The graphic appeared elsewhere on Facebook<\/a> and on X<\/a>.<\/p>\n A screenshot of a Facebook post taken May 19, 2026<\/p>\n Scientists have long\u00a0stated<\/a> that conspiracy theories swirling around supposed “manufactured” weather catastrophes are unfounded and the latest 5G-engineered climate claims are no exception.<\/p>\n “Electromagnetic signals of the power and frequency range of 5G wireless communications signals cannot cause any significant changes to weather on any scale,” said University of Richmond physics professor,\u00a0Jack Singal<\/a> (archived here<\/a>).<\/p>\n 5G is the fifth generation of cell tower technology<\/a> that allows for wider bandwidth and the ability to transmit more data over a range of radio frequencies (archived here<\/a>).<\/p>\n It improves the speed, connectivity and reliability of its transmissions, compared to its predecessors.<\/p>\n Asked if 5G infrastructure could trigger a storm or drought, Andrew Dessler<\/a>, a global climate physics researcher and director of the Texas Center for Extreme Weather (archived here<\/a>) said:\u00a0“Absolutely not.”<\/p>\n He told AFP on May 18 there are many reasons to reject the assertions in the graphic, including:<\/p>\n No mechanism exists whereby radio-frequency energy can change the\u00a0weather.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n The amount of energy used by the cell phone network is negligible compared to the solar energy that drives the weather.<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n No credible scientific literature<\/a> exists backing the theories proposed in the visual (archived here<\/a>).<\/p>\n “Humans are indeed changing the weather in important ways,” Dessler said — just not via cell phone networks — but due to emissions.<\/p>\n Additionally, the chart includes a disclaimer reading: “This image is for informational and illustrative purposes only. It represents a theory and is not proven or endorsed by any scientific body.”<\/p>\n NICOLAS ASFOURIAFP<\/p>\n (NICOLAS ASFOURI \/ AFP)Lack of particle control<\/p>\n Metallic and barium nanoparticles<\/a> may exist in the air, but atmospheric data show no evidence of any widespread, intentional dispersal, experts told AFP (archived\u00a0here<\/a>).<\/p>\n Such\u00a0particles reside in the atmosphere for a few days, said Stephen Holler<\/a>, a physics professor at Fordham University (archived here<\/a>).<\/p>\n “Any continued effort to use such particulates to modify the weather would require continuous replenishment, which would show up in observations,” but this is not the case, he said.<\/p>\n Additionally, he said 5G waves “are vastly larger than these particles” and would simply pass through without interference or absorption.<\/p>\n “The fact is, the global warming and other climate change impacts that we see are the result of geoengineering through the continued\u00a0injection of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases<\/a> into the atmosphere over the past two centuries,” Holler said (archived here<\/a>).<\/p>\n Steven Cummer<\/a>, a professor of engineering at Duke University (archived here<\/a>), pointed out in a May 19 email that\u00a0in real atmospheric conditions, wind forces are much stronger than waves emitted by 5G networks, making it impossible to control particles with them.<\/p>\n AFP previously debunked posts which made unfounded<\/a> claims about wireless signals activating pathogens or being used to spread\u00a0infectious diseases<\/a>.<\/p>\n While theories<\/a> of viruses propagating through radio frequencies<\/a> appeared in pay-to-play journals<\/a> at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, major health organizations<\/a> have found no evidence linking 5G exposure<\/a> to adverse health effects<\/a> (archived here<\/a>,\u00a0here<\/a> and here<\/a>).<\/p>\n![\"<span>A](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/ba59d40719a8852060eb8123ea1bc447.jpeg\"\/)
<\/p>\n\n
![\"<span>Two](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ie\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/2d7cf6e44781984d3bec0779a2aa0cae.jpeg\"\/)
Two 5G towers are pictured in Beijing in 2020<\/p>\n