The comments reflect what happens when genuinely new frameworks meet established expertise. George brought network engineering knowledge to the discussion, pressing on protocol specifics. Leon clarified that the processing occurs externally—phone sensors, Face ID cameras—rather than requiring internal digital encoding. The exchange illustrates why this work matters: the technical details of how biological signals interface with digital infrastructure are precisely what needs examination, and Leon has spent years mapping that territory across thousands of pages of referenced research.
Andrew, your situation with your daughter mirrors what many face—watching someone emerge from years of institutional education with frameworks that preclude even examining certain questions. The challenge isn't intelligence; it's that certain conclusions are rendered unthinkable before investigation begins. Whether she engages with this material or not, the fact that you're looking for bridges is itself significant.
Drew extended the framework toward free energy and antigravity implications. The connection he draws—that understanding electromagnetism as primary opens doors that have been deliberately closed—tracks with Tesla's treatment and the broader pattern of suppression. The institutional compromise he describes isn't speculation; it's observable in how certain research directions simply don't get funded.
To those sharing the work and translating it—Christine, Amaterasu, elcienemgalindo—the network effect matters. These ideas spread person to person because they won't spread through official channels.
Dawn's instinct to send this to someone with biochemistry background is sound. These claims are testable. Pollack's experiments can be replicated. Levin's demonstrations are documented. The genetics framework makes specific predictions that can be examined against observation.
Leon's work synthesizes research streams that rarely appear in the same conversation—Pollack's water science, Levin's bioelectricity, Wheeler's physics, Wallace's networking testimony. That synthesis is the contribution. Follow the references. Examine the evidence. The material stands on its own.
yep. 100% accurate in my own direct experience/knowing/etc. ever sooooo beauty fully expressed 'n' shared. truth aka infinite love we each are, be told/shared/lived/given freely for we are this. <3 i love you sooooo mucho amore!
"I see the current movement of decentralised scientific investigations and networking around the pursuit of truth as very hopeful for us. For me personally, writing Telestai Nexus was a very cathartic experience and it has reconnected me back to my essence, to my purpose. We are not here to be slaves and I will spend the rest of my life to defend our freedom!"
One of the most hopeful articles I’ve read. Well worth delving into. Wondering if I can induce my daughter - who has just finished a biochemistry degree and now continuing post-grad studies, but very much caught by her scientific textbook education - to take a look at this line of thinking. Thank you!
If I may add, there are other broader implications for the exposure of electromagnetism as a primary driving force:
1. Free Energy. And I mean it in the sense that once devices are initially built and connected to the existing infrastructure, they'll need only regulatory maintenance.. no fuel, just perpetually generated energy. No need to pay for it ever again. This is why Tesla was treated the way he was.
As our good friend Amaterasu's articles point out, most of what we spend our money on accounts for the energy required to produce it. If energy costs nothing to generate after the initial build, money... the age old system of population control, class creation and divisive mechanism of abundance and poverty, would be nearly obsolete. Not overnight, but with the right complementary infrastructure for automated production in place, currency would be unnecessary.
2. Antigravity. It's such a simple concept once one understands the forces that drive that mechanism. It's repulsion. Electromagnetic repulsion.
It is ancient technology. This isn't new by any means. Those in control currently know this. They have exclusive access to ancient sites like Golbeke Tepe, the inner most chambers of the pyramids and all other sites that still hold resonance and emit measurable EM frequencies.
3. All institutions and higher "educational" facilities are compromised.
If the supposed most capable minds are at the helm of these institutions, then why haven't they figured it out.. if they have (they didn't, but they were almost certainly told about it), then why haven't they shared it with the world?
They're either payed off or afraid.
I've had some run ins with some of those gatekeepers myself. Either way, exposing the truth would free them. Since enforcers and "authorities" are bound by mammon and fear, they'd be more or less cutting themselves free.. free energy -> obsoletion of currency -> incentive for enforcement of oppression is eliminated.
There's a bit more to it and I'm sure others would have other great points to add that I did not mention. At any rate, excellent work 🔥 all the best!
So a geoengineered sky of reflective metamaterials would be a perfect GLOBAL 🤣 "soundboard" for the new opto magneto networks....although curvature distortion and land extrusions may be a problem....
I concur.
May I ask you most excellent scientists, for help with this pyrhagorian mishape....math ain't my forte.
How would a 25m monopole phased array beamforming military grade in a civilian installation platform, have a ground footprint "line of sight" capability of 17km.....
Apart from that little "hiccup" , and avoiding God being objectified into Nihisism.....🤣
Hey Mick- good to hear from you :) Only through beam-steering with multiple signals generators of course, "scalar", multiple input, multiple output ... as it is used in the ubiquitous smart grid- it would be with our new street lamps, cars and phones, working in conjunction with all the other signals generators (beam steering through multiple sources, creating standing waves).
I have tried my best to get good values (I am not from the field...) so it is good to have people like you pointing that out ;) We are doing our best with the limited methods we have at hands. I am never making any claims up and I am checking everything as reasonably as possible (I will always correct it when new evidence appears)... the problem is the omnipresence of lies and deceptions as we all have noticed by now!
My strategy was the following:
I red everything I could find in the published literature and learned to speak their language, deciphering their misleading presentations (like tweaking the software of the towers when they are technically capable of much more). Then I looked at all the evidence and tried to find the technical capabilities- for this I am always checking over and over again ... The "scalar" technology, rather compressions and rarefactions in the Aether, is stunningly precise. Then- as you pointed out- there will always be mistakes... ready to be corrected!
Regarding God- I would never do that to the monad... This new perspective sees the subjective and the objective fused in one field... since everything is conscious, that makes every kind of being possible- especially when thinking in the electrome paradigm with etheric bodies as Steiner sees them. One miracle remains, the spark or continuous creation initiation...! ;) God and the Goddess that are in essence one! I have faith in the rhythm and feeling in everything and I just want to make sure that we have both parents among us :) Creation is wondrous - no random interactions imho!
Yep, it's bio-electricity that provides form and function to every organism, nothing to do with genetics. Michael Levin's research is brilliant and proves that real understanding of biology happens without genetics.
However, I would disagree with Karmameleon's comments about flat earth. Water cannot and does not curve, many real world experiments prove this as does common sense. If water does not curve, then we arrive at a better understanding of the shape of the earth realm. Trillions of dollars have been and are being spent applying Atomism to the heavens and Earth to brain-wash and indoctrinate that we live on a spinning ball surrounded by billions more spinning balls, not to educate. 'Flat earther' and 'conspiracy theorist' are both ad hominem attacks used to ridicule by people who are too lazy or brainwashed to do their own investigations.
Wow. I tried hard to understand without much training in this field. So I sent to my best friend of thirty years who wanted to read it based on her family’s education and background. She’s sending it to her brother, Dr Luke Bucci, in Houston, Tx, an award winner, for his comments.
I read about structured water 10 years ago when I operated an alkaline water (by the gallon) store in Wimberley, Tx, yearning to understand the electro-biome properties.
Anyway, I’m still on this journey. So thankful for this article!
The comment section contains claims indicating insects dying from 5G. It is quite telling that the word pesticide doesnt occur in the debate. Chemical industry marwels.
The fact that there was a background of black ops means that there also was a background of disinfo. Black ops are not experts of the technology they have some familiarity with. It is rather the case that such ops themselves are used to disinform. This is in particular the case concerning applications of technology for remote surveillance and mind reading. It all concerns the handling of weak signals in noisy conditions and it is all surrounded with secrecy. The black ops themselves may be the last to understand the weak spots of the technology. Therefore the technical explanations in the article are not credible. The superiors of the black ops have a wish for us to feel powerless.
"The notion that billions of miles of molecular code swimming at the nanoscale — subject to constant thermal motion — somehow orchestrates the staggering complexity of living systems requires more faith than the mechanistic worldview was supposed to demand."
......
That is not a good argument. The energy barrier corresponding to thermal motion is 0.025 -0.027eV, while the energy barrier that determines the stability of the genetic code is much higher 0.5 to 1.5eV. DNA molecules are therefore intact under thermal agitation. Probability for breaking a DNA molecule means several individual base pairs have to be broken. P~exp(-1eV/0.027)~10^-16 That aspect must not be left uncommented when one wants to carry out this analysis. It is very much like with the stability of the voltage levels pertinent to a digital computer. Computers make very few serious mistakes like confusing ones and zeros. In addition the double strands enable the correction of one error.
A protocol involves specifications to enable communication. That includes the medium of transport (light in this case) and a digital encoding protocol. Saying that the standard involves the same light in the human body means nothing at all. It's using the same light in a fibre-optic transmitter, too. It's also the same light coming from the sun. Those observations mean nothing.
That standard requires not only compliant light sources, but sensors, transmitters and the implementation of the defined digital protocol.
Where is your explanation of these essential elements (sensor and digital encoder/decoder) being assembled or placed inside the human body? The simple transmission of compliant light does not comply with the standard.
Thanks again for providing all this diverse material. There are a lot of assertions in this Q&A that are difficult to nail down specific support for.
I have a couple very specific questions to start with.
"I remembered the qdot patent from 2020 and the peculiar fact that it disappeared from the thermofisher website."
My antenna goes up as soon as someone talks about Patents, because most people don't seem to know what they are and what they mean. Patents are evidence or proof that someone had an idea and registered it, that's it. They are not proof or evidence of anything else.
Patents by definition are public domain, they are not secret. What was the patent mentioned here and what exactly is Leon claiming it shows? I would like to look it up and validate any claims being made.
For example, where can I find evidence or experiments demonstrating the following?
"These qdots are simply very small particles that have very high capacitance and hence react powerfully to our bioelectricity and amplify it or turn it into light!"
"In order to get to a sane level of EMF that are killing most of our animals and plants at the moment, we need to understand the problem first, which is not the falsified notion that CO2 would kill us all."
What is the evidence of this? I am not aware of animals and plants dying en masse? If anything vegetation is growing more now than ever given the higher CO2 content!
In Section 12 Leon proves to me he doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to networks. I am both an Engineer, and a network specialist. I know for a fact, when he starts listing off ANSI standards completely out of context relevancy he is either ignorant and misunderstands, or he is being intentionally deceptive. Either one is a big problem because he's either speaking definitively about stuff he doesn't understand or he's got some agenda of his own.
"There are several networks, comprising the 802.15.6 for medical devices, the 802.15.7 for all qdots and infrared emissions (including our body) in conjunction with the 802.15.4 RF hybrid optical network."
That statement in the context of what he is describing is absolutely false, and verifiably so. If he can misconstrue which to me a really basic things, then I have to question every dot he's connecting between what could be half-truths. Reader beware! Happy to discuss offline if you want.
Sabrina talks about these networks for years in 500+ videos for hundreds upon hundreds of hours of detailed recitals - the PHD class is being fed lies, unfortunately ...
Regarding the death of insects... you must not drive a car then ? 5g is vile sir - all animals rely on their magneto- dielectric communication :)
You can find 3000+ pages with references to evidencence and the search function on my substack will get you there!
I drive a car, in addition to owning both urban and rural property. In the urban setting I've noticed an increase in wasps (which eat other insects). In the rural property we saw bunker year for caterpillars just a couple years ago, long after the rollout of 5G.
Additionally, insect populations are heavily affected by temperature, so hotter temperatures during summer in some areas -- we are at a solar maximum -- will reduce the insect population.
Do you have any hard evidence that 5G affects insect populations especially since there are a ton of factors that can regionally affect their populations?
yes solar maximum and radiation maximum with cancer maximum (Windscreen 2005 : full of insects in the summer. Now: none. Not only insects go nuts, the mental health from all the interfacing is catastrophic in general and people think its about faster internet... ). Insects rely on very fine communication with signals and we are currently living in a mayhem era with artificial saturation that keeps everyone fried ... you say you research vaccines, so you believe in viruses ?
Sending me to a site with a million references where only a fraction discuss insects isn't providing the evidence I asked for. The one obvious article about insects and 5G is interesting, but they study done by the scientist on Samos isn't rigorous because it doesn't control for any other variables (even basic things like temperature) and the sample sizes are so small it's statistically nominal. I don't disregard her observations, I simply point out it's not rigorous to any degree and could easily be polluted by confounders.
The one study it references is good and it was Lazaro et al (2016) and they did a very thorough job of studying power (distance) from the source, and prevalence of insects controlling for a variety of important other factors. They did find a strong correlation to RF signal strength and prevalence of insects. Notably, this was done pre-5G.
So I still don't see the hard evidence of 5G specifically being worse for insects.
I know beekeepers here in my province (and we have had 5G for a while now) and the population increases and declines are far more related to winter temperatures than anything else. Again I am not stating I believe the conclusion to be wrong, but I think strong claims require strong evidence and I simply don't see it on the Insect/5G front.
Notably, I do find modelling studies on 5G and insects, but I've been studying vaccines for 3 decades and I know full well modelling isn't real evidence of anything.
I stop this conversation here. You are defending 5g and 6g... I hope that you are genuinely interested in the betterment of this wretched situation for humanity sir. I will not answer you anymore. For me this is ridiculous, you are defending these technologies that are evidently used for brain interfacing and that are disturbing all of our natural communication. I would not make it so blatantly obvious and defend 5g if I wanted to discredit people that are seeing things how they are :)
I am by no means deceptive- I have never taken money for my work and put everything in this ;) Everything is as evidence based as possible ... as Mick points out - we cannot have every single measurement correct and I always correct myself on the way... Sabrina's main message is that these networks are used and they lie about the routes and usecase, of course. When you understand the deceptions of virology and genetics, it is easier to see how high flown the lies actually are. I recommend reading my articles about Sabrina Wallace first... she comes from networking and I was just gathering what she said- then I wrote about 3000 pages about much more diverse issues and aimed at integrating them!
The IEEE 802.15.7-2018 standard (IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks—Part 15.7: Short-Range Optical Wireless Communications) defines a physical layer (PHY) and medium access control (MAC) sublayer for short-range optical wireless communications (OWC) in optically transparent media. It covers light wavelengths from 10,000 nm (far-infrared) down to 190 nm (ultraviolet), which explicitly includes the infrared range.This broad wavelength support makes it highly suitable for applications involving infrared emissions, including those from quantum dots (QDs) such as PbS (lead sulfide) or HgTe (mercury telluride) colloidal QDs, which are commonly engineered for tunable emissions and detection in the near-infrared (NIR), short-wave infrared (SWIR), and mid-wave infrared (MWIR) bands.The standard supports Optical Camera Communication (OCC) modes, which can involve infrared sources and camera-based receivers (e.g., using IR-sensitive image sensors to read modulated signals). This aligns well with QD-based emitters or photodetectors in scenarios like imaging, sensing, or low-to-moderate rate optical communication, where tunable QD emissions and high detectivity are leveraged.Later amendments, such as IEEE 802.15.7a-2024, further enhance the OCC PHY for higher rates and longer ranges, but the core 2018 version already provides the foundational support for infrared-inclusive OWC.Other related IEEE standards include:IEEE 802.11bb (approved in 2023): This is the formal LiFi standard (Light Fidelity), amending IEEE 802.11 for high-speed communication using light in the 800–1000 nm near-infrared band (with potential extensions to other optical bands). It targets bidirectional data rates from 10 Mb/s up to 9.6 Gb/s and is relevant for high-speed infrared optical links, though it focuses more on LED/laser-based sources rather than specifically QDs. It could complement QD systems in hybrid or future high-speed setups.
IEEE 802.15.13 (approved around 2023): This defines PHY and MAC for OWC using wavelengths from 10,000 nm to 190 nm (similar broad range as 802.15.7). It is positioned as a modernized or expanded framework for optical wireless, including potential LiFi/OWC applications in industrial or other settings, offering future potential for QD-integrated systems.
IEEE 802.15.4 and 802.15.3: These are primarily for low-rate WPANs (e.g., Zigbee-like) and higher-rate multimedia, respectively. They can indirectly support QD-based hybrid RF-optical networks (e.g., combining infrared optical links with RF backhaul), but they do not directly target optical/infrared PHYs.
Overall, IEEE 802.15.7-2018 remains the most directly applicable primary standard for reading or working with quantum dot infrared emissions in communication, sensing, or imaging contexts due to its explicit infrared wavelength inclusion and OCC support. Emerging work on colloidal QD infrared photodetectors and emitters often operates in wavelength regimes compatible with these OWC standards, though specific QD implementations are typically device-level rather than standardized at the protocol level.If you're looking for implementation details, specific QD material compatibility, or updates beyond 2024, let me know for a deeper dive!
I know these standards quite well, what are you proposing they mean?
For example, the PHY definition for IEEE 802.15.7-2018 is a protocol, it's not a sensor. Your body (light amplified or not) is not going to conform to the protocol, so will have zero compatibility with any equipment designed for it. Not to mention the lack of transparent medium.
Hi, your article there does not answer the simple question I asked about the protocol at all. I stated your body is not going to conform to a protocol (which is what the standard defines). Where is the evidence that any human body transmits according to the protocol defined by IEEE 802.15.7-2018.
The protocol supports a variety of light frequencies, but the protocol itself has little to do with the light itself, it's the sequencing and the timing that defines the protocol.
Who said this is a sensor ? Please read first. The sensors are hidden as adjuvants, viruses, antimicrobial agents...There are many thousands of pages from Dominique Guillet at this point, all referenced - with hundreds upon hundreds of studies with evidence for anyone looking for that (but their science is categorically deceptive, the ivory tower perfection is flawed with intention!) .... I am not going to type that for you personally in this chat- please make the effort, thank you.
From your own article you quote: "The primary standard for reading quantum dot infrared emissions is IEEE 802.15.7-2018".
Reading emissions requires sensing.
I will repeat, this IEEE standard is a digital PROTOCOL standard for digital transmission using light as a medium for communication. How is graphene oxide or any chemical additive going to encode information into digital protocols for transmission in the body confirming to that standard without a microchip? You don't explain this very critical detail anywhere. You can't achieve any sort of logical digital encoding without a microchip or you haven't explained how that works. Please explain.
To implement communication using a protocol involving light, you need:
A sensor, an emitter, a medium, and a microchip that encodes and decodes the digital protocol. I have not seen any explanation of how this standard could be implemented in the human body without all these elements.
Graphene oxide reduces to rGO fibers that turn CHARGE into MAGNETISM through spintronics, but they lie about electron spin because electrons do not exist. The rest is voltage fluorescence.
You did not explain how the protocol gets encoded or decoded. You keep avoiding the most basic question about the essential part of the PHY layer protocol.
You have not said a single thing that can link the IEEE 802.15.7-2018 to any of this. Why are you inferring I'm not informed when you seem to misunderstand the basics of digital encoding which is essentially what these protocols are about (vs the light source).
Virology and Genetics have entirely been set up to hide this. Rosalind Franklin did not discover Nucleotides, she was working on graphite and used the spacing for one layer, 0,34 nm to invent nucleotide ladder spacing. This material is being used and these protocols are incorporating medical devices at the physical layer and of course you will not hear about the details. I will stop this conversation here because I am not going to argue with someone who does not see the dangers of wireless tech.
I've been studying and reducing EMFs in my house for longer than you have and I have thousands of dollars of measuring equipment. I've custom designed the electrical system in my house and 95% of what happens in the house is fully wired, not wireless, including a land line telephone.
You make assumptions that are wildly inaccurate.
I am not disputing anything about nucleotides I am asking specifically about the domain I am extremely familiar with and that is networking protocols and electrical engineering.
Now if you can't answer the most basic question of how the IEEE protocol in detail actually applies here, then all you've posted is technobabble.
Look, when you are familiar with the protocol for infrared, then find out more about that- I was happy that I found the 802.15.7 because before, the 802.15.6 is surely not sufficient for that. Qdots were the main ingredient in the covid shots by the way... this was the story about the "messenger molecules". I hope you are not going to put all your efforts in this ONE ISSUE now, because I am 99,9% of the time thinking about something else.
Claiming that that certain wavelengths of light emitted by the body are in the same standard is not a meaningful observation. A communication standard requires all of the following to implement:
Communication method (i.e. light, electrical, rf) which requires sensors and emitters, a transmission medium, in addition to digital encoding and decoding. All of these elements are essential to meet the standard.
Even if we could plausibly admit the bodies ability to emit, transmit and sense those light signals, where is the digital encoding and decoding occurring?
I am glad that you are studying EMF. It is also great that you know so much about these protocols, so please tell me- because all this protocol says is that it exists and encompasses exactly these signals that are emitted from voltage fluorescent qdots and I hope I do not have to remind you that the powers that shall not be are not saying that they will interface your magneto- dielectric signals and use your biofield as a part of the ubiquitous smart grid. They just lie, like they lied about "mrna" messanger molecules .... I have been writing thousands of pages about this years ago and I am now focussing on other topics, feel free to dismiss it all if that gives you peace of mind... We are now at a point where the WEF is openly talking about the way they are utilising this information that is being gathered with sober certainty. Have a good day sir. I am not here to argue with you about the 802.15.7 - if you have a rigid personality, go on ... I will stop here. Godspeed to you!
"because all this protocol says is that it exists and encompasses exactly these signals"
This is highly inaccurate. The protocol requires emission, transmission, sensing and digital encoding and decoding. Without all those elements, you're not talking about that standard.
Where is the digital encoding and decoding occurring?
Author's Note
The comments reflect what happens when genuinely new frameworks meet established expertise. George brought network engineering knowledge to the discussion, pressing on protocol specifics. Leon clarified that the processing occurs externally—phone sensors, Face ID cameras—rather than requiring internal digital encoding. The exchange illustrates why this work matters: the technical details of how biological signals interface with digital infrastructure are precisely what needs examination, and Leon has spent years mapping that territory across thousands of pages of referenced research.
Andrew, your situation with your daughter mirrors what many face—watching someone emerge from years of institutional education with frameworks that preclude even examining certain questions. The challenge isn't intelligence; it's that certain conclusions are rendered unthinkable before investigation begins. Whether she engages with this material or not, the fact that you're looking for bridges is itself significant.
Drew extended the framework toward free energy and antigravity implications. The connection he draws—that understanding electromagnetism as primary opens doors that have been deliberately closed—tracks with Tesla's treatment and the broader pattern of suppression. The institutional compromise he describes isn't speculation; it's observable in how certain research directions simply don't get funded.
To those sharing the work and translating it—Christine, Amaterasu, elcienemgalindo—the network effect matters. These ideas spread person to person because they won't spread through official channels.
Dawn's instinct to send this to someone with biochemistry background is sound. These claims are testable. Pollack's experiments can be replicated. Levin's demonstrations are documented. The genetics framework makes specific predictions that can be examined against observation.
Leon's work synthesizes research streams that rarely appear in the same conversation—Pollack's water science, Levin's bioelectricity, Wheeler's physics, Wallace's networking testimony. That synthesis is the contribution. Follow the references. Examine the evidence. The material stands on its own.
Thank you for reading.
yep. 100% accurate in my own direct experience/knowing/etc. ever sooooo beauty fully expressed 'n' shared. truth aka infinite love we each are, be told/shared/lived/given freely for we are this. <3 i love you sooooo mucho amore!
"I see the current movement of decentralised scientific investigations and networking around the pursuit of truth as very hopeful for us. For me personally, writing Telestai Nexus was a very cathartic experience and it has reconnected me back to my essence, to my purpose. We are not here to be slaves and I will spend the rest of my life to defend our freedom!"
ditto!!!!!!!!!! i concur!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
One of the most hopeful articles I’ve read. Well worth delving into. Wondering if I can induce my daughter - who has just finished a biochemistry degree and now continuing post-grad studies, but very much caught by her scientific textbook education - to take a look at this line of thinking. Thank you!
Awesome article Sir,
If I may add, there are other broader implications for the exposure of electromagnetism as a primary driving force:
1. Free Energy. And I mean it in the sense that once devices are initially built and connected to the existing infrastructure, they'll need only regulatory maintenance.. no fuel, just perpetually generated energy. No need to pay for it ever again. This is why Tesla was treated the way he was.
As our good friend Amaterasu's articles point out, most of what we spend our money on accounts for the energy required to produce it. If energy costs nothing to generate after the initial build, money... the age old system of population control, class creation and divisive mechanism of abundance and poverty, would be nearly obsolete. Not overnight, but with the right complementary infrastructure for automated production in place, currency would be unnecessary.
2. Antigravity. It's such a simple concept once one understands the forces that drive that mechanism. It's repulsion. Electromagnetic repulsion.
It is ancient technology. This isn't new by any means. Those in control currently know this. They have exclusive access to ancient sites like Golbeke Tepe, the inner most chambers of the pyramids and all other sites that still hold resonance and emit measurable EM frequencies.
3. All institutions and higher "educational" facilities are compromised.
If the supposed most capable minds are at the helm of these institutions, then why haven't they figured it out.. if they have (they didn't, but they were almost certainly told about it), then why haven't they shared it with the world?
They're either payed off or afraid.
I've had some run ins with some of those gatekeepers myself. Either way, exposing the truth would free them. Since enforcers and "authorities" are bound by mammon and fear, they'd be more or less cutting themselves free.. free energy -> obsoletion of currency -> incentive for enforcement of oppression is eliminated.
There's a bit more to it and I'm sure others would have other great points to add that I did not mention. At any rate, excellent work 🔥 all the best!
Remakable!
So a geoengineered sky of reflective metamaterials would be a perfect GLOBAL 🤣 "soundboard" for the new opto magneto networks....although curvature distortion and land extrusions may be a problem....
I concur.
May I ask you most excellent scientists, for help with this pyrhagorian mishape....math ain't my forte.
How would a 25m monopole phased array beamforming military grade in a civilian installation platform, have a ground footprint "line of sight" capability of 17km.....
Apart from that little "hiccup" , and avoiding God being objectified into Nihisism.....🤣
Have a fantastic day.
Cheers,
Michael.
Hey Mick- good to hear from you :) Only through beam-steering with multiple signals generators of course, "scalar", multiple input, multiple output ... as it is used in the ubiquitous smart grid- it would be with our new street lamps, cars and phones, working in conjunction with all the other signals generators (beam steering through multiple sources, creating standing waves).
I have tried my best to get good values (I am not from the field...) so it is good to have people like you pointing that out ;) We are doing our best with the limited methods we have at hands. I am never making any claims up and I am checking everything as reasonably as possible (I will always correct it when new evidence appears)... the problem is the omnipresence of lies and deceptions as we all have noticed by now!
My strategy was the following:
I red everything I could find in the published literature and learned to speak their language, deciphering their misleading presentations (like tweaking the software of the towers when they are technically capable of much more). Then I looked at all the evidence and tried to find the technical capabilities- for this I am always checking over and over again ... The "scalar" technology, rather compressions and rarefactions in the Aether, is stunningly precise. Then- as you pointed out- there will always be mistakes... ready to be corrected!
Regarding God- I would never do that to the monad... This new perspective sees the subjective and the objective fused in one field... since everything is conscious, that makes every kind of being possible- especially when thinking in the electrome paradigm with etheric bodies as Steiner sees them. One miracle remains, the spark or continuous creation initiation...! ;) God and the Goddess that are in essence one! I have faith in the rhythm and feeling in everything and I just want to make sure that we have both parents among us :) Creation is wondrous - no random interactions imho!
Yep, it's bio-electricity that provides form and function to every organism, nothing to do with genetics. Michael Levin's research is brilliant and proves that real understanding of biology happens without genetics.
However, I would disagree with Karmameleon's comments about flat earth. Water cannot and does not curve, many real world experiments prove this as does common sense. If water does not curve, then we arrive at a better understanding of the shape of the earth realm. Trillions of dollars have been and are being spent applying Atomism to the heavens and Earth to brain-wash and indoctrinate that we live on a spinning ball surrounded by billions more spinning balls, not to educate. 'Flat earther' and 'conspiracy theorist' are both ad hominem attacks used to ridicule by people who are too lazy or brainwashed to do their own investigations.
Wow. I tried hard to understand without much training in this field. So I sent to my best friend of thirty years who wanted to read it based on her family’s education and background. She’s sending it to her brother, Dr Luke Bucci, in Houston, Tx, an award winner, for his comments.
I read about structured water 10 years ago when I operated an alkaline water (by the gallon) store in Wimberley, Tx, yearning to understand the electro-biome properties.
Anyway, I’m still on this journey. So thankful for this article!
Excelente artigo!Gratidão! Repassndo...
It's awesome to see the false narratives torn down! Thanks for the interview of Leon! A brillian man, indeed!
The comment section contains claims indicating insects dying from 5G. It is quite telling that the word pesticide doesnt occur in the debate. Chemical industry marwels.
The fact that there was a background of black ops means that there also was a background of disinfo. Black ops are not experts of the technology they have some familiarity with. It is rather the case that such ops themselves are used to disinform. This is in particular the case concerning applications of technology for remote surveillance and mind reading. It all concerns the handling of weak signals in noisy conditions and it is all surrounded with secrecy. The black ops themselves may be the last to understand the weak spots of the technology. Therefore the technical explanations in the article are not credible. The superiors of the black ops have a wish for us to feel powerless.
"The notion that billions of miles of molecular code swimming at the nanoscale — subject to constant thermal motion — somehow orchestrates the staggering complexity of living systems requires more faith than the mechanistic worldview was supposed to demand."
......
That is not a good argument. The energy barrier corresponding to thermal motion is 0.025 -0.027eV, while the energy barrier that determines the stability of the genetic code is much higher 0.5 to 1.5eV. DNA molecules are therefore intact under thermal agitation. Probability for breaking a DNA molecule means several individual base pairs have to be broken. P~exp(-1eV/0.027)~10^-16 That aspect must not be left uncommented when one wants to carry out this analysis. It is very much like with the stability of the voltage levels pertinent to a digital computer. Computers make very few serious mistakes like confusing ones and zeros. In addition the double strands enable the correction of one error.
A protocol involves specifications to enable communication. That includes the medium of transport (light in this case) and a digital encoding protocol. Saying that the standard involves the same light in the human body means nothing at all. It's using the same light in a fibre-optic transmitter, too. It's also the same light coming from the sun. Those observations mean nothing.
That standard requires not only compliant light sources, but sensors, transmitters and the implementation of the defined digital protocol.
Where is your explanation of these essential elements (sensor and digital encoder/decoder) being assembled or placed inside the human body? The simple transmission of compliant light does not comply with the standard.
Thanks again for providing all this diverse material. There are a lot of assertions in this Q&A that are difficult to nail down specific support for.
I have a couple very specific questions to start with.
"I remembered the qdot patent from 2020 and the peculiar fact that it disappeared from the thermofisher website."
My antenna goes up as soon as someone talks about Patents, because most people don't seem to know what they are and what they mean. Patents are evidence or proof that someone had an idea and registered it, that's it. They are not proof or evidence of anything else.
Patents by definition are public domain, they are not secret. What was the patent mentioned here and what exactly is Leon claiming it shows? I would like to look it up and validate any claims being made.
For example, where can I find evidence or experiments demonstrating the following?
"These qdots are simply very small particles that have very high capacitance and hence react powerfully to our bioelectricity and amplify it or turn it into light!"
"In order to get to a sane level of EMF that are killing most of our animals and plants at the moment, we need to understand the problem first, which is not the falsified notion that CO2 would kill us all."
What is the evidence of this? I am not aware of animals and plants dying en masse? If anything vegetation is growing more now than ever given the higher CO2 content!
In Section 12 Leon proves to me he doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to networks. I am both an Engineer, and a network specialist. I know for a fact, when he starts listing off ANSI standards completely out of context relevancy he is either ignorant and misunderstands, or he is being intentionally deceptive. Either one is a big problem because he's either speaking definitively about stuff he doesn't understand or he's got some agenda of his own.
"There are several networks, comprising the 802.15.6 for medical devices, the 802.15.7 for all qdots and infrared emissions (including our body) in conjunction with the 802.15.4 RF hybrid optical network."
That statement in the context of what he is describing is absolutely false, and verifiably so. If he can misconstrue which to me a really basic things, then I have to question every dot he's connecting between what could be half-truths. Reader beware! Happy to discuss offline if you want.
Sabrina talks about these networks for years in 500+ videos for hundreds upon hundreds of hours of detailed recitals - the PHD class is being fed lies, unfortunately ...
Regarding the death of insects... you must not drive a car then ? 5g is vile sir - all animals rely on their magneto- dielectric communication :)
You can find 3000+ pages with references to evidencence and the search function on my substack will get you there!
I drive a car, in addition to owning both urban and rural property. In the urban setting I've noticed an increase in wasps (which eat other insects). In the rural property we saw bunker year for caterpillars just a couple years ago, long after the rollout of 5G.
Additionally, insect populations are heavily affected by temperature, so hotter temperatures during summer in some areas -- we are at a solar maximum -- will reduce the insect population.
Do you have any hard evidence that 5G affects insect populations especially since there are a ton of factors that can regionally affect their populations?
yes solar maximum and radiation maximum with cancer maximum (Windscreen 2005 : full of insects in the summer. Now: none. Not only insects go nuts, the mental health from all the interfacing is catastrophic in general and people think its about faster internet... ). Insects rely on very fine communication with signals and we are currently living in a mayhem era with artificial saturation that keeps everyone fried ... you say you research vaccines, so you believe in viruses ?
Frances Leader : https://francesleader.substack.com/p/all-my-substack-articles-on-emfc19
https://francesleader.substack.com/p/radiation-emergency?utm_source=substack&utm_campaign=post_embed&utm_medium=web
Sending me to a site with a million references where only a fraction discuss insects isn't providing the evidence I asked for. The one obvious article about insects and 5G is interesting, but they study done by the scientist on Samos isn't rigorous because it doesn't control for any other variables (even basic things like temperature) and the sample sizes are so small it's statistically nominal. I don't disregard her observations, I simply point out it's not rigorous to any degree and could easily be polluted by confounders.
The one study it references is good and it was Lazaro et al (2016) and they did a very thorough job of studying power (distance) from the source, and prevalence of insects controlling for a variety of important other factors. They did find a strong correlation to RF signal strength and prevalence of insects. Notably, this was done pre-5G.
So I still don't see the hard evidence of 5G specifically being worse for insects.
I know beekeepers here in my province (and we have had 5G for a while now) and the population increases and declines are far more related to winter temperatures than anything else. Again I am not stating I believe the conclusion to be wrong, but I think strong claims require strong evidence and I simply don't see it on the Insect/5G front.
Notably, I do find modelling studies on 5G and insects, but I've been studying vaccines for 3 decades and I know full well modelling isn't real evidence of anything.
I stop this conversation here. You are defending 5g and 6g... I hope that you are genuinely interested in the betterment of this wretched situation for humanity sir. I will not answer you anymore. For me this is ridiculous, you are defending these technologies that are evidently used for brain interfacing and that are disturbing all of our natural communication. I would not make it so blatantly obvious and defend 5g if I wanted to discredit people that are seeing things how they are :)
About the Qdot Patent (it is 1 of hundreds of pieces of evidence) : https://telestai.substack.com/p/mystery-solved-the-bill-gates-trade?utm_source=publication-search
See also this (about the genetics fraud) : https://odysee.com/@alanthier001:7/DNA_fraud_pdf:4
https://telestai.substack.com/p/the-hacking-of-the-entire-biosphere?utm_source=publication-search this one too, about more technical aspects of the interfacing
This one focusses on Nanoparticles in general, always referenced : https://telestai.substack.com/p/nanoparticle-enlightenment
I am by no means deceptive- I have never taken money for my work and put everything in this ;) Everything is as evidence based as possible ... as Mick points out - we cannot have every single measurement correct and I always correct myself on the way... Sabrina's main message is that these networks are used and they lie about the routes and usecase, of course. When you understand the deceptions of virology and genetics, it is easier to see how high flown the lies actually are. I recommend reading my articles about Sabrina Wallace first... she comes from networking and I was just gathering what she said- then I wrote about 3000 pages about much more diverse issues and aimed at integrating them!
The IEEE 802.15.7-2018 standard (IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area Networks—Part 15.7: Short-Range Optical Wireless Communications) defines a physical layer (PHY) and medium access control (MAC) sublayer for short-range optical wireless communications (OWC) in optically transparent media. It covers light wavelengths from 10,000 nm (far-infrared) down to 190 nm (ultraviolet), which explicitly includes the infrared range.This broad wavelength support makes it highly suitable for applications involving infrared emissions, including those from quantum dots (QDs) such as PbS (lead sulfide) or HgTe (mercury telluride) colloidal QDs, which are commonly engineered for tunable emissions and detection in the near-infrared (NIR), short-wave infrared (SWIR), and mid-wave infrared (MWIR) bands.The standard supports Optical Camera Communication (OCC) modes, which can involve infrared sources and camera-based receivers (e.g., using IR-sensitive image sensors to read modulated signals). This aligns well with QD-based emitters or photodetectors in scenarios like imaging, sensing, or low-to-moderate rate optical communication, where tunable QD emissions and high detectivity are leveraged.Later amendments, such as IEEE 802.15.7a-2024, further enhance the OCC PHY for higher rates and longer ranges, but the core 2018 version already provides the foundational support for infrared-inclusive OWC.Other related IEEE standards include:IEEE 802.11bb (approved in 2023): This is the formal LiFi standard (Light Fidelity), amending IEEE 802.11 for high-speed communication using light in the 800–1000 nm near-infrared band (with potential extensions to other optical bands). It targets bidirectional data rates from 10 Mb/s up to 9.6 Gb/s and is relevant for high-speed infrared optical links, though it focuses more on LED/laser-based sources rather than specifically QDs. It could complement QD systems in hybrid or future high-speed setups.
IEEE 802.15.13 (approved around 2023): This defines PHY and MAC for OWC using wavelengths from 10,000 nm to 190 nm (similar broad range as 802.15.7). It is positioned as a modernized or expanded framework for optical wireless, including potential LiFi/OWC applications in industrial or other settings, offering future potential for QD-integrated systems.
IEEE 802.15.4 and 802.15.3: These are primarily for low-rate WPANs (e.g., Zigbee-like) and higher-rate multimedia, respectively. They can indirectly support QD-based hybrid RF-optical networks (e.g., combining infrared optical links with RF backhaul), but they do not directly target optical/infrared PHYs.
Overall, IEEE 802.15.7-2018 remains the most directly applicable primary standard for reading or working with quantum dot infrared emissions in communication, sensing, or imaging contexts due to its explicit infrared wavelength inclusion and OCC support. Emerging work on colloidal QD infrared photodetectors and emitters often operates in wavelength regimes compatible with these OWC standards, though specific QD implementations are typically device-level rather than standardized at the protocol level.If you're looking for implementation details, specific QD material compatibility, or updates beyond 2024, let me know for a deeper dive!
More info : https://telestai.substack.com/p/sabrina-wallace-741
also the other articles, the search function is good as well...
and here : https://telestai.substack.com/p/sabrina-wallace
I know these standards quite well, what are you proposing they mean?
For example, the PHY definition for IEEE 802.15.7-2018 is a protocol, it's not a sensor. Your body (light amplified or not) is not going to conform to the protocol, so will have zero compatibility with any equipment designed for it. Not to mention the lack of transparent medium.
I wrote a lot about this interfacing : https://telestai.substack.com/p/interfacing-our-cellular-communication
and here : https://telestai.substack.com/p/nanoparticle-enlightenment
and about the simplicity of the deceit : https://telestai.substack.com/p/the-simplicity-of-the-deceit-is-profound
Hi, your article there does not answer the simple question I asked about the protocol at all. I stated your body is not going to conform to a protocol (which is what the standard defines). Where is the evidence that any human body transmits according to the protocol defined by IEEE 802.15.7-2018.
The protocol supports a variety of light frequencies, but the protocol itself has little to do with the light itself, it's the sequencing and the timing that defines the protocol.
Who said this is a sensor ? Please read first. The sensors are hidden as adjuvants, viruses, antimicrobial agents...There are many thousands of pages from Dominique Guillet at this point, all referenced - with hundreds upon hundreds of studies with evidence for anyone looking for that (but their science is categorically deceptive, the ivory tower perfection is flawed with intention!) .... I am not going to type that for you personally in this chat- please make the effort, thank you.
From your own article you quote: "The primary standard for reading quantum dot infrared emissions is IEEE 802.15.7-2018".
Reading emissions requires sensing.
I will repeat, this IEEE standard is a digital PROTOCOL standard for digital transmission using light as a medium for communication. How is graphene oxide or any chemical additive going to encode information into digital protocols for transmission in the body confirming to that standard without a microchip? You don't explain this very critical detail anywhere. You can't achieve any sort of logical digital encoding without a microchip or you haven't explained how that works. Please explain.
To implement communication using a protocol involving light, you need:
A sensor, an emitter, a medium, and a microchip that encodes and decodes the digital protocol. I have not seen any explanation of how this standard could be implemented in the human body without all these elements.
Well most of the signals are red from the Face ID cameras and processed in the phone
https://telestai.substack.com/p/the-nano-network-riddle-is-solved
No microchip necessary ....
Graphene oxide reduces to rGO fibers that turn CHARGE into MAGNETISM through spintronics, but they lie about electron spin because electrons do not exist. The rest is voltage fluorescence.
You did not explain how the protocol gets encoded or decoded. You keep avoiding the most basic question about the essential part of the PHY layer protocol.
You have not said a single thing that can link the IEEE 802.15.7-2018 to any of this. Why are you inferring I'm not informed when you seem to misunderstand the basics of digital encoding which is essentially what these protocols are about (vs the light source).
Virology and Genetics have entirely been set up to hide this. Rosalind Franklin did not discover Nucleotides, she was working on graphite and used the spacing for one layer, 0,34 nm to invent nucleotide ladder spacing. This material is being used and these protocols are incorporating medical devices at the physical layer and of course you will not hear about the details. I will stop this conversation here because I am not going to argue with someone who does not see the dangers of wireless tech.
The history behind Rosalind Franklin's "discovery" : https://telestai.substack.com/p/rosalind-franklin-discovered-graphene
I've been studying and reducing EMFs in my house for longer than you have and I have thousands of dollars of measuring equipment. I've custom designed the electrical system in my house and 95% of what happens in the house is fully wired, not wireless, including a land line telephone.
You make assumptions that are wildly inaccurate.
I am not disputing anything about nucleotides I am asking specifically about the domain I am extremely familiar with and that is networking protocols and electrical engineering.
Now if you can't answer the most basic question of how the IEEE protocol in detail actually applies here, then all you've posted is technobabble.
Look, when you are familiar with the protocol for infrared, then find out more about that- I was happy that I found the 802.15.7 because before, the 802.15.6 is surely not sufficient for that. Qdots were the main ingredient in the covid shots by the way... this was the story about the "messenger molecules". I hope you are not going to put all your efforts in this ONE ISSUE now, because I am 99,9% of the time thinking about something else.
Claiming that that certain wavelengths of light emitted by the body are in the same standard is not a meaningful observation. A communication standard requires all of the following to implement:
Communication method (i.e. light, electrical, rf) which requires sensors and emitters, a transmission medium, in addition to digital encoding and decoding. All of these elements are essential to meet the standard.
Even if we could plausibly admit the bodies ability to emit, transmit and sense those light signals, where is the digital encoding and decoding occurring?
I am glad that you are studying EMF. It is also great that you know so much about these protocols, so please tell me- because all this protocol says is that it exists and encompasses exactly these signals that are emitted from voltage fluorescent qdots and I hope I do not have to remind you that the powers that shall not be are not saying that they will interface your magneto- dielectric signals and use your biofield as a part of the ubiquitous smart grid. They just lie, like they lied about "mrna" messanger molecules .... I have been writing thousands of pages about this years ago and I am now focussing on other topics, feel free to dismiss it all if that gives you peace of mind... We are now at a point where the WEF is openly talking about the way they are utilising this information that is being gathered with sober certainty. Have a good day sir. I am not here to argue with you about the 802.15.7 - if you have a rigid personality, go on ... I will stop here. Godspeed to you!
"because all this protocol says is that it exists and encompasses exactly these signals"
This is highly inaccurate. The protocol requires emission, transmission, sensing and digital encoding and decoding. Without all those elements, you're not talking about that standard.
Where is the digital encoding and decoding occurring?