[linuxboxer]

Whether people want to believe it or not, 5G is being deployed as both a biological and psychological weapon. Millimetre waves and their effects are well studied and utilised by military in their active denial crowd control systems. Wifi is also dangerous, why would they have chosen 2.4Ghz when this is the frequency absorption spectrum of H2O. The same frequency microwave ovens use to most effectively heat food. Similarly, the frequency absorption spectrum of oxygen is mm wave 60Ghz, 5G is likely to use this spectrum at some point. Next generation wifi (WiGig) has its default frequency based on the oxygen molecules absorption point. This means they are messing with the fundamental elements of biological life. Ethernet cables do not have these same flaws. The surveillance and control aspect of this iot 5G network ecosystem is going to have chilling effects on freedom, liberty and sovereignty. Social credit anyone?

[Ao7bei3s]

For microwave ovens / water: You have cause and effect reversed. You believe water has an absorption peak at 2.4GHz because microwave ovens use it, not the other way around. In reality, microwave ovens use 2.4GHz because it's legally available (ISM band) and water has a wide absorption spectrum in GHz area (the exact peak shifts wildly with temperature[1]. 2.4GHz is _far_ from optimal). Microwave ovens also contain kilowatt output in a small chamber using RF reflective walls (necessary for the standing waves to develop). Contrast this with the inverse square law for cell towers.

For air: The 60GHz allows reduced cell size. This makes it more realistic for you to opt out of receiving everyone else's emissions (by walking away). Also, air is not not "fundamental to biological life" (anaerobic organisms exist). More seriously, at 60GHz and above skin penetration is very, very shallow.

Active denial systems use a slightly higher frequency (95GHz) and much higher radiated power (30kW-2.5 MW says Wikipedia).

The social aspects of IOT have as much to do with 5G as with, say, smartphones in general. That's just anti-tech. It can be discussed, but it's not an interesting argument in the context of whether 5G is harmful.

You are making emotional arguments that are not grounded in technical arguments.

[1] Please refer to the chart in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_absorption_by_...