It is important to know which areas have already gone live with 5G, which areas are planning to go live and which have no plans as yet.

This article in July 2019, outlines all the areas involved as well as the networks involved.

5G Network Currently Live Planned & Announced
EE
(check coverage)
9 towns and cities live
Belfast, Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Coventry, Edinburgh, Leicester, London, Manchester
16 towns and cities planned
Aberdeen, Cambridge, Derby, Glasgow, Gloucester, Hull, Leeds, Liverpool, Newcastle, Nottingham, Peterborough, Plymouth, Portsmouth, Sheffield, Southampton, Wolverhampton
O2
(check coverage)
42 towns and cities planned
Aberdeen, Belfast, Birkenhead, Birmingham, Blackpool, Bournemouth, Bradford, Brighton, Bristol, Cambridge, Cardiff, Coventry, Derby, Edinburgh, Eton, Glasgow, Guildford, Hove, Leeds, Leicester, Lisburn, Liverpool, London, Luton, Manchester, Milton Keynes, Newbury, Newcastle, Northampton, Norwich, Nottingham, Plymouth, Portsmouth, Reading, Sheffield, Slough, Southampton, Stoke-on-Trent, Sunderland, Warrington, Windsor, Wolverhampton
Three
(check coverage)
1 towns and cities live
London
24 towns and cities planned
Birmingham, Bolton, Bradford, Brighton, Bristol, Cardiff, Coventry, Derby, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Hull, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, Manchester, Middlesbrough, Milton Keynes, Nottingham, Reading, Rotherham, Sheffield, Slough, Sunderland, Wolverhampton
Vodafone
(check coverage)
15 towns and cities live
Birkenhead, Birmingham, Bolton, Bristol, Cardiff, Gatwick, Glasgow, Lancaster, Liverpool, London, Manchester, Newbury, Plymouth, Stoke-on-Trent, Wolverhampton
7 towns and cities planned
Blackpool, Bournemouth, Guildford, Portsmouth, Reading, Southampton, Warrington

BT Mobile and Sky Mobile have also confirmed that they’ll be launching a 5G service in 2019. BT Mobile piggybacks on coverage from EE, so their 5G service will be available in the same places as EE. Similarly, Sky Mobile uses O2 as their network coverage provider so you can expect them to offer 5G in the same towns and cities as O2.

5G Coverage In Major Towns & Cities

Unsurprising, it’s the UK’s largest towns and cities that are getting 5G coverage before the rest of the country.

All 15 of the UK’s largest towns and cities will receive a 5G service before the end of the year. However, due to the staggered roll-out of 5G, different 5G mobile networks will be available in each city. This is summarised in the table below:

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
London Live
(3 providers)
EE: Live (May 2019)
Three: Live (August 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Birmingham Live
(2 providers)
EE: Live (May 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Glasgow Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Liverpool Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Bristol Live
(2 providers)
EE: Live (October 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Manchester Live
(2 providers)
EE: Live (May 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Sheffield Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Leeds Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Edinburgh Live
(EE)
EE: Live (May 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Leicester Live
(EE)
EE: Live (October 2019)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Coventry Live
(EE)
EE: Live (October 2019)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Bradford Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Cardiff Live
(2 providers)
EE: Live (May 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Belfast Live
(EE)
EE: Live (May 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Nottingham Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)

Read on for further information about the 5G roll out in different regions of the UK.

5G Coverage: By Region

Eastern England

At the moment, 5G coverage isn’t available in the East of England. So far, EE is the only mobile network to announce a launch date for 5G in Eastern England (they’re due to launch their 5GEE service in Cambridge and Peterborough in 2020):

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Cambridge
Cambridgeshire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (2020)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Luton
Bedfordshire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Norwich
Norfolk
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Peterborough
Cambridgeshire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (2020)
Basildon
Essex
Not Yet
Announced
 
Chelmsford
Essex
Not Yet
Announced
 
Colchester
Essex
Not Yet
Announced
 
Hemel Hempstead
Hertfordshire
Not Yet
Announced
 
Ipswich
Suffolk
Not Yet
Announced
 
Southend-on-Sea
Essex
Not Yet
Announced
 
Watford
Hertfordshire
Not Yet
Announced
 

East Midlands

5G coverage should be available in the Eastern Midlands before the end of 2019. Both EE and Three have announced their 5G rollout plan for Derby, Leicester and Nottingham:

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Leicester
Leicestershire
Live
(EE)
EE: Live (October 2019)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Derby
Derbyshire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (2020)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Northampton
Northamptonshire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Nottingham
Nottinghamshire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Lincoln
Lincolnshire
Not Yet
Announced
 

London

Unsurprisingly, London has been the epicentre of the UK’s 5G coverage roll out.

At the time of writing, both EE and Vodafone offer 5G coverage in London. Three will launch their 5G service in August 2019, with O2 also launching a 5G service before the end of the year.

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
London
London
Live
(3 providers)
EE: Live (May 2019)
Three: Live (August 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)

North East England

5G coverage has currently been announced for three cities in the North East of England:

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Middlesbrough
North Yorkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Newcastle
Tyne and Wear
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Sunderland
Tyne and Wear
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Gateshead
Tyne and Wear
Not Yet
Announced
 

North West England

At the time of writing, 5G coverage is live in both Liverpool and Manchester.

For residents of Liverpool, 5G coverage is currently available only from Vodafone. However, both EE and Three have announced their plans to launch a 5G service in the city before the end of the year.

In Manchester, both EE and Vodafone have live 5G mobile networks, with Three aiming to launch a 5G service in the city before the end of the year.

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Birkenhead
Merseyside
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Bolton
Greater Manchester
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Liverpool
Merseyside
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Manchester
Greater Manchester
Live
(2 providers)
EE: Live (May 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Lancaster
Lancashire
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
 
Blackpool
Lancashire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Vodafone: Planned (End of 2019)
Warrington
Cheshire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Vodafone: Planned (End of 2019)
Blackburn
Lancashire
Not Yet
Announced
 
Oldham
Greater Manchester
Not Yet
Announced
 
Rochdale
Greater Manchester
Not Yet
Announced
 
Sale
Greater Manchester
Not Yet
Announced
 
Salford
Greater Manchester
Not Yet
Announced
 
St Helens
Merseyside
Not Yet
Announced
 
Stockport
Greater Manchester
Not Yet
Announced
 
Wigan
Greater Manchester
Not Yet
Announced
 

Northern Ireland

In Northern Ireland, 5G coverage is currently available in Belfast on EE’s mobile network. O2 have also announced the roll-out of 5G coverage which should arrive in Belfast before the end of the year.

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Belfast
County Antrim
Live
(EE)
EE: Live (May 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Lisburn
County Antrim
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (End of 2019)

Scotland

5G coverage is currently available in Edinburgh and Glasgow (EE has coverage in Edinburgh whilst Vodafone has coverage in Glasgow). 5G coverage should also launch in Aberdeen sometime in 2020:

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Edinburgh
Edinburgh
Live
(EE)
EE: Live (May 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Glasgow
Glasgow
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Aberdeen
Aberdeen
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (2020)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Dundee
Dundee
Not Yet
Announced
 

South East England

The following towns and cities in South East England currently have 5G coverage in the works:

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Newbury
Berkshire
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Gatwick
West Sussex
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
 
Brighton
East Sussex
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Eton
Berkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Guildford
Surrey
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Vodafone: Planned (End of 2019)
Hove
East Sussex
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Milton Keynes
Buckinghamshire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Portsmouth
Hampshire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (2020)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Vodafone: Planned (End of 2019)
Reading
Berkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Vodafone: Planned (End of 2019)
Slough
Berkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Southampton
Hampshire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (2020)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Vodafone: Planned (End of 2019)
Windsor
Berkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Basingstoke
Hampshire
Not Yet
Announced
 
Crawley
West Sussex
Not Yet
Announced
 
Eastbourne
East Sussex
Not Yet
Announced
 
Gillingham
Kent
Not Yet
Announced
 
High Wycombe
Buckinghamshire
Not Yet
Announced
 
Maidstone
Kent
Not Yet
Announced
 
Oxford
Oxfordshire
Not Yet
Announced
 
Woking
Surrey
Not Yet
Announced
 
Worthing
West Sussex
Not Yet
Announced
 

South West England

In the South West of England, 5G coverage is currently live on Vodafone’s 5G network in Bristol. It should also arrive in Bournemouth and Plymouth by the end of 2019:

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Bristol
Bristol
Live
(2 providers)
EE: Live (October 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Plymouth
Devon
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
EE: Planned (2020)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Bournemouth
Dorset
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Vodafone: Planned (End of 2019)
Gloucester
Gloucestershire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (2020)
Bath
Somerset
Not Yet
Announced
 
Cheltenham
Gloucestershire
Not Yet
Announced
 
Exeter
Devon
Not Yet
Announced
 
Poole
Dorset
Not Yet
Announced
 
Swindon
Wiltshire
Not Yet
Announced
 

Wales

Both EE and Vodafone currently have a 5G mobile network live in Cardiff. By the end of the year, all four mobile networks should have a 5G network in Wales, with O2 and Three aiming to launch their 5G service in Cardiff before the end of the year.

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Cardiff
South Glamorgan
Live
(2 providers)
EE: Live (May 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Newport
Gwent
Not Yet
Announced
 
Swansea
West Glamorgan
Not Yet
Announced
 

West Midlands

At present, 5G mobile coverage is available in Birmingham on both the EE and Vodafone networks. It’s also confirmed that we’ll see a 5G service in Coventry, Stoke-on-Trent and Wolverhampton before the end of the year.

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Birmingham
West Midlands
Live
(2 providers)
EE: Live (May 2019)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Coventry
West Midlands
Live
(EE)
EE: Live (October 2019)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Stoke-on-Trent
Staffordshire
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
O2: Planned (End of 2019)
Wolverhampton
West Midlands
Live
(Vodafone)
Vodafone: Live (July 2019)
EE: Planned (2020)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Solihull
West Midlands
Not Yet
Announced
 
Sutton Coldfield
West Midlands
Not Yet
Announced
 
Telford
Shropshire
Not Yet
Announced
 
Worcester
Worcestershire
Not Yet
Announced
 

Yorkshire and the Humber

5G coverage has so far been announced for five towns and cities around Yorkshire and the Humber:

Town/City 5G Status 5G Networks
Bradford
West Yorkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Hull
East Riding of Yorkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Leeds
West Yorkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (October 2019)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Rotherham
South Yorkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Sheffield
South Yorkshire
Planned &
Announced
 
EE: Planned (End of 2019)
O2: Planned (Summer 2020)
Three: Planned (End of 2019)
Doncaster
South Yorkshire
Not Yet
Announced
 
Huddersfield
West Yorkshire
Not Yet
Announced
 
Wakefield
West Yorkshire
Not Yet
Announced
 
York
North Yorkshire
Not Yet
Announced

 

https://kenstechtips.com/index.php/5g-network-coverage

BT launched its 5G service on Friday 11th October, 2019. It launched in 20 towns and cities on day one, and – unsurprisingly since it owns EE – it  offers 5G coverage in the same places as EE.

However, it’s worth noting that these locations don’t initially have comprehensive 5G coverage. Rather, 5G will be found primarily in places with high population density.

BT has confirmed that it will be switching on 5G in 25 more towns and cities throughout the rest of 2019. Link to article: https://5g.co.uk/bt/

Moratoriums

The latest news is that a campaigner in Totnes  have persuaded local officials to declare a moratorium on installing the high-frequency network.

Is this a step forward? Well it might be If Totnes were due to have 5G coverage anytime soon! And it might be if council holding moratoriums had any force in planning law, they do not! But when you throw into the mix, the fact that the government is holding a public consultation to allow the telecom infrastructure to by pass any need for planning applications and that that consultation will end in just a few weeks, then you have to wonder why these campaigners are not advertising that fact.

We can see that 5G has already been rolled out in 25 towns and cities live, we can see that it is also planned to be rolled out in a further 89 towns and cities across the UK 2019/2020.

Yet, a council with no plans in the pipeline to roll out 5G have agreed to a moratorium which according to reports:

THE DECISION HAS NO FORCE IN PLANNING LAW?

Another report in a main stream media states:

 

Which begs the question: Why claim that it bans the installation of new technology at the same time reporting that a moratorium has no force in planning laws? Why claim to ban installation in an area that has no plans as yet to install the network?

When has main stream media ran stories that go against the agenda? 

 

Even the BBC are reporting this, the very agency that is funded by the Dept of Digital, Culture, Media and Sports, the same agency tasked with the Smart/5G roll out.

Recent Government proclamations claim they intend to remove planning restrictions for telecoms operators which will  conclude following a government consultation that is set for November 2019.

On top of that the Government is also seeking to make it easier for operators to build taller masts and related mobile infrastructure via a new consultation (here).

Mobile Planning Consultation (Permitted Development Rights)

* changing the permitted height of new masts to deliver better mobile coverage, promote mast sharing and minimise the need to build more infrastructure;

* allowing existing ground-based masts to be strengthened without prior approval to enable sites to be upgraded for 5G and for mast sharing;

* deploying radio equipment cabinets on protected and unprotected land without prior approval, excluding sites of special scientific interest; and

* allowing building-based masts nearer to roads to support 5G and increase mobile coverage.

 So, if a moratorium has no force in planning law and planning laws are set to give telecom operators ever greater powers next month, what exactly does a council with no plans in place  for 5G roll out,holding a moratorium achieve? According to the report, the campaigner claims that it sends out a  warning to ministers that they cannot bring in 5G without further research into its effects on health.

But they already have! Just not in his area? And the govt plan to give telecom even more rights next month!

The article also went on to  quote the  this campaigner who states:

 Adjunct Professor Curtis Bennett is  a radiation consultant and Chief  of Integrative Health Forum (IHFGlobal). Bennett,s core work is stopping the radiation that will kill the planet and all on it.

The Integrative Health Forum evolved in 2003 and serves professionals and associations that promote health, well-being, and EMF awareness. They host the only CME/CE-approved educational programs offering scientific knowledge about the impact of EMF on the human body.

He states:

You can NOT impose EMFs on  natural frequencies and vibrations.There is ZERO acceptable exposure.

Causation and biological plausibility linking RF EMFs to adverse health effects was found, reported and qualified for lecture for Continuing Medical Education credits required for ongoing medical licensing’

There is no making it safe.There is no acceptable absorption or dosage of electromagnetic radiation.

 

 

The   Government is  seeking to make it easier for operators to build taller masts. The claim is that there are advantages of taller masts because they’re perceived to be safer (the equipment is further away from people on the ground), can cover a much wider area and you don’t need as many smaller masts when you have one big one.

Is this not exactly what this campaigner has been given main stream media coverage to request, Safer 5G? 

Why would a local council who know that there are NO plans to roll out 5G,in their own area, agree to moratorium to which it claims to be halting the roll out? There are no plans to roll out  as yet in that area!

At the same time it is reported that the decision will have  have no force in planning law.

So if there are NO plans to roll out 5G in Totnes and a moratorium approved by Totnes council has no force in planning law, what exactly is this really all about?

And what is the actual point of councils holding moratoriums if they have no force in planning law? 

I suspect this may be a tactic for other campaigners  to follow meanwhile the govt give even more rights to telecom providers next month AND there is NO halt to 5G, it is already in  many areas.

Apart from Gateshead– which is also an area in which another so called campaigner, claims to have 5G lampposts that are targeting the Jewish population and is a co-partner in campaigning with the man from Totnes claiming to want safer 5G.

I have already exposed this fake campaigner here. https://www.vigiliae.org/mark-steele-is-controlled-opposition/

Gateshead have never had 5G nor are there any plans for it, the council even had a moan about being overlooked for funding to test it.

 

If anyone wants to find out if their area is using 5G, there is a simple app that you can use via your postcode. Link here. https://www.signalchecker.co.uk/?fbclid=IwAR0aPGAXJuByv3SIax1XflZK9kv8uXS_O0wyFuuQNfSHo3WSS-RZEBx1YE4

In the meantime. 

Campaigners needs to ask some questions about moratoriums and what they can actually achieve because it seems that they are being used to claim they can stop the 5G roll out when they clearly cannot! The fact that BT announced that it was rolling out 5G  on Friday 11th October, 2019. It launched in 20 towns and cities on day one, this is AFTER this campaigner claimed that the call for a moratorium sends out a message that ministers cannot roll out 5G without testing it for safety first: No, what is does is create a false sense that this action is stopping the roll out when it clearly is NOT.

Link to newspaper article: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7544239/5G-campaigners-force-Devon-council-pause-installation-new-high-speed-network.html

The Government has launched a consultation on proposals to simplify planning rules for mobile infrastructure to support the roll-out of 5G across the country. Make your opinion count!

 

 

Ways to respond

or

Email to:

MobilePlanningConsultation@communities.gov.uk

Write to:Planning Infrastructure Division
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government
3rd Floor, Fry Building
2 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DF

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/proposed-reforms-to-permitted-development-rights-to-support-the-deployment-of-5g-and-extend-mobile-coverage?utm_source=Members&utm_campaign=3e9a675e14-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_06_08_03_15_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_206970988f-3e9a675e14-323862985&mc_cid=3e9a675e14&mc_eid=0ab877a7dd&fbclid=IwAR0XxGybXk-akCPQVh_6sOn3av4-gCc_qc4zKp2Cl7iYIoJYMDE–F02ufQ

Here we have another area agreeing to hold a moratorium, an area that has no pending plans for the roll out of 5G, claiming that it could:

 allow mast placement to follow local planning regulations

While the Govt consultation states”This consultation seeks views on the principle of amending or creating new
permitted development rights to grant planning permission for the following four
proposals, and in particular, the circumstances in which it would be appropriate to:
a. enable deployment of radio housing equipment on land without requiring
prior approval, excluding on sites of special scientific interest, to support
5G deployment;

 

To enable deployment of 5G and to improve mobile coverage, mobile network
operators need to deploy radio equipment housing (‘equipment housing’). This can
range in size from a small cabinet to a purpose built cabin serving several
operators. It can be placed within a building, underground, on the ground or on a rooftop. The equipment is connected to antennas via feeder cables and provides
the power source. An example would be an equipment cabinet located near to a
monopole mast.

Can you see what is going on here? 

Whilst these campaigners are getting moratoriums for the local council to affect the planning applications of the 5G roll out, doing so in areas with no planned roll out, the govt is just weeks away from changing legislature to allow the roll out to proceed without the need of any planning applications at all.

Yet why are these campaigners NOT giving the links to the govt consultation on their websites or even mentioning it publicly?

Should the chair of the supposedly ‘independent’ body setting the guidelines of microwave radiation protection and also his wife – really be holding shares in the very same companies he is supposed to be regulating?  How is this not an extreme conflict of interests?

Full Article : https://communityoperatingsystem.wordpress.com/2019/09/12/how-icnirp-agnir-phe-and-a-30-year-old-political-decision-created-and-then-covered-up-a-global-public-health-scandal/?fbclid=IwAR0pjLTBUcStFXOc-FM5f6m2j

Summary

This consultation seeks views on the principle of amending permitted development rights to support deployment of 5G and extend mobile coverage.

This consultation closes at

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/proposed-reforms-to-permitted-development-rights-to-support-the-deployment-of-5g-and-extend-mobile-coverage?utm_source=Members&utm_campaign=3e9a675e14-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_06_08_03_15_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_206970988f-3e9a675e14-323862985&mc_cid=3e9a675e14&mc_eid=0ab877a7dd&fbclid=IwAR1QHWHsRhjPgtZJ9W-b-RgcnGTqDdLd53PZq2mWMZCqB4XphmeT7r_9f9c

“90% of the climate scientists hold that CO2 induced climate change is underway and presents serious risks.”

What they leave out is that those 90% of so called scientists have never agreed on what percentage of climate change is caused by Fossil fuels, the most current information puts the number anywhere between 0.000001% to 0.004%, or a .07 degree Fahrenheit change over the next 50 years.

Our natural climate drivers <(sun, moon, oceans, electromagnetic forces, orbital precession and eccentricities, along with our ever changing equatorial tilt)> that don’t include anything that man has done, in earth’s history has changed by up to 14 degrees Fahrenheit over a 50 year span.

The alarmists have NO evidence. That’s aparently why they spend all their time inventing bogus “surveys”, or other distractions.

It’s been warmer than now several times during this interglacial period, The IPCC argues that the current temperature is a record going back several hundreds (highly likely) and somewhat less likely going back to the MWP. But they provide no justification for that. In fact, there is an abundance of evidence from peer-reviewed studies indicating that the temperature was as high, likely higher during those earlier warm durations.

The alarmists deny that the Medieval Warming Period was a global event, and that it was likely warmer back then than it is now (more of Mann’s Mann-made climate). As usual, no basis for that claim. (The reason for their claim is that they cannot explain ANY earlier warming period which experiences temperatures higher than now because rising CO2 is the only cause the computer models deal with. CO2 had been constant for hundreds of thousands of years at the time of the MWP. )

However, in order to provide actual evidence of their claim that the MWP was not global and not was warm as now, it would have been necessary to obtain proxy temperatures around the globe. Mann didn’t bother doing that. But wait..! It has been done by others. First of all, there are 6,000 bore holes around the globe, and these readings are not restricted to areas where ice cores are the only option. The boreholes temperature trends show conclusively that the MWP trend was global. An enlightening discussion of the borehole results can be found at Joanne Nova’s website. Her spouse, Dr David Evans, is well acquainted with climate models. ( Evans has become as big a target as Lord Monckton. The alarmists begin foaming at the mouth at the mention of either name.)

But there’s more ….. google the Greenland study (gisp2). That study demonstrates that Greenland also experienced the MWP trend (and is distant from Europe) and was warmer than now.

Next, the Mendenhall glacier in Alaska recently receded sufficiently to expose a shattered 1,000 year-old forest still standing in its original position. (A similar situation has recently been exposed in the Alps, but dated that forest is dated 4,000 years old.) In either case there are obviously no trees now growing at that latitude anywhere near those sites. Conclusion: it was warmer back then than it is now. The Alaskan exposure indicates Alaska was also experiencing the MWP trend. (Note: Alaska is remote from both Greenland and Europe).

There are also ancient vineyards which have been found at latitudes where grapes cannot be grown today. Ancient graves found beneath the perma frost don’t help the alarmist situation either. All indicate that it was warmer back during this interglacial than now. http://www.livescience.com/…

Next, there are hundreds of peer-reviewed MWP studies. These have been performed by researchers and science organizations around the globe. A subset of these studies specifically address temperatures (rather than such things as rainfall, droughts, etc.) Almost every MWP study has been catalogued by co2science.org and those studies also happen to  be accessible at that website by region. I’ll leave it to the readers to go there, select half a dozen regions (don’t forget the southern hemisphere) and choose in each (if one exists) a temperature based study. We already know from the boreholes that the MWP was global. With these studies you will almost invariably find that the study selected also shows it to be as warm, likely warmer than it is now.

There is an overwhelming amount of REAL evidence conflicting with the alarmists’ denial that the MWP was a global event and likely warmer than now. And… there are new studies confirming the earlier ones which continue to arrive. Also, keep in mind that many of these studies were performed decades ago, and the IPCC acknowledged those in its earlier reports by admitting that the MWP was global and warmer than now. However, there was little interest in asking questions about the conflict after Mann came up with his dubious “hockey stick” graph. (Keep in mind that his 12 tree study conflicts with McIntyre’s study which used 34 trees, and in any event was NOT even close to a global study.)

Surely Obama, a president who claimed climate change was his number one priority, would, with the help of his advisers, justify his claim. Unfortunately, the alarmist “science” was exposed after his  visit to Alaska, where he pointed out two receding glaciers as evidence of “climate change” (which means, at least to that cult, “warming caused mostly by human activity”). However, it turns out there are also other GROWING glaciers, both in Alaska and elsewhere on the globe, which thoroughly disables that claim insofar as evidence. We are, after all, enjoying a relatively brief warming period between ice ages. But, it gets worse… one of the two receding glaciers, “Exit” by name, has been receding since 1730. That’s 100+years before CO2 (the supposed human caused culprit) began increasing. And THAT pretty much sums up the alarmist position on evidence.

Computer model output is not evidence. It merely reflects the author(s) understanding, at best. But, keep in mind that it may also represent confirmation bias and/or some other agenda. Even the IPCC has admitted that climate can only be represented by a nonlinear system that includes various known and unknown chaotic influences, so it remains unlikely that we will be able to produce accurate predictions.
The IPCC has also acknowledged the current temperature “hiatus”. That hiatus rules out the supposed alarmist rebuttal of the MWP because they claim that the MWP, to have been global, must show a multi-decadal synchronous warming. That supposed rebuttal leads to the fact that our hiatus indicates we are not now experiencing global warming either!

Our current warming (such as it is … stalled since 1998) began NOT in the mid 1850s (a cherry-picked date), but, BY DEFINITION, at the first bottom (the low temperature) during the Little Ice Age. That was around 1630-1650, so 200 years BEFORE co2 began increasing, and also 200 years before the industrial revolution. Co2 began increasing around the mid 1800s and it is well known that there is little possibility (at an average annual increase of 2 ppmv per year) that co2 total increase would have been sufficient to impact temperature measurements before another 100 years of measuring the temperature. This implies that we have recorded 300 years of temperature which reflect only NATURALLY caused temperature increase. and this takes us to about 1950. (So, why all the talk about temperatures going back into the 1800s?)

But from the 1940s to the 1970s there was a mild COOLING. (Another hiatus!) So the current alarm about temperature increase is constrained to a bit more than 2 decades of warming, running from 1975 to 1997/1998, which has been followed by a bit less than 2 decades of NO statistically significant ADDITIONAL temperature increase. And 1997/98 are not a “cherry-picked el Nino because the hiatus runs into 2015/16 which is was also an equally (or more) powerful el Nino.

NOAA made a desperate attempt to make the “hiatus” disappear. It was called their “pause-buster”. They replaced the 3,000+ ARGO buoys (specifically designed for environmental measurements) with less reliable temperature readings from ship intake, which, among other problems, has a known .12C temperature bias. The same suspects also attempted to introduce a new (not yet vetted) terrestrial database. Dr. John Bates, a whistle blower at NOAA pointed this out, although some skeptics had recognized earlier what was going on. Dr. Bates does not appear to be a skeptic (aka “denier”) either, but he’s clearly now a heretic in the eyes of the alarmists.

NOAA’s data machinations are highly suspect. And how much ruckus have we heard about which year or month has been “hottest”, courtesy NASA?. What these “scientists” neglect to mention (either that, or the major news media don’t understand, or ignore it) is that the difference betwixt recent year annual temperatures involve a FEW HUNDREDTHs of one degree, whereas the uncertainty error is greater than ONE TENTH of a degree. This means they are babbling about NOISE. REAL scientists wouldn’t stand for that kind of stuff.

Finally, even Obama’s EPA administrator admitted during congressional testimony that there is nothing we can do which will impact the temperature in the out-years. (And that assumes an ongoing effort, involving expenditures of TRILLIONs to supposedly solve this likely non-problem.)

By Denis Ables.

There is no evidence showing that CO2 level has EVER had any impact on the global temperature, not even over geologic periods when CO2 level was 10 to 20 times higher than now. In fact,  the only correlation between temperature and CO2 variation which tracks both up and down trends shows the opposite. It is temperature variation which occurs FIRST and only hundreds of years later do similar variations show up in CO2 level. So you don’t even have a correlation, let alone any evidence.

 

 

The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) is what its name suggests: an international panel of nongovernment scientists and scholars who have come together to understand the causes and consequences of climate change. Because we are not predisposed to believe climate change is caused by human greenhouse gas emissions, we are able to look at evidence the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) ignores. Because we do not work for any governments, we are not biased toward the assumption that greater government activity is necessary.

 

NIPCC traces its roots to a meeting in Milan in 2003 organized by the
Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), a nonprofit research and education organization based in Arlington, Virginia. SEPP, in turn, was founded in 1990 by Dr. S. Fred Singer, an atmospheric physicist, and incorporated in 1992 following Dr. Singer’s retirement from the University of Virginia. NIPCC is currently a joint project of SEPP, The Heartland Institute, and the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change.

 

NIPCC has produced 14 reports to date:
  • Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate
  • Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)
  • Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report
  • Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science
  • Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts
  • Scientific Critique of IPCC’s 2013 ‘Summary for Policymakers’
  • Commentary and Analysis on the Whitehead & Associates 2014 NSW Sea-Level Report
  • Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming
  • Written Evidence Submitted to the Commons Select Committee of the United Kingdom Parliament
  • NIPCC vs. IPCC
  • Chinese Translation of Climate Change Reconsidered
  • Global Warming Surprises: Temperature data in dispute can reverse conclusions about human influence on climate
  • Data versus Hype: How Ten Cities Show
    Sea-level Rise Is a False Crisis
  • Climate Change Reconsidered II: Fossil Fuels
  • Link to website: http://climatechangereconsidered.org/http://climatechangereconsidered.org/

“Why the CO2 ‘Theory’ Fails

1. FACT. There is no evidence for the CO2 climate driver proposition in the real world using real data over hundreds of thousands of years. World temperatures do not follow CO2.
[See weatheraction.com to see how the data has been manipulated]

2. FACT. Even if CO2 had an effect the idea that Man’s 4% of total CO2 flux rules the other natural 96% flux in and out of sea/land making it follow man’s activity is a ridiculous conspiracy theory of nature.

3. FACT. The reason why the CO2 atmosphere theory can never work is that the Ocean-atmosphere interface controls the amount of CO2 in air – a warmer ocean (which holds 50x more CO2 than the atmosphere) emits CO2 and vice versa. This is very basic physics”

“Hysterical claims that July world / any country temps are “hottest ever / since records began” are FRAUD.
– intended to coerce and brainwash politicians and the public into accepting World-Economic-Forum + mega-corporations schemes to control and rob the world for deluded projects to ‘Save the Planet’ which are actually intended to boost the super rich and Save the banks from otherwise imminent doom.
The truth is, as the late Christopher Booker, renowned journalist & first editor of Private Eye, exposed, Climate data is fraudulently “adjusted” on an industrial scale via WMO (World Met Organisation)/NOAA &c to make the present appear warmer & the past colder”

“The utter disgrace of Official temperature “reports” –
~30% of USA data stations are now FABRICATED Data
Data fraud hits record levels every year since 2014

To see the record levels of fraud now perpetrated for USA date
(let alone UK and other Met Offices around the world and world bodies) go to Piers Corbyn latest Presentations (power Point Links in Right column of this home page) and go to:-
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/…/ncdc-breaks-their-own…/
and see a flip-flop of adjustments upwards which corresponds to CO2 amounts!!