Shielded Tent

In November 2007 I acquired an electromagnetically shielded tent with the intention of a technological solution to the mindcontrol, which I believed to be inflicted using microwaves or other EM radiation. Unfortunately this experiment was a failure, and the tent did not shield me from mindcontrol. Here is a picture of the tent constructed in my upstairs bedroom in Clapham.



I had previously purchased a personal protection suit from the retailer for £ 146.88 made of Silvertex Clothing but it had been quite useless in preventing mindcontrol or cordless phone transmissions, so they agreed to its return in part credit for the shielded tent, which cost £ 2936.33. The tent stopped cellphone transmissions in the 900MHz band but not DECT cordless phone transmissions at 1900MHz, which I would have expected it to. The DECT transmissions came through with perfect digital clarity, with the handset inside the tent and the base station several rooms away. The tent was made of Shieldex Nora Dell Nickel-Copper-Silver conductive fabric with a manufacturer claimed effectiveness of 85db from 30MHz to 10GHz.

In summer 2007 I had been to Euro EMC with a group of mindcontrol targeted individuals to test their metal Faraday Cage to see if it made any difference to our experience. Since the mindcontrol only occurs at my home or accommodation this was an otiose exercise from my point of view, but it was nevertheless interesting to see what a professional Faraday cage looked like and to compare my experience with other people. Their Ian King supplied me with a formula; 
attenuation = 20 logbase10 (extsig / intsig)
which gave the attentuation in decibels calculated as a ratio of signal outside the tent to inside the tent. If Shieldex's figure of 85dB had been true this would have given a ratio of 17782 which would certainly have blocked a cordless phone, and should have blocked the mindcontrol as well. Unfortunately Shieldex's claim was false, as shown in the following test report for this particular tent.



The actual test figures were approximately 55dB above 1GHz which translates to a ratio of 562. Even assuming these test figures are true, that level of attenuation was insufficient to stop a DECT phone, or to put a stop to the mindcontrol which continued despite my attempted concealment within the shielded enclosure. I returned it for a full refund.

I think the main reason the tent did not stop the mindcontrol is that it provided insufficient shielding. The Nora Dell material was very thin and insufficient for the purpose. I kept a record of what happened when I was inside the tent, and the entry of 19:23 14/12/2007 clearly shows that mindreading and verbal mindcontrol was happening while I was inside the tent. A proper metal Faraday cage would have provided a more sure test, but these cost over £ 12,000 and I could not afford it. They do however provide real shielding of over 100dB so it would be a definitive test of whether the mindcontrol was real or imaginary. There is an additional possibility that some technology other than electromagnetic radiation is used, which no Faraday cage would protect against, but my technical knowledge is not sufficient to comment on that.