reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker discusses the longevity and origins of lighting technology, presenting several notable claims about the history and the modern lighting industry. They begin by highlighting a Mazda bulb, noting that the “old Mazda bulbs would last one hundred and twenty years.” They claim that General Electric (GE) and other light bulb companies responded by reverse engineering this original design to create bulbs that would break down faster, enabling more frequent sales of replacement bulbs. The speaker asserts that the original incandescent Mazda bulb demonstrated exceptional longevity, and they reference the “centennial incandescent” as still burning for more than a hundred and twenty years, with a specific mention that this can be looked up in California. A broader point is then made about LEDs and the environmental argument often used to promote them. The speaker asserts that LEDs, which many people hear are superior for saving the Earth, already had a technology foundation prior to LEDs. They claim that the light bulbs capable of lasting a century existed before LEDs. The speaker then asserts that LEDs were created by IBM and Monsanto, with the implication that the design and production of LED lighting involve entities described as a computer company and a toxic pesticide company. From there, the speaker links this history to contemporary use: bringing an LED bulb into a home, positioned above the head, is framed as bringing in a bulb “designed by a computer company and a toxic pesticide company.” The consequence, as claimed, is that this choice will affect the body, with specific adverse outcomes listed as brain fog, fatigue, blindness, cataracts, and hair-related issues. The overall argument ties the adoption of LED lighting to concerns about health and corporate influence, suggesting that the modern LED bulbs carry risks tied to their corporate origins and design. In summary, the speaker presents a chain of assertions: Mazda’s long-lasting bulbs inspired industry changes aimed at shorter-lived replacements; the existence of a century-lasting incandescent example (the centennial incandescent) still operating in California; LEDs being developed by IBM and Monsanto; and the implication that using LEDs introduces health risks such as brain fog, fatigue, blindness, cataracts, and hair problems due to their alleged corporate provenance.

Speaker 0: Facial recognition will be used to unlock your digital identity, which is going to be a tool of control for the agendas that are coming down the pipeline. Elements of that control are already with us. Alexa, good morning. Good morning. You are never alone in your home, and this is why. All your devices at home and all smart appliances, they are all connected on a wireless network. Many of these devices will have cameras, many will have microphones, and so they are monitoring everything all the time. Your smart appliances are communicating with the smart meter and sending it real time usage data. If there is a Ring camera also in your home, a mesh network is formed and all your devices are being tracked within the home, its location, its usage and all the data is going to Amazon's servers. When you leave your home, all modern vehicles are connected to the Internet, so your automobile is being tracked all the time. When you are going under a string of smart LED poles and smart LED lights on the highway and in the streets of your towns and cities, those form a wireless network and are tracking your vehicle. They are tracking all the devices on you from smartphones to smartwatches when you're walking on the streets. So data is being collected twenty four seven continuously on every human being whenever you are within these wireless networks. Speaker 1: And it's obviously not good for health also because of all the electromagnetic radiation. Speaker 0: In the long term, the plan is to pretty much lock up humanity in smart cities, which is kind of a super set of a fifteen minute city. Speaker 1: They've sold all the state and local governments and countries that smart cities are about sustainability and the good of the city. But in reality, the language from the UN and WEF and their white papers is all inverted. So their monitoring is really about limiting mobility and no car ownership. Right? Surveillance control via LED grid is why the smart lighting is death. Water management is about water rationing. Noise pollution is about speed surveillance. Traffic monitoring is about limiting mobility. And then, of course, energy conservation is all about rationing heat, electricity, and gasoline. Another concept one should be familiar with is called geofencing, and that's think of it as an invisible fence around you where you cannot go beyond a certain point, and that'll be related to your face recognition, digital identity, and access control. Your smart contracts, Softbrick can turn off your digital currency beyond a certain point from your house. Our world has been turned into a digital panopticon. Speaker 0: That means you can be monitored, analyzed, managed and monetized.

"You ever see a webcam with tape over it? Cute, right? But here's the twist. It's not always the camera you need to worry about. Some smart TVs, monitors, even LED lights come equipped with hidden sensors. Not to see you, but to watch your patterns. They track light changes, reflections, even your breathing rate, all in the name of optimizing your experience. That Silicon Valley's way of saying they're studying you like a lab rat. And that dead pixel in the corner of your screen might not be dead at all. It's just biding its time, waiting to gather data on your every move. So next time you settle in for a binge watch, remember, you might not be the only one watching. Welcome to the age of surveillance, where even the seemingly innocuous can be a window into your life."

- The speaker says this is probably the creepiest bulb here at Ace Hardware. - The Smart WiFi bulb works with Alexa and Google Home, activates with your voice, and syncs up to your Google Home and your Alexa, giving a George Orwell 1984 vibe. - The speaker explains this is why they stick to incandescent bulbs, noting that incandescent bulbs don’t steal your information or watch you.

The speaker discusses the Administration's ban on incandescent and halogen bulbs starting August 1, 2023. They express concern about the negative effects of LED bulbs, such as causing anxiety, restlessness, and impacting melatonin levels. The speaker also mentions that LED bulbs are linked to blindness, flicker excessively, and emit microwave radiation. They highlight the potential privacy issues with smart bulbs, as they can sync with various devices and collect personal information. The speaker advises stocking up on incandescent and halogen bulbs before the ban takes effect.

The transcript discusses LED lights and a supposed IoT (Internet of Things) capability. It states that on 04/09/2019, Target confirmed they had provided Internet of Things lighting. IoT lighting means everything is connected and data can be collected from ongoing activities. The example given is that if you walk into Target with your phone, the lights will sync up to your phone to obtain data about what you’re purchasing and what you’re doing. The narration links this event to the period just before 2020, suggesting it occurred prior to the surge in shopping and alleged shortages that year. The speaker then asserts that these LED lights have microscopic cameras in them so they can watch people from every angle. The claim is that other stores, such as Whole Foods, are using similar technology in price tags that can scan and see who is buying items to collect data. The main takeaway presented is that if you bring LED lights into your home, the same type of technology claimed to be in these stores could be in the LED lights you bring into your house.

Now I've heard they got meta glasses. They got glasses, which people are gonna walk around and record. If a person enters anybody's home with glasses which are recording the entire time, they're probably gonna have to beat them up. Meta Glasses sponsored by Ray Ban. Do you see how all these companies are in it together? They wanna sell their products and they wanna record you and put you into some George Orwell 1984 prison. Everybody's got cameras and they're all recording you with their ring doorbells and all this weird stuff. NPCs are aliens at this point. You gotta be an alien or an NPC. Buy all this technology and keep purchasing it and thinking that this is okay and chat GPT and this and smartwatches, and you're talking to your watch while you put your MetaGlasses and get your 55 boosters. Like, that's pretty much what it was.

Today, we discuss the replacement of healthy bulbs with fluorescent and LED bulbs. LEDs are said to save money, but the difference in cost is minimal. LED bulbs emit radio frequencies, which can cause interference, but this is not mentioned on the packaging. Fluorescent bulbs, marketed as earth-friendly and long-lasting, contain mercury and other hazardous materials. They also emit radio frequencies that disrupt various devices. The bulbs they want to ban actually last over 3000 hours, but there are no warning labels about radio frequency emissions.

The speaker describes observing moonlight and notes that the color spectrums appeared as lines, with certain colors missing, and that the moonlight is constantly changing. They claim this is why people go nuts during the full moon. They assert that the Epstein files were dropped two days before the full moon because “everybody goes nuts when they find out that the government's a bunch of pedophiles … and they need to be hung.” They argue that LEDs and fluorescence are very similar to moonlight, producing the same color spectrum, which is why LEDs and fluorescence are used in homes—to give people the same moonlight spectrum. The speaker claims that people walk around with pulsating and flickering light, “going completely crazy,” because the color spectrum from the moon flickers like an LED or fluorescent bulb during the full moon. They say they bought a device to see what the color spectrum is of what is coming off the moon. The speaker contends this is also why incandescent bulbs should be banned, arguing that incandescent bulbs are being removed for a reason: “number one, they're healing on the eyes,” and that there’s a red spectrum which is “actually very beneficial.”

Speaker 0: Wanna do a little video showing the difference between an incandescent bulb and an LED bulb so you guys can see the difference. Incandescent is very natural, very healing, great for reading. These are like putting an LED streetlight in your home. That is a light emitting diode. It's creating the light color, and it's very, very high in radio frequencies and messes with the mind because of the flicker rate. First, these little cute end incandescent bulbs, none of that. Very simple, very safe. If you don't have access to these bulbs, you can also do things with candlelight. You can look into fire light fire meditations. But LEDs, I would say not putting any of this stuff in your house because it messes with the mind, with the melatonin levels, and doesn't allow you to sleep. This is why people are suffering from so many sleeping issues is because these bulbs.

Speaker 0: So instead of putting the LED lights on your face, here's a simple option. Look at this. $1. $1. Who would guess from 1000bulbs.com? You can stock up on any types of bulbs you want, incandescents, halogens, the whole thing.

Speaker 0 discusses the push for LED lighting and questions the narrative that LEDs will save the planet. He points to the Centennial Light Bulb as the oldest and longest-running light bulb, noting it is an incandescent bulb that has lasted over a hundred and twenty years and is still functioning. He mentions that this bulb was included in the Guinness World Book of Records and was promoted by General Electric. He then shifts to a critical counterpoint about General Electric. He states that the same General Electric “created this cartel with other Phillips and other electric companies to basically create fines on incandescent bulbs that lasted too long.” From there, he connects the push for LED bulbs to this history: incandescent bulbs are portrayed as inefficient, yet the same electric companies allegedly worked to suppress long-lasting incandescent bulbs through fines and by eliminating producers of such bulbs. He suggests a contradiction in the industry’s stance: the effort to promote LEDs while historically working to reduce the availability of long-lasting incandescent bulbs through a collusive effort among major companies. The speaker ends with an implied implication that there is a conflict between the long-lasting performance of incandescent bulbs and industry actions intended to phase them out, hinting at a broader critique of the push toward LED lighting.

Speaker 0 says that at the lows people are buying incandescent bulbs because of a new ban, and it is important to stock up on these bulbs. Incandescent bulbs are described as very natural to our eyes, and it is emphasized that one should put incandescent bulbs into the home and not LEDs. The speaker claims the problem with LED lights is that they burn out the back of the eye, which “causes cataracts,” and that smart bulbs and devices connected to WiFi ping radiation to the skull while plugged in. Therefore, the advice is to avoid anything with LED and anything that's smart—specifically, smart remote, smart sensors, smart plugs, and smart bulbs. The speaker notes that these are all LED lights installed in the hardware store. Additionally, the speaker urges avoiding anything with Bluetooth built in because Bluetooth operates at the same frequency as a microwave. The overall message is that many marketing tactics push the new bulbs, but one should stick to incandescent bulbs.

The speaker is at a customer’s house to demonstrate a test about which light bulbs people should put in their house “for health,” not for energy efficiency. They note there is no smart meter on the house and claim LEDs would save money only in some contexts; they say with a smart meter, calculations of amps and voltages show that people save no money on utilities. They further state that the “worse” part is health effects, and they demonstrate this using an oscilloscope showing a typical 60-hertz cycle. They first turn on a “traditional light bulb made by Edison,” saying it should match the expected 120-volt 60-hertz cycle. The speaker describes the result as a “perfect sine wave,” with 120 volts, “no noise,” and no jagginess. They then use a spectrum analyzer and describe the incandescent/halogen spectrum as “more smooth,” with low in the blue and only a small bump, calling it a “normal spectrum.” The speaker claims this is why eyes “won’t be damaged” by incandescent or halogen bulbs: the spectrum is more consistent, like the sun, which puts out energy more evenly. They then assert that dominant blue light in the 450 nm area is “extremely toxic” and will “damage your eyes.” Next, they turn on “light bulbs that supposedly saved the polar bear” (described as hot, with heat claimed as beneficial in wintertime). The speaker then “grab[s] all the old CFLs,” including those that contained mercury and were marketed as lasting 10–15 years. They claim the CFLs are made in China and demonstrate that the sine wave becomes jagged with “noise,” and that the bulbs are “not running at 120 volts.” After that, they use the spectrum analyzer on the CFLs and claim there are spikes from flickering “millions and millions of times a second,” which they say makes people sick. They then return to LEDs, calling them “super energy efficient” and saying they don’t have mercury. The speaker demonstrates an “old LED” they call one of the “better ones,” describing the sine wave as noisy and stating that if a house has 30 of them, the noise would be even worse. They again use the spectrum analyzer, claiming the LED is “pulsing” and has “a lot of blue” that acts like a beam. They say LED light-emitting diodes “actually put out a beam,” and that the blue light helps damage eyes and also “pollinating bugs.” They repeat the comparison by turning off the tested bulbs and returning to the original Edison bulb, stating the result is “quiet,” with a “more evenly” spread pattern and less pulsing. The speaker concludes that some other incandescents do better but states “you should never buy an LED,” and ends by telling viewers to do the opposite of what they are told on TV.

In the video, Speaker 0 explains that LED lights are being pushed aggressively, even given away for free, because they will connect everything in the Internet of Things. These LED lights can be connected to a cellphone, a tablet, all home appliances, the thermostat, cars, the garage, and more, allowing monitoring and data collection from these devices. They can also be used to turn off devices based on climate reasons and other factors, meaning you are connected up to the Internet of Things. What’s interesting, according to the speaker, is that these LED lights “ping a lot of microwave radiation,” which will be demonstrated in the next video. The speaker describes using a TriField EMF tester to check the radiation coming off the LED lights and shows results labeled as “off the charts.” The claim is that by bringing these lights into the home, microwave radiation is being pinged into the house. The speaker asserts that this microwave radiation can impact health, listing effects on the heart, brain, eyes, skin, and other organs. The LED lights’ capability to connect to the Internet of Things is highlighted again as part of this scenario. The video then notes a claim about a 2016 announcement from the AMA, stating that LED lights can increase the risk of cataracts and eye degeneration, implying long-term harm to eyesight while allegedly promoting environmental aims. In summary, the narrator claims: - LED lights are being pushed and given away because they enable the Internet of Things, connecting to smartphones, tablets, home appliances, thermostats, cars, and garages for monitoring and control. - These LEDs allegedly “ping a lot of microwave radiation,” detectable with an EMF tester, described as “off the charts.” - The radiation entering the home is claimed to impact health, including the heart, brain, eyes, skin, and other organs, in addition to enabling IoT connectivity. - The speaker cites a 2016 AMA statement asserting that LED lights can increase the risk of cataracts and eye degeneration.

In the discussion, LED light bulbs are described as toxic and advisable to carry a warning label. The speaker presents two specific warnings about LED lighting: - Warning 1: The flicker effect. LED lights flicker at a frequency that is unperceptible to the eye but claimed to be brain-disrupting, potentially leading to sleep disturbances, migraines and headaches, brain fog and fatigue, and harm to the health of the eyes. - Warning 2: Unhealthy levels of blue light. LED lights are said to emit high levels of blue light, which can disrupt the circadian rhythm and affect mood. The speaker asserts the following factual contrasts to incandescent and halogen lighting: LED lights drain energy and life from the body, whereas incandescent and halogen lighting contain a full spectrum of light and infrared light that supposedly adds energy and light to the body, making people healthy. A call to action is issued to switch out lighting, with an optimistic note that the 2022 ban on incandescence and halogens might be reversed in 2025. The message emphasizes that these symptoms and effects can be life-altering for some individuals, and it ends with a request to share the video.

The speaker notes finding incandescent bulbs at Ace Hardware, highlighting a range of watt options such as 25-watt bulbs (including 25-watt globes) and some 40-watt bulbs, which the speaker says can work and are preferable to other options described as “torture.” They compare these to LEDs, pointing out that the spectrum of light from LEDs varies, with a specific emphasis on the yellow spectrum being “off the charts” in the examples shown. The speaker suggests that when entering someone’s home, you might as well ask what type of light bulbs they have. They raise a point about LEDs enabling additional features beyond lighting, stating that LEDs can be connected to the Internet and may have cameras, syncing with devices, and could watch or monitor you. This leads to the claim that the push toward LEDs was not only about saving energy but about having connected bulbs that could spy on people, while noting that old incandescent bulbs “don’t spy on you.” The speaker asserts that this surveillance motivation is connected to government actions, claiming that incandescents were being banned and eliminated because they supposedly prevented spying on citizens. The overall message contrasts incandescent bulbs with LEDs, presenting LEDs as part of a dystopian surveillance trend and portraying incandescents as non-spying alternatives.

Speaker 0 describes smart meters as more than just electricity meters, asserting they function as personal surveillance devices. They claim smart meters sense when devices are turned on or off, measure watt usage (even for small devices like an electric toothbrush), and transmit that data wirelessly through neighbors’ meters to the power company. The data allegedly records electric consumption every minute, stored forever on computers the public cannot access, revealing when someone is home, asleep, on vacation, hosting visitors, using lamps or tools, running a business from home, or bootlegging energy off the grid. The speaker asserts this creates a vivid profile of private living patterns and indicates at-home presence on the night of a murder. The speaker contends this is not electrical metering but personal surveillance—a warrantless search daily. They claim personal life information travels from the meter to the power company, to the government, police, and insurance companies, and to anyone who partners with the power company to access it. The speaker further asserts that even without a direct data-sharing agreement, information can be intercepted via the wireless signal from the meter, because smart meters are radio transmitters. They identify a one-watt radio station licensed by the FCC as the transmitter sending all electrical life details to a data center. Examples are given of authorities in Ohio, Texas, and British Columbia using smart meter data to pinpoint marijuana grow houses, enforce business licenses, and punish private home activities, implying surveillance beyond what residents accept. The claim is made that the power company can sell personal life data to anyone, and that unusual power usage patterns can be used as probable cause to raid a home for growing marijuana or running a computer server without a license. The speaker describes this level of surveillance as “about as big brother as it gets,” with utility workers going door-to-door to install meters. They express a personal opinion that smart meters should be removed from homes, arguing that power companies cannot claim the right to install surveillance devices on residences. They equate smart meters with wiretapping and note wiretapping is illegal in all U.S. states and federal territories. The speaker asserts that allowing a smart meter is tantamount to walking around with a constant webcam on one’s head and accuses the industry of relying on implied consent—the idea that permission is granted if the utility can change the meter, even if residents don’t understand the scope of what’s happening. As a practical step, the speaker advises telling utilities not to change the meter, noting that older meters were billed successfully. They claim to have sent a certified letter denying installation of a smart meter and mention a copy of their letter is available in the video’s description for viewers to adapt. They state post office certified mail is used to obtain a receipt. The speaker concludes that if the meters are installed on every house in America, it would cease to be America.

Speaker 0 argues that facial recognition will be used to unlock a digital identity and will serve as a tool of control for upcoming agendas. They claim that elements of this control already exist and describe a highly connected home environment: all devices and smart appliances are on a wireless network, many have cameras and microphones, and they monitor everything continuously. Smart appliances communicate with the smart meter and send real-time usage data. If a Ring camera is present, a mesh network forms and all devices are tracked within the home, with location and usage data sent to Amazon’s servers. When leaving home, modern vehicles are connected to the Internet and tracked constantly. On highways and in cities, smart LED poles and lights form a wireless network that tracks vehicles and all devices (phones, smartwatches) people carry, enabling continuous data collection on every person within these wireless networks. Speaker 1 notes that this is obviously not good for health due to electromagnetic radiation. Speaker 0 continues by stating that the long-term plan is to lock humanity into smart cities, described as a superset of a fifteen-minute city. They claim governments have been sold on smart cities as promoting sustainability and the common good, but quote language from the UN and the World Economic Forum (WEF) as inverted. In this view, surveillance is used to limit mobility and reduce car ownership. They describe surveillance via an LED grid as essential to smart lighting and view it as harmful. They extend this to water management, which they say is about water rationing; noise pollution as speed surveillance; traffic monitoring as mobility restriction; and energy conservation as rationing heat, electricity, and gasoline. The speakers introduce the concept of geofencing as an invisible boundary that people cannot cross, tied to facial recognition, digital identity, and access control. They mention smart contracts and a mechanism called Softbrick that can disable digital currency beyond a point from a person’s house. They summarize their view by stating that the world has become a digital panopticon, enabling monitoring, analysis, management, and monetization of people.

Avoid installing surveillance devices like ring doorbells, Google Nests, or Amazon Echoes from stores like Home Depot or Lowe's. These devices constantly monitor you and connect to your Wi-Fi. LED lights marketed as relaxing can actually cause anxiety. Smart Wi-Fi bulbs emit Wi-Fi signals like a microwave, potentially affecting the brain. Instead, choose incandescent bulbs as they are the safest option. They mimic sunlight and promote good health.

Some smart TVs, monitors, even LED lights come equipped with hidden sensors. Not to see you, but to watch your patterns. They track light changes, reflections, even your breathing rate, all in the name of optimizing your experience. That Silicon Valley's way of saying they're studying you like a lab rat. And that dead pixel in the corner of your screen might not be dead at all. It's just biding its time, waiting to gather data on your every move. They call it progress, but really, you're the beta test in this grand experiment. So next time you settle in for a binge watch, remember, you might not be the only one watching. Welcome to the age of surveillance, where even the seemingly innocuous can be a window into your life.

There's no reason to bring any LEDs into your home. The none. Zero. Zilch. No reason at all. There are incandescent bulbs all over the place. And if people say I can't find them, you haven't searched. All you gotta do is type in incandescent bulbs. They will come up. You should have incandescent bulbs in your house. If you don't have incandescents, you could have halogens. If you don't have halogens, you could get those little reptile bulbs. And it's funny because the reptiles have better light bulbs than the humans. You know all the reptile bulbs are incandescent red light bulbs. That's what keeps the reptile healthy. So the reptiles have incandescent red bulbs, but the humans have LED cold bulbs. So yeah, when you start to sit here and think about the whole thing with you know why they're pushing LEDs is because they want your light bulbs to hook up to your WiFi, to hook up to your Bluetooth, to hook up all your devices in your house. And then they can watch you like some Black Mirror episode. The Centennial bulb and it's actually still burning in California. It's been burning since nineteen o four. Incandescents have been burning for a hundred and twenty years. Health and Light by doctor John Ott, or Light as Medicine by Jacob Liberman.

The speaker discusses red light therapy, advocating the use of a red light incandescent bulb that costs about $7 to $10, which you can plug in to treat with red light. They argue you don’t need the masks associated with seizures. They contrast incandescent bulbs with LED masks, stating that the LEDs flicker like crazy, causing nausea, and they emit radio frequencies that are “toxic to your brain” because you are pulsing your brain the entire time. The speaker recommends sticking to old incandescent bulbs, noting they don’t cost much. They comment that the government wanted to ban incandescent bulbs, but claim these bulbs are linked to health issues and are perfectly legal.

Speaker 0 argues that facial recognition will be used to unlock your digital identity, which will be a tool of control for upcoming agendas. Speaker 1 notes that elements of this control are already with us, citing Alexa as an example. Speaker 0 contends you are never alone in your home, because all devices and smart appliances are connected on a wireless network, many with cameras and microphones, monitoring everything all the time. Smart appliances communicate with the smart meter, sending real-time usage data. If a Ring camera is in the home, a mesh network is formed and all devices are being tracked within the home, including location and usage, with data going to Amazon’s servers. Speaker 1 adds that when you leave your home, modern vehicles are connected to the Internet and tracked continually. On the streets, smart LED poles and smart LED lights form a wireless network that track your vehicle. They claim data is collected 24/7 continuously on every human being within these wireless networks. Speaker 0 asserts this is not good for health due to electromagnetic radiation. Speaker 0 further states that in the long term the plan is to lock up humanity in smart cities, a super set of a fifteen minute city. Speaker 1 says they’ve sold smart cities to state and local governments and countries as about sustainability and the city’s good, but claims the language from the UN and WEF and their white papers is inverted. The monitoring is described as about limiting mobility and no car ownership. Surveillance via LED grid is described as why smart lighting is death. Water management is about water rationing; noise pollution about speed surveillance; traffic monitoring about limiting mobility; energy conservation about rationing heat, electricity, and gasoline. Speaker 0 explains geofencing as an invisible fence around you where you cannot go beyond a certain point, related to face recognition, digital identity, and access control. Speaker 1 mentions that smart contracts can enable Softbrick to turn off your digital currency beyond a certain point from your house. The world is described as turned into a digital panopticon. Speaker 0 concludes that this means you can be monitored, analyzed, managed, and monetized.