Piotr Bein's blog = blog Piotra Beina

06/12/2019

Humanity’s wireless risk: scientists must clear away what determines bio-effects — EMFs or torsion fields

Filed under: Uncategorized — grypa666 @ 05:42
Diana Wojtkowiak 19.12.2019: Co do publikacji w czasopisamach recenzowanych to z pól torsyjnych mam tylko jedną: Спектроскопия частиц торсионного поля – RU w rosyjskim Журнале Формирующихся Направлений Науки (2018) номер 19-20 том 6, стр. 10-18. Ale tam już i tak wszystko kontroluje FSB, publikacja została opatrzona kilkustronicową recenzją, która ma zdyskredytować jej wartość. Pewnie aby mnie zniechęcić. […] Wersja polska trochę szersza: Spektroskopia pól torsyjnych – to o spektroskopii pól torsyjnych, koniu roboczym moich działań. Recenzja jest tylko po rosyjsku za publikacją na rosyjskiej stronie. Jest cała kupa rosyjskich publikacjach o odziaływaniu pól torsyjnych w różnych ich czasopisamach, do wiekszości nie mam dostępu, tak jak nie każdy ma dostęp do polskich publikacji naukowych. FSB można wstawić jako moją opinię ale dowodu przedmiotowego nie mam.
.
Maria Majewska: The situation is identical with vaccines.  It is very difficult to publish a paper which presents the truth about toxicity of vaccines.  Nearly all biomedical scientific journals are now owned by pharmaceutical or other industrial cartels and serve their masters.  Most biomedical science is now corrupt and fake.  Very sad.  I am afraid that the only way to defend ourselves from being fried by 5G microwaves is to boycott all technical products with utilize it, or – if this does not help – even employ sabotage, what is already happening in some countries and states in the USA.   Legal class action suits against the governments  for trying to maim and kill the people for profits should be also considered.

.

Diana Wojtkowiak: What about publishing? Twenty years ago it was possible to publish in word range journal that shield of electromagnetic field don’t decrease biological effects. Today it is impossible.  Editors don’t write why article was not accepted, they inform only that journal staff reject 90% works. When we look on electromagnetic influences works published in last year, we see that almost all are negative. Publishers are not our friends, they are our enemy now. 

.

PB: Dear Dr. Diana, If I understand, there is an ethical issue of experimenting with humans, correct? If so, why not do very basic studies: on bio-preparates of proteins, blood samples of volunteers who bathe in the radio wave “soup” anyway and do not care, animals and their tissues… Isn’t the goal to show bio-effetcs with EMF screened off and without the screening?

There goes Prof. Johansson’s nicety of his outline of the scientific inquiry process. Simple things play in, like funding and state attitude, personal security of the researchers and their facilities and results, security of the fund, place of publication and is it acknowledged by the West and free from intel services manipulation, knowledge of languages of nations where the subject is advanced…
How much money would be required?
Poles will help “our Dr. Diana”.
Let’s keep it a patriotic, national project, with a goal of giving people of the world some means to defend themselves against Big Telecom genocide.
If foreigners wished to contribute to the fund, they could do it on a priviledge basis.

.

Diana Wojtkowiak: Dear Olle, If you have funds for it, it will be. I realise my research by own private resources. I don’t must nothing prove anyone. Who want die from cancer in institutionally controlled, independently replicated, peer review-based population studies, let him die. I’m not going to make anyone happy with the strength of.

Also, we speak about research that in your country may be a little prohibited. Konstantin Meyl wrote in his book „La guerre des ondes scalaires” that manipulation of elections by scalar field (torsion field) are realized in USA, Russia, Germany, Israel and Sweden. So your country secret services may want you will not interested in torsion field physics. Institutionally prefered research in Europe is that which nothing discover. It is not what I like. More, I’m disgusted with this. It is pity of our life for this.

.

Olle Johansson: I asked for controlled, independently replicated, peer review-based studies. Do you have any?

.

Diana Wojtkowiak: Dear Olle, I respect your long-standing researches. I cited some of your works.

But probably we are sleeping.

I attached you the information about Dark Ice equipment constructed half year ago by Lockheed Martin company (producer of bombers) . This is positioning equipment based on natural GPS system without satellites. The precision of this system is 10cm in the scale of our glob.

I spoke on this system on torsion fields conference in Moscow in 2016. And that this system is used by birds also. I measured natural adress of my laboratory (corner of table) with precision of 1m.

The other application of Dark Ice is communication with submarine and underground.

Of course Lockhed martin didn’t mentioned about torsion field. The name torsion field and similar names it is the top secret in US. But peoples competent in art knows what is this and knows its properties. For plebeians Lockheed Martin spoke about magnetometer.

Torsion field are used by Russia, USA and China for exploration of geological resources by Ochatrin method from years (up to 8 kilometer deep).

The torsion fields are not on peripherals of our galaxy, they are here inside our bodies. The symbol ψ (psi) in quantum physics equations named wave function, probability function, mattery wave etc. it is really torsion field. All biological interaction based on van der Waals forces are torsion field effects. It is why there homeopathy, energy therapy, dowsing and acupuncture works.

There is no proof that electromagnetic field influences human body. There is problem why epidemiologic studies shows more children leukemia cases then norm even at 500m distance from the 400kV energy line, while electromagnetic field vanish among noises at 50-100m distance. This same is seen in epidemiological research of cellular phone stations. There is no any publication showing that electromagnetic field shield decrease biological effect. It is of course very simple experiment, and the problem is not with difficulty of testing, the problem is that shields don’t function. It is not good result for publication. My friend made this experiment with his shielding material. He was very uncomfortable finding that his shield gave no biological effect. There are almost no publications about biological effects dependence of distance from electromagnetic radiation source in laboratory conditions. The few showed very slowly decreasing biological effects with distance not expected for electromagnetic field.

There is very many other examples of torsion field effects, but not for this short letter. I made hundreds of experiments with torsion field during ten years period. Some of them are described on my internet page: www.torsionfield.eu

Accidentally encountered by me miner from Ukraine had some knowledge about torsion field, but the knowledge is unattainable for western scientist. From one side it is confidential theme,.reserved for the army only, for killing soldiers and mostly civilians. From the other side Russian language is impermeable barrier for most western scientists.

So, finally, it seems very good, you are convinced torsion field is hoax. You don’t know why really peoples die from cancer. This is in good agreement with globalist depopulation plans.

Sorry for my not good English. When there was time for it, we have problems with learning of English language in my country during communist power.

.

PB: Dear Olle, Standing alone does not necessarily mean being in error. Let some scientists, fearless of being smeared “loonies, frauds and crack-pots”, clarify who is right on TF and who is not. You are qualified, equipped and funded (Nobel Prize) to do it, please read scientific papers on TF without bias. Slavic language command is required 🙂

As to your introductory lecture on null hypothesis 🙂 I mean new institutions of the ECNRR type. They would be ineffective without examining, whether torsion fields (TF) are a hoax or aren’t. ECNRR’s dosimetry and safety limits are based on EMF energy characteristics. What if TF characteristics are the decisive ones? We would be in deception of the ICNIRP type that we aim to abolish.
In your own research, it’s easy to screen off the EM factor to see if EMF or TF is at work. Perhaps together with Dr Diana Wojtkowiak you could produce Nobel Prize-level results 🙂 Why not visit her lab, read her research reports, replicate them or prove she is a fraud and publish in peer-reviewed journal as a  deterrent to all the TF hoaxers, incl. the scientists in classified TF applications in Russia, USA and China..
Do we have a case of subjective opinion influencing choice of theory? If so, then it’s obvious that the concensus “rule” is out to lunch. If one doesn’t know the theory or has been indoctrinated against it, then no chance for that theory. Slurs under these circumstances are repulsive. Even if Dr. Wojtkowiak was wrong, this is not the way to treat an energetic ally against 5G.
Neither you nor Prof. Busby bothered to examine Dr Wojkowiak’s work, nor the large body of Slavic-language, peer-reviewed literature. Arthur refers to Wiki 🙂  where also the non-thermal effects are distorted. Should the TF hypothesis be true, Dr. Diana would make EMF-based research on bio-effects obsolete, simply by replicating results in terms of bio-effects but with the EMF screened off. She has been banned from speaking to the Partliament on 5G. The same gov’t suppressed an objective scientific report on bio-effects and replaced it with “facts” by Big Telecom. That’s how much science has to say today.
Olle, thanks for the compliment 🙂 I’d rather not be a captive to academic pressures, prefer freedom to think outside of the box of scientific concensus. Labels aside, do I need to be an academic scientist to challenge them? The scientific inquiry process you outline is not the only one, but Dr. Wojtkowiak can comply, I believe. “Further studies” have been done since TF discovery in the USA a century ago, never mind that it’s unexplainable by institutional science. Maybe that science errs because the civilian scientists are kept in the dark in the West.
The public couldn’t care less about the theories; the causation factor matters. If it’s TFs and people know how to screen off TF instead of EMF radiation, they can protect own health and life. As is, screening off EMF with paints and faraday cages, switching off Wi-Fi at night (while the phantom field persists 24/7/365) may be the hoax of the century, unless TFs are crack-pot. If no scientist honestly disputes, rebukes and disproves Dr Wojtkowiak’s experimental apparatus and results, we will remain potentially misinformed.
Sorry, my conscience would not let me act on an issue whose science is possibly doubly falsified: by ICNIRP’s thermal dogma and by the “academic science” on EMF instead of TF as the bio-effect cause. I’m sorry you see a threat in my stance, and assure you I will not yield to placations with a theory of scientific inquiry process that we all know can be manipulated.
Here are some introductory papers by Dr Wojtkowiak.
Dr Diana Wojtkowiak: Permanent contamination of the Earth by 5G network and voluntary acceptance of enemies’ application of electronic warfare
Fantom cywilizacyjny (pdf)
Szkodliwość “pól elektromagnetycznych” (pdf)

.

Olle Johansson: Dear Piotr, You write “I don’t think society needs any new research institutions, unless we are sure they are on the right track”. This is actually a very dangerous approach, traditionally only being used to suppress knowledge, or to direct it into politically-supported directions. When research projects and/or institutions are inaugurated they always start with a null (or zero) hypothesis, not with the final result. To do the latter is to invite serious prejudice, and also reveals that you are not an academic scientist.

The controlled, consensus-based research theories used are perfectly well suited for their tasks, but the wrong-doing lies in the fact that the “oil”, namely the monetary grants, are used as steering instruments. This will also invite very serious flaws in the final outcome.
For torsion fields there are three hypotheses of them: A field generated by a torsion tensor in differential geometry; the field used in Einstein–Cartan theory and other alternatives to general relativity that involve torsion of spacetime; or a field alleged to make faster-than-light communication and paranormal phenomena possible, the latter regarded as a completely unfounded scam in pseudoscience.
 
You also write “I have supported their activities, anyway, but will cease to do so, unless a professional debate clears who persists in error”. Again this points to that you are not an academic scientist. We never use threats, you see, but rather build theories supported by hypotheses trials. These theories then build facts, knowledge and understanding. As academic scientists we are very well aware of that such facts, knowledge and understanding may be tomorrows bygones, because further studies (but not threats or prejudices) have added or removed data, results, and/or conclusions.
Since I can not find any support for the faster-than-light communication version of the term torsion field, I must lay this discussion to rest, and adhere to Arthur’s short firm summary that they “are a complete and utter hoax”. For the other types it is still an open question, and I am prepared to eat a small, green marzipan hat would anyone come up with scientific evidence for their existence, and such evidence being replicated by independent research units, and all of it being published under conventional rigorous peer review-criteria. Such evidence, I am sure, would also pave the way to Stockholm, so go for it, dear Piotr!  😉

.

PB: Dear All, Professor Busby writes: scientists are very wary of joining the ECRR (ECNRR) in case they lose their jobs or get branded as loonies. 

I don’t think society needs any new research institutions, unless we are sure they are on the right track. Relating EMF to bio-effects may be as absurd as Big Telecom’s standards based on thermal phenomena. According to Dr Wojtkowiak, EMFs are only loosely correlated with torsion fields (TF), the information carriers that control bio-processes. TF reach much further than EMFs and form lasting phantoms, a fact that would prompt an immediate moratorium on all wireless, incl. Wi-Fi in homes.
Prof. Busby’s concept of accumulated dose, NREM, may be pointless, if not EMF but TF exposure is relevant. A parameter from the ionizing effects research, and linearities assumed in the NREM model based on EMFs’ bio-effects, would further make the NREM concept unreliable if not obsolete, should TFs be the determinant.
I conclude Professors Johanssen and Busby maintain that for the anti-wireless protest to succeed, it suffices to continue the science of EMF bio-effects, with support by court cases. Similar approach has not worked for ionizing radiation — not on a global scale that would make the policies turn around. The nuclear lobby acts more and more brazenly while the public becomes more ignorant of growing ionising exposure, morbidity and mortality. Nuclear lobby’s dramatic relaxation of exposure limits concides with “anthropogenic” climate change, industry’s promotion of “safe nuclear power”, and nuclear waste export to disadvantaged countries.  Independent nuclear labs are practially gone, and independents like Prof. Busby meet increasing hurdles and persecution in their activities against the nuclear lobby.
In the glyphosate situation, corporations easily shed off billion dollar court penalties onto consumers, as their food market share is orders of magnitude bigger. It is even worse with Big Pharma’s vaccinations: the perepetrators are exempt from any liability, while the number of mandatory vaccinations increase year to year.
I trust that Professors Busby and Johanssen, and the rest of objective scientists would not adopt “no see, no hear, no speak” attitude. and would engage in a professional discussion with Dr Wojtkowiak. If indeed TFs determine bio-effects of wireless exposure, then most of scientific and regulatory reform efforts are misinformed at the outset.
In past correspondence, Prof. Busby and others in the address list have dismissed off hand TF theses. I have supported their activities, anyway, but will cease to do so, unless a professional debate clears who persists in error.
.
Olle Johansson: Good luck, dear Chris!
 
The “guy in Greece” and I – together with George Carlo – have written three papers together, and I would name them among the top ten of my career:
 

Panagopoulos DJ, Johansson O, Carlo GL, “Evaluation of specific absorption rate as a dosimetric quantity for electromagnetic fields bioeffects”, PLoS ONE 2013; 8: e62663. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062663

Panagopoulos DJ, Johansson O, Carlo GL, “Real versus simulated mobile phone exposures in experimental studies”, BioMed Res Internat 2015a, Article ID 607053

Panagopoulos DJ, Johansson O, Carlo GL, “Polarization: A key difference between man-made and natural electromagnetic fields, in regard to biological activity”, Nature Scientific Reports 2015b; 5: 14914, 1-10, doi: 10.1038/srep14914

.

Christopher Busby: Dear all,

I am in Riga and will move here permanently of France since Britain has
gone mad. I tried to stand for the Green Party in the forthcoming
election but they chose a “safe” candidate. They were concerned about
what I might say on the TV about all the threats we face globally, of
which EM is only one (but increasingly dangerous with the roll out of
5G). There are some signs that there may be a change in thinking about
5G, with several governments now moving to refuse it. Also (like
ionizing) the evidence keeps coming in. My approach has always to go
round them and set up an alternative operation (Agency) but I find
scientists are very wary of joining the ECRR (ECNRR) in case they lose
their jobs or get branded as loonies. And it is a lot of work for no
money. But I am working on several court cases on ionizing in the USA
and UK and getting paid for that, so I can support the ECRR/ECNRR work
on the back of that. Also my scientific credibility is increasing. I was
asked to be on teh Editorial Board of quite a posh journal, and I have
been asked to write a paper on EM RF and health. I will write about the
idea I had to quantify the radiation as cumulative, the NREM idea.
Ditta helps from Sweden. you can email her on info@ifrrr.org
The people are sheep and increasingly so as their heads fill up with the
crap on the mobile phones. So it is down to the few. We need
experimental and empirical research and to publish it in proper
journals. That is the way forward. Recently some guy in Greece showed
chromosome damage in peripheral lymphocytes from moblie phone exposed
cells. That is how we get them.

On 2019-12-01 02:17, Piotr Bein wrote:
Dear Professor Olle Johansson

Indeed, brainwashed, addcited public is a problem, pulling Humanity into genocidal Big Telecom’s abyss. It;s a universal problem since French Revolution: indoctrinated and manipulated “majority” rules over logos.

We need a number of educated and motivated people aroud the world to reach a critical mass. They would have a better chance in the present political system to change a corporation-dominated, government decision-making.

Bogged down in international appeals and national and local (like Kraków) action groups, our meagre mass has evidently had only a slight success: a rather tiny number of persons among the public become convinced of the wireless problem. Polish petition for a moratorium on telecom tech was signed by only 9k people. Street rallies drew only a handful, in only a couple of cities. The rest, not just in Poland as you note,  keeps demanding more and better toys, expecting antennas and wireless devices everywhere, soon in their brains.

Can we, the thinkers, do anything about it, and HOW? In private conversations with activists against 5G, the Polish parliamentarians and senators who have passed a bill preceding the folly Health Minister’s directive proposal, said that they were well aware of the health risks of wireless but would vote the bill in, anyway. They must obey their party leader, lest they lose livelihood.

Thank you for writing our Minister of Health, Professor Łukasz Szumowski, PhD and DSc, a cardilologist and electro-physiologist. Why would such person dare to propse a 100-fold increase in radiowave”soup” density. Dr. Diana Wojtkowiak,  n internationally acclaimed leader in torsion field science, has answered the question in her letter to the Minister.

You may risk auto-translating it, while an earlier version of her take on the immorality of science and government is here in English.

In case you are unaware, THE SCIENCE OF TORSION FIELDS might advance the undestanding of wireless tech’s effects on living organisms, and may contribute to engineering of safer equipment.. Given political will and funding, it might save resources in the assessment of bio-effects of EMF, with a view on setting safety standards for the wireless industry. The conclusion would be similar to yours: zero exposure allowed, as it’s the information-carrying torsion field that affects living organisms. EMF-generated torsion fields reach further than their generator and are only loosely correlated with it, but can be screened off, just like EMFs can. Consequently, we could have the toys and they could be much safer, too.

Dr. Wojtkowiak writes in a paper appended to her letter to the Minister (actually a call to sanity with a whip called Genocide Convention):

In research on impacts of electrical and electronic devices on living organisms, it is not difficult to establish whether we are dealing with EM or torsion fields. It suffices to apply suitable screens. A screen for torsion field particles works by fully  reflecting from outside6. Made of plastic, it does not affect the EMF. Copper or permalloy sheet screens off EMF but lets torsion field particles through. This way, using the same experimental biological methods we can examine impacts __on living organisms by torsion fields, more precisely — by particles of torsion fields. We can by the same method test emissivity of electronic devices following various modifications. Instead of studying if a field has an effect or doesn’t, we can, by looking at bio-effects, engineer electronic equipment with several times lesser emissivity of harmful torsion fields. If is a task for scientiosts and engineers for a few coming decades.

Conflating the issues of torsion field science and public quest for toys, options arise:

  • The governments out of own reason, wisdom and volition re-direct tech development from the industry’s genocidal path.
  • Problem-conscious people globally sponsor torsion field applications
    to develop, by crowd-funding and such, safer equipment designs and
    screening methods, incl. blockage of telecommunication system
    operations, until the industry is forced to change to safer systems
    due to mounting lawsuits and rising consumer awareness.

This has to come, naturally, when nations realize where the increasing
mortality and morbidity come from. Unless of course 5G and subsequent
implementations take humanity’s brains and bodies into the vice of
Artificial Intelligence.

I copy this email to Professor Szumawski, in case he wants to re-join
Humanity and leave the path he has embarked upon by signing under a
directive proposal that would permanently damage the still reasonable
quality of the Polish environment.
Why permanantly? — Dr. Wojtkowiak has forewarned the Parliament and
Senate, the Government and the President of Poland about s.c. phantom
effects of torsion fields, created all over the country as a
consequence of already operating base cell stations in 3G to 4G
systems, and of the hundredfold rising the wireless power density
standard for 5G in the near future.

2 Comments

  1. […] silną pulsacją, zatem szczególnie ryzykowną.  . Nie o PEM chodzi, tylko o pola torsyjne . Niedawna dyskusja paru polskich uczonych z paru zachodnimi, w tym laureat Nagrody Nobla w bio-efektach PEM, […]

    Pingback by [szkic] Do Parlamentarnego Zespołu ds. Cyberbezpieczeństwa Dzieci ws. zagrożenia wszystkich Polaków przez Big Telecom | Piotr Bein's blog = blog Piotra Beina — 19/12/2019 @ 03:15

  2. […] Humanity’s wireless risk: scientists must clear away what determines bio-effects — EMFs or torsi… […]

    Pingback by [pl, en, fr] Dr Ewa Pawela: Coronavirus in email or smartphone | Piotr Bein's blog = blog Piotra Beina — 14/02/2020 @ 05:32


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: