How about the various footage in the middle of cemeteries, where mac addresses are being emitted, or you want to ignore those?
You may want to check this out or call the FCC yourself https://www.bitchute.com/video/VxZ21zaP6gg5/
I have avoided posting his stuff due to his language but he is a Ham operator and trained Radar operator. Anyway it totally contradicts what you are saying about anonymous blue tooth addresses
Note this:
BlackPilledHAM -- "ALSO, I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THE FCC REP STATED THAT ONLY UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, LIKE MANUFACTURING PRODUCTS FOR EXAMPLE LIKE A CNC MACHINE MAY HAVE UN-NAMED BLE MAC ADDRESS BUT IT IS NOT RECOMENDED BUT NOT AGAINST THE RULES. THAT IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE RULE IS A DISTANCE TO PUBLIC ACCESS - MEANING, YOU CANT SEE THEM FROM YOUR DEVICE FROM A PUBLIC AREA. THAT ANY DEVICE LIKE A BLUETOOTH HEADSET, A CAR, ANYTHING THAT YOU CAN CONNECT TO WITH A PHONE OR OTHER DEVICE VIA BLUETOOTH, YOU CANT HAVE UN-NAMED MAC ADDRESS."
See above
They are covered in the video above.
I don't believe it to be physically possible for nano sized bluetooth transmitters that are able to transmit through centimeters of soil to exist....
... as for the feasibility of nano sized bluetooth tech as a whole? I believ there are quite a handful of open questions....
I believe one can be a HAM-operator and even an expert without being a Bluetooth expert and not know about Bluetooth LE Privacy.
If you Google (or Yanxed, comrade) it and see how many documents about it there are, on Bluetooth's own pages, Apple, Android, etc... it's clear that it exists and is in use...
If you look at the video above you see that he is able to recognize all devices:
It's when I'm analyzing the packet captures, there is a public or random address flag that is set, it's either set or not to (0x00 or 0x01) and the 16bit GAP specific manufacturer data is always present regardless of the public/random mac address flag.
The Mac Address is only 48bits of 128bits of identifying data your devices emit every 100ms.
What I didn't address in the video is the GATT data, this data can also identify wether a device is/can communicate with HRMs, sensors, audio devices, controllers, HID devices etc....
......I collect the packets from 5000 Bluetooth devices in the 3rd largest city in the UK, and clearly demonstrate that the (Peer Address Type) is set to (random device 0x01) and, that the 16bit manufacturer specific data clearly shows in (((Every Capture))) picked at random a recognised manufacturer! I wrote my own capture program.
Aren't you guys wondering how much CPU processing power and memory is needed for the Bluetooth and TCP/IP stacks and for 1024Kbs / 128Kb/s transfer speeds.
Even though various research papers, theories and plans about nano-technology exist, is there any evidence that "they" now have this kind secret alternative, parallel technology that is orders of magnitude more advanced and miniaturized in use? I don't believe so.
See my previous comment:
1 Like
The little I have watched so far he seems very pro-vaxx, with the mountain of evidence on this topic, why bother......
Well, if it works for you, sure, just ignore it...
There seems to be a bit of mixing between the sizes and capabilities (self assembling, for instance) in materials by Mik Andersen and La Quinta Columna... and the "BIOTEQ injectable microchips" is much bigger stuff...
"circcuitry transceiverrs"
The images of these thingamajiggers, even though they might at a first glance appear to resemble microchips are not. Square, squareish forms do exist in nature.
The details we see in these images are not uniform, every single "component" is of a different size and is not straight, not in line, and they are not connected.
I've seen some images where lines have been drawn to imply that that is where the connections are and the author has just enhanced it to make it clearer.
The idea that the nano/mini-bluetooth devices in peoples bodies would secretly bluetooth pair with their phones and then secretly ferry data across to "them" is laughable.
Compare to someones crystal gazing with a microscope, very similar.
For instance this picture:
https://www.wkiri.com/today/?p=3085
We even have something that resembles Mik Andersen's "fractal graphene nanoantennas"
As for the reason why this kind of material is produced: I believe it can be many different reasons: disinformation and misinformation. Some people are fear-merchants and build up fear and are then able to sell their solutions, be that lectures, materials, products....And I believe the Goebbels quite on the "big lie" is applicable here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AN3PhXv00kQ Just watched this and the last part conclusion of this guy did not prove true with the 1 unknown device I currently detected on my Bluetooth LE scanner App. There is one vaccinated person in the house by the way, 6 not...
Try this one instead.
Here's what it looks like in the middle of nowhere where I live:-
Holy schmoly, 5 bluetooth nanochipped vaxtards ?!
However when I tap them to check out more info I see more info and start recognizing my own devices and my neighbors iphone...
OK done that:
The only identifiable thing I can see there is Microsoft. But being as Bill Gates owns those patents...the "666" one.
Anyway thanks for tip, I will try it elsewhere.
Well... I don't think you yourself believe that you're phone isn't seeing a Microsoft device somewhere but that it's more probably coming from an implanted cryptocurrency mining bluetooth implant....
Sure, someone at Microsoft had an stupid idea and patented it, but where is the link? You know, the whole correlation does not imply causation thing?
What hardware does Microsoft produce, I can check my laptop?? The second digit of MAC address still doesn't comply with what the CISCO guy said in the video ie the 2nd character is not a 2, a 6, an A or an E. Its an 8. So seems it is NOT a randomized address.
I am still inclined to go with the Gates of HELL MOTB theory
Laptops, tablets, watches, keyboards, mouses, etc...
The signal can come from a neighbor/car/etc too...
It's a complex subject. If it's not a randomized address it can also be one which is missing the vendor ID. Yes, even though there might be standards and regulations they are not always followed as it is expensive to get your vendor ID registered...
It just doesn't have credible evidence...
Nearest neighbour over 50m away. Nearest car potentially 80m away, mostly no parking there. I live on a beach.
Of the 3 Unknown devices I have seen so far NONE of them has followed the criteria outlined by the CISCO guy.
1 Like
Ok... Now add the missing sentence to the above... (the range of bluetooth)
1m to 1km according to this Understanding Bluetooth Range | Bluetooth® Technology Website
For me to only pick up 1 signal, I would say it was meters, I would expect hundreds/thousands within a 1km
Your statements are not logical. The range of Bluetooth varies greatly as you yourself have found out. If it varies from 1 meter to 1km then why do you expect hundreds or thousands within 1km?
The Bluetooth Range Estimator
Because picking up only 1 within 50m means the bluetooth available has a short range. Anyway its probably the vaxxed person in the household, no mystery to me.If you think otherwise use the data I gave you and put that in the bluetooth estimator, I can not see enough info there to do that. Can You ID any info whatsoever apart from Microsoft on that spec? Looks like it doesnt want to be identified, which one would expect if it was from a vaxx victim.
3D Graphene Oxide Nanoparticles for Cloud Seeding Patent US 2022/0002159 A1
The present invention provides for an ice-nucleating particle for cloud seeding and other applications, which can initiate ice nucleation at a temperature of -8 degrees C. Further, the ice nucleation particle number increase continuously and rapidly with the reducing of temperature. The ice nucleating particle in the present invention is nanostructure porous composite of 3-dimentional reduced graphene oxide and silica dioxide nanoparticles (PrGO-SN). The present invention also provides for a process synthesizing the PrGO-SN.
2015 study discusses potential to implant nano sensors into human organs to function as part of a wireless nanosensor network (WNSN) to possibly be used for intrabody disease detection. The article states that, “nanosensors deployed in WNSN, equipped with graphene-based nanopatch antennas [3], can detect symptoms or virus by means of molecules [7] or bacteria behaviors [8]. In fact, the large surface area and the excellent electrical conductivity of graphene allow rapid electron transfer that facilitates accurate and selective detection of biomolecules.” Link
Researchers and patents describe graphene oxide as a component of the CV-19 injections. Beyond the Internet of Nanothings (IoNT) this system is actually describing the Internet of Bodies (IoB).
Shouldn't be too hard to test...
I don't think you have the expertise in Bluetooth to claim that "it doesn't want to be identified". Or can you tell me what specific data points get you to that conclusion.