Caught in the Act: How Targeted Individuals can Measure EMF Targeting using a Trifield Meter
As a targeted individual, I am targeted with both acoustic attacks and directed energy (DEW). Using the Trifield TF2 meter, you can produce real scientific evidence that you are being targeted with electromagnetic frequency. I will keep this guide as simple as possible.
In this case, I am using this EMF meter from Trifield. It measures Magnetic field, Electrical field, and RF frequency.
Step 1: Capture a Baseline Frequency
As mentioned Trifield measures three different frequency responses- set yours to RF radio frequency. Go to one of your rooms and measure the RF frequency (RF frequency covers the range of 20 MHz — 6 GHz; this is important because the acoustic frequency used in targeting is generally 1–3 GHZ and DEW is generally believed in this range as well).
Trifield shows a Main frequency reading which changes constantly and a Peak reading. Jot both down. Get a sense over a day or two what the average Main and Peak RF frequencies are in that room. Ideally:
- Avoid testing near appliances
- Avoid testing near large sources of metal
- Turn Wifi off and remove computers or turn off
- You may also want to test with computers/wifi on and in the above 2 cases as well — just to have those data points (in the event, when you’re targeted, you have these devices on and want to compare apples to apples). But usually the targeting goes on long enough you can establish the same circumstances as your baseline (ie: remove computers, turn off wifi)
- Use your hand in the same position on the meter and hold the meter at the same angle. Your hand can actually impact the RF reading and so can whether you hold the meter vertically (up/down) versus holding it horizontally (flat).
In my case, I tested it in my bedroom, with my hand gripping the sides of the meter at the bottom and holding it flat, and the typical highest Peak baseline was typically 0.6. This is measured in Milliwatts/square meter (or mW/m2). I pay most attention to Peak because it appears these are pulsed microwave frequencies so they come in intervals. This means the meter goes up and down constantly but Trifield’s Peak measurement will capture the EMF reading of the attack. When I say the typical highest peak, I mean it may jump occasionally higher but where does it often peak to? (usually more than once in a minute)
Professor Dr. Beatrice Golomb of UCSD’s study on the EMF attacks on US diplomats in Cuba confirms that EMF peak measurements are crucial (page 7):
“Of note, Frey induction is not governed by average radiation intensity, but the energy in a single pulse. Analogously, if a jackhammer hit each 2 minutes, the low time-averaged pressure would not explain the damage.”
Step 2: When you are Targeted, Run the Trifield Meter and Compare to the Baseline
Use the same measurement as above. When you begin hearing the acoustic attack (often a high pitched noise, could sound like crickets, sirens, car alarms, etc.), turn the meter on. Or if you feel the DEW, same thing.
In my case, when I could clearly hear the microwave hearing attack; I found three very interesting changes in my meter readings during the targeting:
- The Peak RF frequency reading went up. Considerably. It went from generally peaking at 0.6 during baseline to regularly peaking at 3.5 during the attack. This is a reading that is over 5 times greater than baseline. In fact in one case it went up to 10 (which would be a reading of 10,000 uW/M2).
2. Rapid Fluctuation in Meter Readings: There are some concentrated attacks where the meter readings go flying up and down like an accordion on steroids. I will aim to videotape this. This does not happen during baseline (non-targeting) periods. Here I am talking about the Main Readings (not the Peak ones). I’ve noticed where you position the meter relative to yourself matters in order to capture the attack readings (which suggests the EMF radiation comes at an angle).
3. The Walking Effect is real: You may have heard about the acoustic attack on US diplomats in Cuba. During the attack, diplomats found when they walked, the acoustic attack subsided but would begin again in a few seconds. This presumed the targeting would have to be recalibrated before the attack could again hit the targeted individual. During attacks, I found that if I walked, the Peak reading would go down significantly (back to what it was during Baseline; presumably because I had moved out of the path of the targeting momentarily); but if I stop, after a few seconds, the Attack Stage Peak RF levels come back. I do not see a significant “Walking Effect” during the baseline (non-targeted periods).
Some TI’s have claimed that targeting decreases when you measure it. If so, the fact that EMF targeting may leave behind scientifically sound evidence of targeting abuse via electromagnetic weapons may be the reason they back off temporarily. (note: if you plan to use the Trifield defensively in that manner, it may be tough. It goes through a 9 volt battery fast and there is no way to plug it into an electrical outlet).
If TI’s would aggregate our EMF meter results by sharing them, it could help pave the way for credible, scientific documentation of the phenomenon that would lead to more mainstream understanding and acceptance.
UPDATE August 13, 2018: Confirmation that the Trifield RF meter captures the evidence of a TI acoustic attack via its “Peak” reading. At around 3 Pm, I am tracking the readings and the Peak maxes at 0.004 mW/M2. Then, the microwave frequency acoustic attack begins (high-pitched sound; in my case, like a car alarm), and immediately, the RF Peak reading jumps to 2.5 and then 5. So it vaulted up by ~1,000x when the acoustic attack happened. In this case I was not even using a rough baseline for a specific room (generally) formed over several days of averages. I happened to be gauging the actual baseline in real-time and then the acoustic attack just so happened to take place right then- and could see the vaulting of the Peak reading almost immediately. Quite eye-opening.
This was in the middle of my kitchen- not close to any appliance (it’s a large kitchen with a spacious island table in the middle). The Main and Peak baseline readings were very low; with the main reading being 0.001. It just so happened the acoustic attack began at the time I was gauging the meter and saw the Peak Radio Frequency reading vault up in direct correlation with the attack.
There were no other events that could have caused the spike. I was not near any wifi or computer; nor was there any movement around me. Nor was there any volatility for the baseline reading in the several minutes I was watching it. This suggests strong proof that TI acoustic attacks can be tracked via EMF meter.
- Acoustic attacks by perpetrators on Targeted Individuals CAN be tracked and measured in RF (radio frequency) via a Trifield TF2 meter.
- The Trifield RF metric captures the frequencies from 20 MHZ to 6 GHZ. It is believed that microwave hearing frequency is between 1 and 3 GHZ so it is fitting that the Trifield RF monitor can measure this acoustic attack.
- In this case, I was primarily tracking the effect of acoustic attacks. I did this because I could hear the acoustic attack. It is the same sound I’ve been targeted with for a long time; that no one else can hear. (It has been correlated with other TI targeting and is very distinguishable from organic acoustic sounds). I did NOT track the correlation/causation of RF measurement change based on DEW, RNM, or the various other electromagnetic attacks that perpetrators use.
- It was extremely fortuitous that the attack started just after I established a baseline for that area in my home. Therefore, causality was determined with significant confidence that the acoustic attack was responsible for the spike in the RF reading. Very often, a baseline RF reading is established at one point when one is not being attacked; and then you have the attack hours later, perhaps a day later. Things can change in a day- such as the position of various devices, presence of people, etc. In this case, no “noise” was introduced to the measurement because the “Control” group was established, measured and then the “Experiment” group happened immediately after, with no time in between. I am highly confident the acoustic attack was the sole reason for the change in the RF reading, as there were no other differences in environment (nor the position of the meter, the location of the meter in the “Before Attack” vs “During Attack” period, etc.)