president trump has again dismissed the impeachment inquiry against him after the first public hearings, claiming it's all based on third—hand information. he told journalists he hadn't seen a minute of the proceedings. he is accused of withholding aid to ukraine to pressure its new leader into investigating one of mr trump's rivals for the white house, joe biden. the us president has been giving a very warm welcome to the turkish president visiting washington. and mr trump insisted he'd done the right thing by withdrawing us troops from northern syria, even though it led to a turkish military onslaught, across the border, against long—time american allies, the kurds. british voters have been urged not to give up on stopping brexit by the outgoing european council president. donald tusk said leaving the eu would leave the uk a "second—rate player" and that brexit would likely mark the "real end of the british empire".

it is about half past three in the morning. now it's time for click. this week, is 56 really a health hazard? weather forecasting in danger. and back in time to the berlin wall. in towns and cities across the uk, a tech revolution is slowly being born, one antenna at a time. bit by bit, 56 is becoming a thing. and while all the infrastructure might look a bit dull, take a look at this. this is a speed test to this phone,

which, right now, is getting data speeds of 390mbps. not bad! yeah, this new network is going to be so fast that we'll be able to download in a heartbeat and stream video to multiple devices at once. in order to allow this to properly take off, with high speed and minimal delay, we're going to see lots of new antennas, each serving small areas. and some of them may use much higher frequency radio waves than previous mobile networks. but having these antennas everywhere has given some people pause for thought. they believe that 56 radio waves could cause health problems, and they're campaigning for the rollout to be halted. now, this protest group is small but vocal,

and it does seem to be growing. so paul carter went to brighton to meet some of the anti—sg movement. chanting: prove that it's safe! hove, near brighton. chanting: say no to sg! say no to sg! it may not be the first place that comes to mind when thinking of the front line of protest. chanting: prove that it's safe! but campaigners here are making theirfeelings known about plans to introduce sg masts in the area. chanting: what do we want? a ban! when do we want it? now! the world health organization, public health england and the nhs all say there's no sufficient evidence to say 56 poses a risk to health. however, that has done little to placate campaigners. earlier this year, one parliamentary petition calling for more research into 56 attracted more than 29,000 signatures. so what are their concerns? public health england

and the government say that 56 and electromagnetic frequencies are safe because they all fall underneath the level of the international safety guidelines. however, there are huge issues with the safety guidelines. there is a great, big gaping black hole. what the safety guidelines will tell you is whether your mast will burn or heat you, but what it won't tell you is all of these health effects that are known by science to be linked to electromagnetic frequency radiation. who decides who is guinea pigs? who is deciding to roll this out, and on who? who are going to be the lab rats, the lab mice, whatever you want to call us, because it's not safety tested? if someone said to me, fact, 56 is safe.

if our government came to me and said, fact, 56 is safe, fact, it has been tested by the telecoms industry, i probably wouldn't have the concerns that i have. but to me, there is no fact there from them. the industry, however, have a very different view. campaigners will say sg hasn't been tested and if it's not been tested, it shouldn't be rolled out. what do you say to that? i hear that line a lot and it fundamentally misunderstands what 56 is. 56 uses technologies that have been in use in all countries for decades now. the type of frequencies that are used, the radio waves they are using, they are the same ballpark of radio waves that have been used and tested, and tested and tested, for decades. the technology that goes into the antennas doesn't fundamentally change the way that those radio waves behave. so whilst it looks and feels like a brand—new technology from a marketing perspective, its roots are actually inherent mobile radio technology that has been tested and used for decades now.

what is happening here is very similar to the smoking. the actual health effects, the actual science, was hidden. and this is exactly what is happening here. 5g is highly, highly unlikely to cause more cancers than 2—46, and there isn't much evidence of an increased risk in 2—46, if any. it's not the new tobacco. it's not the new asbestos. that just simply isn't true. but despite the weight of scientific evidence, the anti—sg movement is growing. similar groups have been popping up in other areas around the world, fuelled by social media and the internet. back in hove, the campaigners had the opportunity to present their concerns to counsellors. exposure to sg radiation will be 21w, 365 days a year, without our informed consent. nationally, public health england provide expert advice on public health matters associated with radiofrequency

electromagnetic fields or radio waves used in telecommunications. the implementation and regulation of 56 technology is a national responsibility. chanting: save our children! is there anything from this point that they can say that will convince you this is safe? yeah, they can put their case, but the independent scientists and the actual science needs to be properly heard as well. ultimately, is this a battle you can actually win? there will always be a small number of individuals who do not want to hear from large corporations like us. and there will always be a huge group of people who don't have any concerns about this technology. there might be a group in the middle who could be swayed, and i think that is the group that, yeah, there is a battle to be won, if you like. we do need to make sure people have

access to the right information, but they can make an informed decision and not be misled by what is some pretty aggressive scaremongering. that was howard jones talking to paul carter. and to try and address the concerns of those who may still be undecided, we have come to this rooftop in london to take some measurements from a 56 transmitter. dr richard findlay is an electromagnetic field safety specialist, and he's going to be measuring the strength and frequency of the radio waves at different distances from the mast. so, first, we're going to put the probe right up on the middle of the transmitter. yes. 0k. let's go for it. the middle, coming down... and your maximum reading was...? 550. 551.6%. so basically, if you were to strap

yourself to that transmitter, three metres up there, you would be getting five times the guidelines. yes, you would be overexposed. ok, but nobody‘s going to do that. no. ok, so should we go over there? which is — what would you say, two or three metres in that direction, and see how the signal drops off? yep. there we go. wow — 14.5. so even over the last distance, we have gone down by a factor of, what is that? that's more than 50 times? yeah, 550 down to 14.5, so... 0k, down to less than a fifth of the government safety guidelines. yes. right. time to try and make sense of those readings with physicist and cancer researcher david grimes. so, we have seen there that the power drops off really, really quickly,

as you move away from the transmitter. absolutely, and that is what you would expect. as you get further and further away from a source of light, which of course radiofrequency really is, even if we can't see it, the drop—off is really, really rapid. and by the time you are even at an appreciable distance away from any kind of transmitter, it is way more likely that your phone itself is going to be emitting a lot more than any of these transmitters are. do you think one of the worries about 56 is that there is talk of using higher frequency radio waves? absolutely. i think people have an acute understanding that higherfrequency is higher energy. but i think what people need to be aware of is that this kind of radiation is still very, very non—ionising. what that means is it doesn't have the fundamental energy to liberate an electron and cause damage. if you want to cause cancers in things like that, you typically need to cause that kind of dna damage. and the new 56 spectrum is very low energy. it is much lower energy

than visible light. more than that, the biophysics itself, the mechanics of how you might develop a cancer or something, we know that this kind of radiation is not ionising. it cannot cause the level of dna damage that you typically expect oi’ need to cause cancer. and so, for that reason, the combination of epidemiological evidence and biophysical evidence, we don't have any current cause for concern. that being said, it is always good to observe and keep an eye on trends to see what might emerge. but we don't expect anything will. so there you go, some real science which i hope has helped you to understand how safe sg signals are. and just for extra information, we are now taking a reading at head level here on the roof, right next to the sg transmitter. and the number is kind of bouncing around the 2% mark. so even if you were walking on a rooftop next to a 56 transmitter, as we are, you are still 50 times below

the recommended safety level. hello, and welcome to the week in tech. it was the week that the us national transportation safety board flagged software flaws in the self—driving uber that killed a woman in arizona last year. it said the car failed to properly identify her as a pedestrian while she had been walking with a bicycle across a poorly lit road. american and japanese researchers have used beams of light to hack google home, amazon echo, and apple home product devices in a bid to expose security and privacy risks. a laser managed to take control of one of the devices from over 30 metres away. and uk drone pilots have until the end of november to register their details with the civil aviation authority orface penalty fines. us researchers say

they've printed skin that is alive and even has working blood vessels. scientists combined cells that kick—start blood vessel development with animal collagen. all of this is happening inside 3d—printed tissue. this could potentially deliver better skin grafts to burns patients. and finally, harvard researchers have revealed their urchinbot, complete with wiggling tentacles. the amphibious robot uses pumps, valves and magnets to move, and could be useful in ocean clean—ups. it is a touch sluggish, though, with a top speed of six millimetres per second. a pilgrimage for creativity. each year in los angeles, 15,000 artists, designers and storytellers flock to adobe max to discover the latest tools they'll have to mix in their creative pallets.

while we humans still find the imaginative sparks, increasingly, it is the guiding hand of machines doing the heavy lifting, and intuitively understanding the parts of an image we want to manipulate, from repainting a single frame of video to letting adobe's ai platform handle the entire scene. unlike the somewhat dystopian future depicted in the movies, adobe isn't too worried about a landscape dominated by ai. in fact, they're betting the farm on it alongside another emerging technology — augmented reality. the potential for digital overlays to truly enhance our real world, and yes, even cardboard movie sets, is creating feverish buzz. after all, ar does not invoke the same fears as ai and its terminator—esque machines. but while futuristic demos are seductive, actually creating these enhanced environments has been beyond the wit of most of us neophytes. enter adobe aero,

a free ipad app making content creation relatively straightforward. just using normal everyday gestures... but there is still the challenge of finding some decent glasses to eye up our new world, and notjust peer at it through our phones or tablets. but adobe's confidence is unwavering. ar bridges the physical and digital worlds and truly has the potential to be bigger than the web. scott, you made a very bold claim in the keynote. back it up. well, if you think about it, the web is something we have to go to, and we only go to it when we feel like we need something. but ar is always going to be there, permeating our everyday life when we don't need it. so for example, in your bathroom, every pill bottle has information on top of it and every food has calorie counts and whatever else. there is going to be layers of augmented reality and they are going to be everywhere, all the time. a peek into adobe's r&d also reveals its firm belief in al.

here, it's being used to blend a bird sketch with a real bird's texture to create something entirely new. and this research prototype shows how you can easily animate the mouth of a flat image to the words in an audio file. our technology works with any image, photo or sketch. but it's clear that such bleeding edge creative products can potentially be more sinister. in this post—truth era, deep fake photos and videos are becoming a serious challenge online, where politicians, celebrities or even ex—girlfriends can be made to say or do things they never actually said or did. to combat this, adobe has launched a system that records exactly which changes were made to images, when, and by whom, so that a viewer can see an authenticated breadcrumb trail of edits. technology alone cannot solve this. you actually really need a multitude of pieces to come together. we have a role to play as a technology player, these distribution platforms and media platforms have a role

to play, but, frankly, creators have a role to play. i think content authentication is definitely important and it's definitely in its very first stages. the very fact that they've got the new york times and twitter involved is a very good start, but it's got a long way to go and nobody really knows how it will take shape. one thing we do know is that al is here to stay, whether we like it or not. so, we've been talking about the problems that 56 radio signals may or may not cause and while we've established that they don't damage our health, they may actually cause other problems in very surprising areas. some scientists are concerned that 56 could affect our ability to predict the weather. specifically hurricanes and other extreme events. they say it could set

forecasting back to the 1980s. peter gibbs, a professional meteorologist for nearly a0 years, has been finding out why. in 2018, the federal communications commission, or fcc, in the us, auctioned off part of their radio spectrum or a bunch of frequencies to telecommunications companies for use on the 56 network. what's that got to do with weather? andrew freedman at the washington post has been following this story from the start. the background really is that scientists have figured out that 56 equipment that telecommunications companies want to deploy, particularly in cities, may actually interfere with signals that are bouncing out of satellites in space into the earth's atmosphere and back to sense a very important component for making weather forecasts.

so, let's try to explain the problem and bear in mind i am a scientist, not an artist. so bear with me, 0k. so, what weather satellites are looking for when they monitor the atmosphere is microwave transmissions and they are coming from things like clouds, from snow, from rain, from water vapour as well. very faint microwave signals at very precise frequencies. so, for example, here's a little water vapour molecule, it's vibrating away a 23.8 gigahertz. right next to that frequency is 2a gigahertz, which is one of the ones that's been auctioned off for use in 56. now, you can'tjust ask that little molecule to tune out of the way. and that's the fundamental problem. that's why weather scientists are really worried. it looks like they're about to get some rather noisy neighbours. if they're broadcasting loudly in the house next door, or, in our case in frequency band

next door, even if the leaking is quite a small amount of their power, it can still be much larger than what we're trying to measure. we're going to be in very difficult world where, you know, we're not necessarily sure what we're measuring anymore. are we measuring interference? are we measuring the signal? that's the worst fear. the complex weather models used in today's forecasts need satellite data on a global scale. a storm now hitting europe might have started life days earlier in north america. the world meteorological organization in geneva, switzerland organises that exchange of data and they're worried a reduction in quality could have real—life consequences — consequences that could have been avoided. if we don't have the specific measurement, in fact we will lose three to six hours to inform population of the risk of a special event, meteorological special events like flash floods, or storms, things like that.

so the scientists are really worried. the us regulators don't seem to think there's that much of an issue. while one representative of the telecoms companies has actually called the scientists' fears absurd. the telecom companies have aggressively pushed back at the scientific agencies and said, "we don't think that your analyses are correct. we actually think that this is something that isn't such a big deal, and that even if it's a big deal, we can solve this some other way." although the science community has said they're not against 5g, because the benefits are clear, they've tried to engage with the telecom companies about potential interference, so far without much response. i know that there is one company that really could benefit a great deal from 5g because they promote weather apps. of course weather companies want 5g, but the thing

is is that they are opposed to this issue because they're like, "well, what's the use of having a new, faster app if we have inaccurate information?" 5g is coming and it will no doubt bring lots of benefits, but we're living in a time of rapidly changing climate, where severe weather is becoming more frequent and more dangerous. we need to be able to predict and warn of these events. it's never been more important. that was peter gibbs. and just to add that meteorologists from around the world are meeting right now at the world radiocommunication conference to discuss this very issue. so we'll keep you posted. 0n the 9th of november, it'll be 30 years since the fall of the berlin wall. it acted as a physical barrier throughout berlin, but it was also

a symbol of the divide between communism and capitalism. now, virtual reality is being used to bring the past to life. youtube 0riginals and remarkable tv have worked with descendants of those who experienced the rise and fall of the wall, allowing them to step inside photographs and be transported back to virtual recreations of their families' stories. well, there's a famous photograph of my grandma where she was just able to escape from the wall being built last minute. i don't think people really realise that the wall was something that evolved over time. so, in 1961, it started out just as barbed wire that was laid out across the streets. fast forward 20 years into the future and it's a completely militarised border. so, to be able to use vr

to chart that evolution and plant yourself in front of the wall and be there through that iteration felt like quite a powerful thing to do. there's a huge potential in factual storytelling and it feels like we are on the sort of cusp, if you like, of a new way of engaging people in history, a new way of engaging people in documentary. well, my grandfather is one of the builders of the tunnel 57. seeing my grandfather digging the tunnel was really weird. back when he was doing that, he was probably around my age. he was so close to me in that moment that i was actually, like, i would have loved to talk to him about, "you want to go get a beer later?" or anything like that. that is just a taster. if you want to watch our full report on how virtual reality has brought these remarkable stories to life, follow the link below to the bbc news website. and that's it for us for this week.

don't forget, you can find us all across social media throughout the week on facebook, instagram, youtube and twitter at @bbcclick. thanks for watching and we'll see you soon. hello. wednesday started decently enough across the south—west of england and south wales and then came a mix of rain or snow, just depending on elevation. to keep decent weather, you had to be a good dealfurther away towards the east and it was a drier and finer day than we've seen of late, but there was no escaping the fact the system that has brought that combination of wet and at times wintry fare into that south—western quarter is going to be a player more widely across the southern half of britain

during the course of thursday. really quite wet for the commute across the southern counties of england. come the afternoon, we'lljust be pushing the eastern portion of the front with some significant rainfall up towards those flood—affected areas and if you don't happen to see it during daylight hours, given the fact that this system is going to move a little bit further north, you might get it during the evening on what will have been another single—figure temperature day right across the piste. there is more sunshine to be had across scotland and northern ireland with a few showers, but it won't make an awful lot of difference. here we are into the wee small hours of friday, that frontal system tending to fracture a little but each individual pulse of rain i'm showing there could be really quite heavy and unwelcome rain at that into the flood—affected areas, on what is going to be another fairly cool night and a fairly cool start to friday. still dominated by the big area of low pressure which is sitting across us and, indeed, much of central and western europe and the onshore flow from the north sea, moisture—laden airs and there's still bits and pieces of rain to be

had quite widely across england and wales, but not with the same sort of intensity that we might have seen on thursday. scotland, northern ireland seeing the very best of the sunshine, the north of scotland still picking up on one or two showers, each in their own right could be wintry across the higher ground. what news of the weekend? not a great deal changes, i'm afraid. not much intensity about the rain i just about to speak of, but that set—up for saturday is very similar to friday, still the big area of low pressure, still the moisture—laden airs on its northern flank, feeding cloud and bits of pieces of rain, particularly in eastern parts of both scotland and england. separate weather front eventually closes on the western isles. in between, bits and pieces of sunshine perhaps to the western side of wales, down into the south—west of england, up towards the solway, could be favoured and we mayjust about find a degree on the temperatures. i've changed the day, the story's the same. 0k, we're going to bring the front of scotland with some snow on the high ground, but further south, sunshine

in really short supply. and i'm afraid it is going to be one of those weekends.

this is bbc news. welcome if you're watching here in the uk, on pbs in america, or around the globe. i'm mike embley. our top stories: public impeachment hearings into donald trump's presidency get underway in washington. mr trump, who's hosting turkey's leader, says he's too busy to watch. i hear it is a joke. i have not watched. i have not watched for one minute because i have been with the president, which is much more important, as far as i am concerned. earlier, president erdogan received a warm welcome to the white house, despite tensions over the war in syria is there still time to stop brexit? ahead of the uk election, outgoing european council president donald tusk plays political football. don't give up. in this match, we have had added time, and now we are in extra time