SIGN IN YOUR ACCOUNT TO HAVE ACCESS TO DIFFERENT FEATURES

CREATE AN ACCOUNT FORGOT YOUR PASSWORD?

FORGOT YOUR DETAILS?

AAH, WAIT, I REMEMBER NOW!

CREATE ACCOUNT

ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT?
A global alliance against cyber torture and state-sponsored terror—united, informed, and ready to fight back.
  • LOGIN

Cyber Torture

  • Tech
  • Debunked
  • Legal
  • Survival
  • Victims
  • Evidence
  • Intelligence
  • Security
    • Cyber Security
    • Physical Security
  • Media
  • Forum
  • No products in cart.
  • Home
  • Debunked
  • Roger Tolces Sweeps are Junk

Roger Tolces Sweeps are Junk

0
cybertortureinfo@proton.me
Sunday, 04 May 2025 / Published in Debunked

Roger Tolces Sweeps are Junk

Spread the love

Satellite Harassment Reading 2 Roger Tolces Brad Pike – YouTube

📡 Spectrum Analyzer Review

FactorObservationAnalysis
Noise FloorAbout -90 dBmVery high for serious detection work.
Real covert threats (especially “satellite harassment” level) would likely be below -110 dBm.
This noise floor is not sensitive enough to detect small or low-power emissions.
RBW (Resolution Bandwidth)10 MHz (ResBW 10MHz)Huge! Very wide RBW.
At 10 MHz RBW, this analyzer averages together large slices of spectrum.
Meaning it can only see very strong, broad signals, not fine narrowband threats.
Video Bandwidth (VBW)7 MHz (VidBW 7MHz)Also very wide.
Very fast smoothing.
Even more detail lost on small, narrow signals.
Sweep Span5 GHz span (!), centered at 2.5 GHzHe’s sweeping from about 0 GHz to 5 GHz (huge).
This is an extremely wide span, meaning no detailed view at all.
Sweep Speed50 ms sweep timeVery fast — good for wide-area checks but very bad for detecting faint threats.
Reference Level-30 dBmVery high. He’s optimized the screen for looking at strong signals — not weak signals near the noise floor.
Displayed TracesStandard color-coded — red = higher amplitudeNormal display mode, but no peak hold trace is visible here.

🛑 Problems With This Setup

ProblemWhy It Matters
Noise floor too highWeak covert threats would be totally buried.
RBW too wide (10 MHz!)Narrow signals (such as beaconing, implants, etc.) would be invisible.
Span too large (5 GHz!)Impossible to spot fine signals hidden in specific bands.
Sweep speed too fast (50 ms)No long integration or deep signal capture.
Covert signals that are short bursts or low duty cycle would not even show up.
Reference Level too highOnly strong signals are being analyzed.
Weak signals compressed into lower screen range, making them almost invisible.

📋 Quick Summary

ItemValueProper for Covert Detection?
Noise Floor~-90 dBm❌
RBW10 MHz❌
Sweep Span5 GHz❌
Sweep Speed50 ms❌

🎯 Final Evaluation

This setup is:

  • ✅ Fine for detecting very strong local RF noise (Wi-Fi routers, commercial broadcast signals, strong mobile devices).
  • ❌ Completely unsuitable for covert implant detection, satellite harassment detection, or fine-spectrum analysis.
  • ❌ Guaranteed to miss low-level, narrowband, or backscatter threats.

What you can read next

Dave Case CD Scam
EMP Scam
Analysis of Fake Scalar Devices Demystified

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Intra-oral Electronic Tracking Device
  • Long‑Range Tracking
  • AI Designed Human Tracking at a Distance
  • Advanced Detection of Retroreflectors
  • Retroreflectors

Recent Comments

  1. cybertortureinfo@proton.me on Only Real Use Case for a HackRF
  2. David Terry on Only Real Use Case for a HackRF
  3. test on The Community has Been Sold Out
  4. CRAIG LAFOREST on Debunking ICAACT Phase III Jesse Beltran
  5. Patricia Gatten on The Community has Been Sold Out

Recent Posts

  • Intra-oral Electronic Tracking Device

    Spread the loveComprehensive Report on US Paten...
  • Long‑Range Tracking

    Spread the love🔭 The Human Radar: Long‑Range Tr...
  • AI Designed Human Tracking at a Distance

    Spread the loveAi Designed these so its probabl...
  • Advanced Detection of Retroreflectors

    Spread the loveAdvanced Detection of Retrorefle...
  • Retroreflectors

    Spread the love🛰️🔦 The Truth About Retroreflect...

Recent Comments

  • cybertortureinfo@proton.me on Only Real Use Case for a HackRF
  • David Terry on Only Real Use Case for a HackRF
  • test on The Community has Been Sold Out
  • CRAIG LAFOREST on Debunking ICAACT Phase III Jesse Beltran
  • Patricia Gatten on The Community has Been Sold Out

Archives

  • May 2025
  • April 2025

Categories

  • Cyber Security
  • Debunked
  • Evidence
  • Intelligence
  • Legal
  • Media
  • Physical Security
  • Survival
  • Tech
  • Uncategorized
  • Victims

SIGN UP TO OUR NEWSLETTER

Subscribe to our newsletter and receive our latest news straight to your inbox.

SOCIAL MEDIA

TOP