for reference

        1. bisted

          …there is no doubt that there is much disquiet with the decision to merge/coalesce but FFers who find it a step too far are much more likely to defect to Peadar Toibin’s Aontu than to MaryLou’s SF…

        2. GiggidyGoo

          FF – ‘The Republican Party’. I wonder how many of its TDs/Senators/ Councillors are of a republican mindset.

          1. Brother Barnabas

            there arent too many FFers particularly committed to any ideology or principle – they’re committed to getting elected and getting the cushy roles and expense payments; theyll do whatever they need to do to protect that

          2. GiggidyGoo

            BB – and that’ll be their downfall. Over a year ago I’d maintained that FG would suffer in the General Election because of its riding roughshod over the will of the grassroots members in the choice for leader. Waiting in the long grass is how I put it. And it came to pass – it was definately a large part of the reason FG dropped so many seats.

            Micheal Martin is doing similar – riding roughshod over the ordinary members views. He might become a semi-taoiseach in the short term, but a non-entity over a longer period.

    1. some old queen

      Why is it so hard for the health authorities to do a sweep of those homes and test everyone? There is an underlying ageism at play here which is absolutely appalling,

      1. Hansel

        I think it’s a critical shortage of testing capacity.
        I also think they’re talking about doing exactly what you’re describing, in Ireland.

        I’ve been crying out for this for weeks. It seems that healthcare is the number one affected community, both in terms of infections and deaths. We need to prioritise testing them and test them to the maximum capacity. If there’s excess test capacity on any day we should use it to systematically test staff.

  2. GiggidyGoo

    And Ryan leeking to the press. https:/irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/ryan-accused-by-party-members-of-leaking-to-press-to-get-his-way-994061.html
    Ryan, of course, is trying to avoid a leadership contest in his party which must occur if they don’t end up in Government.

  3. some old queen

    In the UK, at least 40 towers and mobile sites have been set alight or vandalised by fringe activists and conspiracy theorists who allege that 5G masts cause cancer or are connected to the coronavirus.

    https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/engineers-face-threats-on-facebook-pages-set-up-to-campaign-against-5g-39131859.html

    And the propaganda continues. What qualifications has this guy Adrian Weckler have to write on this subject?

    EMF and specifically 4G DOES cause cancer. Cancer of the brain, cancer of the ear, cancer of the breast, cancer of the skin and now set for a big spike in cancer of the thyroid- PLUS reduced sperm count in men, if not infertility.

    And now we are expected to accept that an untested super charged version which is so focused that if a number of those beams were to cross on the same xyz geo location as a child’s eyes, it could damage their eyesight. We are to believe that something so strong as to contaminate the readings in hospital equipment and even disable the central locking of cars is harmless?

    And all of this is dismissed as conspiracy so here is a question- it took a good fifty years to unseat the tobacco companies- was that a conspiracy? History is littered with examples of where big business has applied undue influence to governments and bought scientists- even now they are the most powerful lobbyists in the world.

    But one thing is for certain. There are groups organising all over the country and if after this lock down is over, 5G transmitters have appeared in not previously installed locations, all hell is going to break loose. And they won’t be hard to find because in proximity, even a cheap EMF meter goes crazy.

    1. Rosette of Sirius

      Tell you what. Why don’t you put your assertions to the test? Buy yourself a EMF meter and dosimeter. Not that pricey. No more than e50. You’ll get them on Amazon even.

      Measure your surroundings for 24 hours and see what happens. Might even help save you money on Bacofoil.

    2. GiggidyGoo

      Well, there’s a turn up for the books. Rob_G and Rosette deviate from actually discussing the subject matter, and attack the poster.
      Oh wait! That isn’t a deviation – it’s standard.
      I’m not well up on the 5G thing, but at least SOQ will do background investigations to back up his posts. And what do we get from the two R’s? Nothing to discount the post.

      1. Rosette of Sirius

        I have no interest in engaging in any form of debate surrounding 5G let alone 4G as noted above. It’s a futile exercise. I’m an electronics engineer by trade and ever since the ubiquitous take up of cellphones over the past 30 years, this sort of nonsense still persists

        Other than a gentle quip about Bacofoil, my suggestion is actually rather sensible. If you are that concerned about EMR in your daily life, get yourself the tools to measure it. Monitor for a 24 hour period and see what the reading is. Go for a walk – within 2k of course and walk where you believe a 4g mast to be and check the readings. Then make your own mind up.

        1. GiggidyGoo

          So, what you’re saying is ‘Believe me – don’t believe SOQ’, while at the same time (as Rob_G fails to do) failing to provide an alternative take on the situation. The ‘I’m an electronics engineer by trade and ever since the ubiquitous take up of cellphones over the past 30 years, this sort of nonsense still persists’ doesn’t do that.

          And ‘I have no interest in engaging in any form of debate surrounding 5G let alone 4G as noted above. It’s a futile exercise.’ Well, that’s clear enough. What you prefer to engage in is a debate about the person posting.

          1. Rosette of Sirius

            G’wan outta dat…. I’m not asking you to believe anything. Just asserting a position. And providing a helpful suggestion to evaluate further should the interest be there.

          2. GiggidyGoo

            Yes, Rosette.You’re putting forward the notion that you’re an expert – hence you’re reference to ‘this nonsense’. Your suggestions may be helpful. However a ‘gentle quip about bacofoil’ as you called it, is intended to discount someone by referring to the person, not the view.
            In your reply – asserting the view – wouldn’t it be helpful to provide links to studies that back up your assertion. I’m sure they exist. At least it’d be a debate on the subject matter?

          3. Rosette of Sirius

            Why on earth should I bother? I mean you and everyone else has access to the same Google that I have.

          4. Rosette of Sirius

            Didn’t really. Not the way you do all the damn day long between one post or another.

      2. GiggidyGoo

        So my post still stands.I do believe over the past number of weeks, SOQ has put up sources. And you – what sources have you put up to discount his views?

        1. Rob_G

          Well, I haven’t made any extraordinary claims, it’s not up to me to put up sources.

          If someone says: “red trousers cause cancer”, and I respond, “do you have links to any studies to demonstrate how red trousers cause cancer?”, they are the ones that need to convince readers of their argument. They can’t really turn around and say: “Well, where are your links to show that red trousers don’t cause cancer?”, it doesn’t really work like that (though it does not in the least surprise me that you would think it would).

        2. D

          Sure, risible sources have been provided, along with jibes about ‘dissenters’ to the theories presented being ‘sneering morons’, who have in the past tried to educate. It’s a sad case that cannot be helped.

        3. GiggidyGoo

          Rob_G. So why are you attacking the person who posts then? If you’ve decided that what he is saying is incorrect, then shouldn’t you back that up with alternative facts?
          Sorry – we’re dealing with Rob_G – no need to reply.

        4. Rob_G

          Again – no, it’s not up to me.

          And again, the fact that you don’t understand this almost beggars belief.

        5. D

          > alternative facts?
          Sorry to butt in again, but this exact phrasing gets to the heart of the matter – famously used in America.

          It would be an epistemological matter.

          Not all links, sources or opinions are equal. The sciences are not democracies, and certain segments of the population cannot reliably tell fact from fiction. It is not a matter for debate, if anybody is interested or capable enough they can work through a physics text book to understand for themselves.

          If they are not, then, tough.

        6. Hansel

          Source for the fact that 5G is not a concern: Elements of Electromagnetics, by Sadiku.

          Edit: exactly as D said above.
          If you want, work through the text books and understand for yourself.

      3. Some old queen

        For the record Rob- I am a qualified electrical engineer, I have a degree in computer science and a post grad in spatial analysis. I am pretty qualified to speak on at least the technical side of this debate.

        The reference to cross beams is well known- the radiation increases at the point where two or more cross. The eyes are also the most sensitive part of the body to 5G because of the lack of skin coverage etc, especially with children. How much the radiation increases is up for debate as there has been no real world testing done.

        1. D

          It’s called constructive interference and is well understood. The maximum is the sum of the amplitude of all the in phase aspects of the beams. N times a small amount is still a small amount. This is not really up for debate.

          I am terribly disappointed that you have far more academic attainments than I do and yet persist with this. That said, I would say that the physics you did as part of your electrical engineering studies are your only relevant qualification.

        2. some old queen

          Yes well others disagree. 4G was not very well tested and 5G not at all. What scant evidence there is suggests problems with eyes, skin and bacteria. And oddly enough, a resistance to antibiotics.

          Actually no, frequencies were always part of electrical engineering. In fairness the IT interest is more back end but spatial analysis is most definitely relevant. In the states, the telecoms companies are being caught out lying as to the need for the close spacing of masts for example.

          My original point stands- if it transpires that the telecoms companies were installing 5G during this lock down then you will see a massive increase in interest in this subject.

          To do such a thing is devious and dishonest and people will rightly be asking why the secrecy.

        3. Rob_G

          Fair enough, SOQ.

          If your contentions are correct, why do you think that (i) there is so little in the literature to support your view, and (ii) why would so many of your colleagues be meekly going along with installing this infrastructure that will kill so many people?

          (ii) is the hardest part of this theory to accept; if it were the case that these technologies were as dangerous as you say, it would require tens upon tens of thousands of ordinary technicians to cheerfully go along with a vast global conspiracy that would have negative health impact on their own families.

        4. Some old queen

          Rob, firstly there is a serious lack of understanding what 5G is.

          When Eamonn Holmes made that statement, a representative from BT said there was little difference between 4 and 5G. Either he didn’t know what he was talking about or he was lying- I am really not sure which is worse. Eamonn just asked a question most people want an answer too- is it safe?

          The 5G race between US and China should not prevent people in democratic countries asking that question because even if it kills quarter of China- the Chinese Communist Party will still proceed.

    3. D

      EMF – You’re Unbelievable

      :-)

      Your problem is that you are unable to tell or even guess, who is telling the truth and who is telling lies. As a result of that, nobody is able to help you.

    4. ReproBertie

      https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/dont-fall-prey-to-scaremongering-about-5g/
      “A multitude of quality studies conducted over the past few decades have found no measurable detrimental effect of RF radiation (RFR) on human health. In the words of the World Health Organization, “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.”
      On the strength of epidemiological evidence, cancer fears are dangerously misguided: While American cell-phone usage has grown from virtually zero in 1992 to virtually 100 percent by 2008, there has been no indication that glioma rates have increased proportionally in the same period—a nonrelationship replicated by numerous other studies.

      The most reliable data come from large and robust trials, with careful controls and large sample groups. The 13-country INTERPHONE study is one example: its unequivocal conclusion was that there was no causal relationship between phone use and incidences of common brain tumors such as glioblastoma and meningioma. The dose-response curve from this undertaking is telling, because it clearly does not betray any obvious signs of correlation. A similar Danish cohort study also did not reveal any obvious link between phone usage and tumor rates.

      Ionizing radiation is detrimental to our health, capable of damaging DNA and killing cells. Ultimately this can lead to cancer, with the same principle used in radiotherapy to kill cancer cells. That light can be marshalled to obliterate cells understandably prompts confusion: If x-rays can kill cancer cells, then could 5G be doing similar damage to us? This is an assertion propagated by vocal anti-5G activists, but it betrays an alarming ignorance of both cancer and how unbelievably vast the electromagnetic spectrum truly is. RFR is undoubtedly nonionizing, being thousands of times less energetic than even visible light.

      To put it in context, the weakest visible light is more than 17,000 times more energetic than the highest-energy 5G photon possible. Were they consistent, anti-5G activists should be orders of magnitude more concerned about light bulbs than cellular phones. The fact that they aren’t is indicative of a gross misunderstanding.”

      Plenty of links to peer-reviewed studies in this article which thoroughly debunk the cell phones cause cancer claims.

      1. GiggidyGoo

        Thanks Repro. That’s debate and an alternative view to SOQ’s, and without an attack on SOQ himself.

      2. some old queen

        WHO’s official body for research and advice on radio frequency radiation is ICNIRP- International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. Many of ICNIRP members have ties to the industry that is dependent on the ICNIRP guidelines- and have serious conflicts of interests.

        Technically, they measure heating effects only- not other biological effects and their limited recommendations are way higher than any country has adapted. Their research from a public health perspective is sparse if at all- at least I can’t find any.

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5504984/

        1. ReproBertie

          You see? You provide stacks of evidence and numerous studies and it’s dismissed on spurious “many members of one organisation have ties to the industry” grounds.
          What a shocker that people working in an area are connected to industry that works in the area. It doesn’t change all the studies showing zero link between mobile phones and cancer.

          1. Some old queen

            Did you even read that document? I doubt it.

            It itemises the main players in the organisation, conflicts of interest and the cross connections between ICNIRP and WHO. But after WHO’s performance with CoVid-19, they are due a good shake up anyways,

    5. Hansel

      I also (like others here) understand this technology in detail, having studied it and worked with it.
      If you’re worried about the masts, I suggest you should dump your handset immediately and that you build a Faraday cage. This is literally where “tinfoil hat” (both the practice and the term) comes from.

      I appreciate that you won’t take this at face value, but at least I’m yet another person telling you “5G is not a significant cause of cancer”.

      Cooking your food causes cancer given that there’s carbon created.
      Sunlight causes cancer.
      Very very many things can be linked to “causing cancer”.

      5G is a thing you don’t understand. But that doesn’t mean it’s something you should worry about.

      One of my family members died of cancer, and I’m living 100m from a significant comms mast so I don’t say all of this lightly.

  4. Birdie

    Christ that’s so sad about Mary, the young pregnant nurse. Heartbreaking. I can’t even imagine how devastated her family is. So sad that the baba won’t meet its Mum :(

    1. Formerly known as @ireland.com

      Tragic. RIP. I am shocked that she was allowed to work in an environment where she was exposed to CV19. Common sense says she should have been in a safer role while this is happening.

  5. Rosette of Sirius

    I have no interest in engaging in any form of debate surrounding 5G let alone 4G as noted above. It’s a futile exercise. I’m an electronics engineer by trade and ever since the ubiquitous take up of cellphones over the past 30 years, this sort of nonsense still persists

    Other than a gentle quip about Bacofoil, my suggestion is actually rather sensible. If you are that concerned about EMR in your daily life, get yourself the tools to measure it. Monitor for a 24 hour period and see what the reading is. Go for a walk – within 2k of course and walk where you believe a 4g mast to be and check the readings. Then make your own mind up.

    The amount of spurious nonsense on the internet is poisoning minds faster than 2/3/4 or even 5g will….

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link