For all those that dont think they are chipped.

a reply to: vonclod

Apparently UHF RFID systems offer a range of up to 100 meters.

Then there is NFC "Near Field Communications" technologies for short read range limitations.

Seems to me range would be down to antenna gain.

How exactly does one hide an easily detectable and traceable item on a person they can not monitor 24/7 visually?

We wont be unwillingly chipped simply because of the massive security breach it opens up to the person doing the chipping.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: vonclod

Apparently UHF RFID systems offer a range of up to 100 meters.

Then there is NFC "Near Field Communications" technologies for short read range limitations.

Seems to me range would be down to antenna gain.

Ahh, ok, good to know, that would be a chip that is bigger than what you can fit down a syringe I'm guessing?

a reply to: vonclod

I'm thinking peeps are going to feel it going in.

Even in liquid metal graphene oxide T-1000 mode.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: vonclod

Apparently UHF RFID systems offer a range of up to 100 meters.

Then there is NFC "Near Field Communications" technologies for short read range limitations.

Seems to me range would be down to antenna gain.

I expect the RFID signal would be tailored for some exclusive brand of scanner technology. If you don't have the scanner you can't read the signal, regardless of proximity. And again this feature is optional.

a reply to: TzarChasm

Ok but you could scan for the signal if you know a person is implanted or the frequency.

"Typically LF RFID systems operate at 125 KHz, although there are some that operate at 134 KHz."

www.impinj.com...#:~:text=Typically%20LF%20RFID%20systems%20operate,sensitive%20to%20radi o%20wave%20interference.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
I expect the RFID signal would be tailored for some exclusive brand of scanner technology. If you don't have the scanner you can't read the signal, regardless of proximity. And again this feature is optional.

Still detectable. Unreadable does not equate to undetectable.

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: TzarChasm
I expect the RFID signal would be tailored for some exclusive brand of scanner technology. If you don't have the scanner you can't read the signal, regardless of proximity. And again this feature is optional.

Still detectable. Unreadable does not equate to undetectable.

Detectable by state issued devices in the hands of state or federal employees, no different from a metal detector.

a reply to: andy06shake

That's all based on power consumption and antenna size. For practical purposes, 2-3" is about the best one can depend on. 6" might be a theoretical maximum. The higher the frequency, the smaller the antenna can be, so most insertable RFIDs do operate in the UHF band... 134 kHz is common. Even though at that frequency, the theoretical output can get to quite a few meters, remember that they get their power wirelessly from the scanner. So there isn't much power available for high-power RF output. The theoretical transmission range is probably several times the range to acquire power to turn on.

You might be thinking of RFID chips that are designed to be placed in things like ear tags instead of under the skin. Those can get a little farther because there is no skin above it to dampen transmission. That means more power available, so more transmission power, plus no issue with producing that much RF energy under the skin. Organic tissue does not like heavy doses of RF inside the body.

In other words, an implantable RFID needs the scanner right next to the skin, almost in contact with it.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TzarChasm

Nope.

Detectable by a slew of consumer scanners, and every single industrial rfid setup.

Keep trying though, this is cute.

a reply to: TheRedneck

You mean no one's going to steal my Netflix password from the microchip in my arm by pointing a barcode scanner at me from across the road?

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: opethPA

I was saying when you have the jab, that's what happens. They take your name address as long as you provide ID , and record it with the batch number of the shot, and record where it was administered on the body, that is left or right deltoid.Why would it matter where it was injected.That was the point.

Okay so the video you linked isnt actually being given as proof for what you are saying then.

a reply to: TheRedneck
That is what I thought.

You might want to go check out "vax gives you AIDS" thread. Lot there for you! magnets, space lasers, and other stuff.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: peck420

OK, let's play Devil's advocate for a moment and assume the laws of physics have ceased to exist and there is a way to implant an RFID chip under your skin using a needle it cannot pass through. Now let's assume that it can transmit 20 meters without burning your skin from underneath. How does it get power without being right next to a scanner?

OK, let's assume that a battery also passed through that needle and the chip is actively powered without shorting everything out in bodily fluids. Someone walks by with an RFID scanner and reads your chip! What did they read? A number.

Just a number.

Maybe it was 000110101110011000110010101001101110001101.

Now what are they going to do with that number?

Answer: nothing. It means nothing unless connected to a database that does not yet exist. And that is assuming that:

• The chip has an actual battery connected to it.
  
• The battery uses electricity that miraculously doesn't short out in bodily fluids.
  
• The chip miraculously lodged right beneath the skin and didn't get swept up in your bloodstream.
  
• The chip is several times more powerful than any implantable chips known to exist.
  
• The chip somehow can detect when someone wants to read it from across the street and turns itself on in response.
  
• You somehow managed to not feel your skin being burned from the inside from that much RF power.
  
• The chip (and the attached battery) fit through a syringe needle, despite being larger than the needle.
  
• Someone was able to program your number in that chip (through telepathy?) while it was being injected.
  
• Your identity was verified absolutely before you got the vaccine.

Now, can we get back to earth here?

TheRedneck

a reply to: TzarChasm

You mean no one's going to steal my Netflix password from the microchip in my arm by pointing a barcode scanner at me from across the road?

That's right. Your Netflix is safe!

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Sounds about right.

Great for opening doors or personal lockers or the like.

Plenty of other purposes also.

But nothing nefarious vaccine wise.

If you went into a used car yard and the salesmen are Bill Gates,Klaus Schwab,Henry Kissenger,Joe Biden and Anthony Fauci would you buy a car there?

I wouldn't

a reply to: vonclod

Well, I highly, highly doubt that it gives anyone AIDS... but it does depress the natural immunity; all medicines do. How much is a question open to debate.

That's why stuff like this RFID and magnetic arms nonsense bother me so much. You can't get good, solid information for all the damn hysteria over the physically impossible crap seeping into every discussion! That spike protein may actually cause someone to have a higher risk for later infections... that is possible. But no, we can't talk about that! We have to talk about things that couldn't happen if every scientist on earth tried to make them happen.

And in the process, anyone who questions the efficacy and safety of the vaccine gets lumped in with the kooks and no one takes them seriously. I swear, some days I wonder if the pro-vaxxers are not the ones spreading this hysteria to discredit anything real.

TheRedneck

a reply to: andy06shake

The only thing nefarious is if they get linked to databases. Then a swipe of the hand and someone has everything they could ever want to know about you. I'd call that pretty nefarious. But we don't have a database set up yet, and we don't have scanners for people to swipe their hand in front of. So it wouldn't do anyone any good even if they were to suspend the laws of physics and inject RFID chips.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

Not that far off from people paying for things with the swipe of the hand(print/finger prints) TheRedneck.

We already do it with our bank cards/credit cards, and even cashless payment via a phone swipe.

There already all linked to database which monitor our spending patterns ""allegedly"" to prevent fraud and the like, but as you know, they probably use/sell the meta info generated for all sorts of other reasons or purpose.

And they don't need people imbedded with RFID chip to accomplish such nether.