TV ads instead of demos

Whilst Extinction Rebellion are trying to sell us their story, they do so by stopping traffic, apologetic, no less, they cause a disturbance.

They say, they need to do this, to make us aware of the climate agenda.

But, what about taking out a TV ad instead. You cannot reach more people than with a TV ad. XR got lots of money, they have extremely rich sponsors, so TV ads, should be affordable for them.

And as it is such a good cause, ITV or other commercial channels may even chip in and half the price?

Apparently the Chief Medical officer, constantly appears in between our favourite program to remind us of corona Virus dangers, he wouldn’t dream stopping traffic to remind a few drivers of the dangers.

Obviously XR want to use the issue to radicalise ‘rebel’s, teach them how to interrupt and feel good about it. They use and abuse us to train political resistance.

I support if it helps the climate

Doesn’t make much sense for the purpose of fighting this virus, the measures, the government comes up with but it helps a lot in reducing carbon emissions, with flights cancelled and other energy consuming activities reduced.

So, I do support. I am not even remotely ill and I am not scared about getting ill. I think Corona virus is just ane excuse to restrict people’s civil liberties.

But, if the government said, they want people to restrict moving for the sake of the climate, there would be an uproar, but if the government says, they have to restrict movments to stop them from getting a deadly illness, they gladly do so.

What a double whammy.Obviously also all the money people in the world are mostly old, so telling them, they are in danger of catching a deadly illness if they go out, will keep them supple and convinced.

non-sensical advice

I’m listening to the daily briefings of no 10 about corona virus, which incidentally have a NHS placard in front of them.

People are advised not to go to clubs, pubs, theatres and music venues etc, but those venues have not been asked to close. Without closure orders, they have no financial protection. So there you are, you supporters of the free market economy, there is no protection from those who promote your freedom to open a business but who are asking punters not to go there; when push comes to shove heh.

Sports events to take place behind closed doors. No mass gatherings. But, do go to a supermarket and find hundreds happily spending at least 1 hour in close proximity to empty the shelves of all the goods that are there. See this video from the outside of a local Lidl store.

I am happily not getting paranoid about the Corona virus. It is out there and it will be going around and around and we can have that hysteria each year and bring society and all we know to a stop. What is the point of that?

The fgure that 250.000 could die from Corona Virus is unrealistic. What would be realistic would be the figures calculated to die from earth warming instead.

Let us have proper information because so far more people have died from normal flu lasat year than from Corona virus this year.

trees as weapons

trees can be a force for good or for bad

As a good force they capture carbon and keep it in the wood they produce. For that to happen a tree has to be 20 – 30 years old and not be allowed to rot be destroyed otherwise.

A bad side-effect of trees can be that they can destroy buildings either with their roots (subsidance) or branches if they are too near to buildings.

Remember Zac Goldsmith, former Tory Mayoral candidate, he wanted to tear down council estates and replace them with newer private buildings.

The government has now promised to plant thousands of new trees and people have to watch out that they do not use them to destroy existing council homes.

On our estate, Tower Hamlets Homes has planted two large tree species, Silver Birches, which reach a height of about 15 meters and get huge crowns, very near 2 council houses, in fact within 3 meters of the building. Tree saplings are allowed to sprout along the whole length of the building. Those trees should be planted 10 meters away from a building.

Not only will these trees take away all light from residents, they will also destroy the guttering and external decorations of the buildings and their roots will cause subsidence as our summers get dryer each year.

_99859938_mixmayanpic.png

Picture copied from a BBC article originator WildBlue Media, channel 4

We are not supposed to accept trees just because there is a hysteria about earth warming and a climate emergency. We do not want our homes to look like that do we? Down the line our culture can disappear under trees. Good for the planet though.

Council estate residents have to be alert to the fact that some councils may plant trees to near to council buildings to destroy them, so they have an excuse to tear them down. If you have residents associations who are tree huggers mainly you cannot rely on them to do something about it.

Our homes are the priority. We do need trees to support us, we need to plant them in appropriate locations.

 

self-preservation planet

Nasa-china-corona

NASA, pic from BBC website

Is this how the planet itself reacts to earth warming? The Corona virus certainly has nutralised carbon emissions in China because the closing down of production and travel has cleared the air there.

Nature has always created deadly viruses, which humans try to fight. As soon as we have one vaccine, we get another new illness. Black death, Ebola, HIV are some examples.

I didn’t bother getting the flu vaccine because it is yesterday’s solution. Corona virus is just a new form of flu.

We should not leave the field to extremists with extreme solutions to the problem that the physics and chemistry of our planet (nature) has created.

As long as we have got governments with leaders who are genuinly interested in the futures of their own families, we can be assured, that purely out of their own survival instincts, they will come up with policies to accommodate their own survival. If they themselves have not fallen victim to unexpected illnesses.

Only in extreme regimes without democracy can the leaders themselves act in self-defiance and self-destructive, as the case of Joseph Goebbels shows.

We need sensible approaches, we need to continue supplying the population with energy, food and housing and simply become cleaner in personal hygiene and find new techological solutions to produce carbon-free methods all around.

  • We need to look above the political and extremist propaganda that the press so loves to spread as it sells papers and gets clicks. 

Just seeing loving couples who announce pregnancies and who dream of better futures for their children should leave us assured that even those who are in power these days will have nowhere to flee to as it is a problem that now affects the whole planet.

If viruses force us to stop transport, then this will clean the air and will provide the sought after solution of reducing carbon. We, as a species have not managed to control nature and never will.

It is rather sad that so many groups now try to exploit the climate emergency to radicalise whole swathes of the population or to achieve a lesser democracy. The only solution to deadly viruses is that we can deal with the effects in a democratic manner. It really doesn’t matter whether the government is Labour or Conservative as this cannot influence nature. Nature creates these viruses without any consciencious influence of any humans.

I just think we need to quickly reduce our emissions because once sickness forces us to stop production of life-essential goods and services, we will become victims of our own success. The increase of problems through bad weather will create more problems.

 

 

Thinking about Heathrow

Extinction Rebellion is a movement sponsored by Billionnaires and those having gotten rich from the old way of doing business.

Now, come to think of it, Britain being an Island nation, relying on transport and especially so, air travel, Extinction Rebellion pours a lot of energy and money into fighting the expansion of Heathrow Airport, just as Britain has left the EU.

Of course the Paris Climate agreement needs to be properly referenced in thecourt proceedings about a third runway, but the loss of the expansion case is only a temporary stoppage and will be addressed by the appeal that Heathrow Airport plans to do. It’s a matter of changing the wording and show proper reference to the agreement.

Whilst I strongly support the reduction of carbon emissions world-wide, which would include an improvement of air-travel for all countries. Extinction Rebellion spent and continuous to spend an awful lot of energy to concentrate on Britain, doing an extra sacrificial deed and asks us to cut off our almost only viable connection to the outside world.

Of course we do have ships, we do have the Euro tunnel to Paris and Belgium but why ask Britain to be the first to reduce commercial activity.

Of course if Britain cannot have air capacity, they would re-channel air traffic via France but the air travel as a whole will not be reduced.

It is a matter of changing methods of transport and trade world-wide, so that all nations have a fair amount of responsibility.

It seems doubly weird that Keir Starmer, prospective leader for the Labour Party, strongly supports Extinction Rebellion and so does Sadiq Khan. Is it any wonder that Extinction Rebellion now has put up camp in one of London’s most left-wing council’s namely Tower Hamlets and moved into our commutiy centre.

Apparently residents have not been consulted prior to this. Our local area is getting deprived of services and they get replaced by birds, bees flowers and fruit trees; and we hold a totally free, yearly fireworks extravaganca nearby. As if that will pay our council taxes.

I  suppose you can achieve sensible world-wide policies by supporting inventions that develop the new technology we need and not by stopping traffic. Extinction Rebellion put their eggs into the demonstrations basket. How crude.

Their radical actions are designed to actively disturb our economy by stopping traffic, interrupting public transport to weaken our economy but that does not help changing technology.

Moon gravitation

350px-outside_view_of_precession

The earth with rubbish floating around it in space

There is a new moon circling around earth. In fact there are many new moons circling around earth. We sent them up there and they are circling at their own pace and in their own way.

The moon is responsible for the gravitational pull of our planet, makes the tides come in and out and is essentially responsible for high and low waters. Rising waters from sea levels may influence flooding in many areas.

The new permanent, natural moon was probably aquired from a meteor shower and it stayed in the orbit. I am just wondering – as a sheer novice on the subject – whether all these new moons around the earth could influence the gravitational pull.

I am not drawing any conclusions from that, as I have never trained in science, I have only studied business and politics and economics, I’m a bit of a specialist.

 

Don’t support traffic stopping demos

We all want to do something sensible about earth warming and stop global carbon emissions. Yet the traffic stopping demonstrations that Extinction Rebellions lays on, do exactly the opposite from what we are trying to achieve.

Those demos stop traffic and make cars spew out more exhaust fumes as they otherwise would.

Research has totally unquestionably proven that flowing traffic causes less damage to our air than standing traffic does.

A recent survey carried out in Milton Keynes for example shows that cities with roundabouts create less emission than those without. We can follow on that stopping traffic at classic junctions cause the problem.

“The Milton Keynes roundabouts do two things – they reduce stop-start driving which reduces production of pollution, and they make space to help the pollution dilute and mix away,” said Prof Mackenzie. “The biggest effect green spaces have on air pollution in urban areas is to provide space for that pollution to disperse.”

Whilst many support Great Thunberg and Save Our Planet initiatives, we should not support the show-stopping demonstrations of Extinction Rebellion, which ruin our air quality. We do not stop earth warming by making traffic even more dangerous than it already is.

Avoid the demo in Bethnal Green on 22. February as it will create enormous traffic tail backs as we get a lot of through traffic from the West End to the M25 and all going East and North street traffic.

Cynically the demo in Tower Hamlets is going to be called ‘Enough is enough’. We should tell Extinction Rebellion that their ancient methods do not help develop a better society, they just make our air dirtier than it already is.

 

 

TUC – neutrality

  • Thought poverty
  • Unilateralism
  • Compartmentalisation

The three ingredients to conflict and distraction.

I don’t just look at what I want to see and don’t just read what I want to hear. I get myself a selection of books from major influencers and compare their thoughts.

Presently it’s

  • Greta Thunberg
  • Donald Trump
  • Mike Berners-Lee

I must confess I only bought the Berners-Lee book because the name reminds me of Tim Berners-Lee, the founder of the Internet and I thought, that everybody with the name of Berners-Lee must know what they are talking about.

Greta, a girl with Aspergers, she is a definite proof of thought poverty and unilateralism and so is Donald Trump. Though because Donald Trump is on the powerful side of life, what he says is good and what Greta says is dangerous.

The clash of ideologies here is not much different from all other clashes in the history of man. For example when Britain invaded the colonies and all those invading repressed the natives. Though now we know that the natives had and still have important knowledge and methology. Probably more knowledge in some stuff than our newly taught engieners and scientists have.

That brings me to compartmentalisation. Nowadays everybody has to specialise fairly early on in life. So a guy like Boris Johnson wouldn’t understand what climate change is all about. He is just a happy go lucky chap who wants to make things happening and with a good sense of humour in a smiling way.

Donald Trump – I am still not through the first book of his – has only profit margins at heart. Very dangerously though, he wants to separate the Social Security budget from the rest of the financial world. He hardly ever talks about standard of living and security of housing, he talks about saving and interest rates.

It’s clear that if you are in power, whatever you say is good. From your point of view, you are the money maker, the law maker and the standard bearer of all things great and small.

Of course radicalisaton of strategy only works for those in power. Those against become criminals in any event.

Now comes Mike Berners-Lee as the go-between Great Thunberg and Donald Trump, the man who also pleases Boris Johnson’s desire to widen the British Empire and international trade relations of Britain with the rest of the world. Mike simply declares that the amount of carbon produced by transport is nothing compared with natural carbons produced by animals and rice production or fermentation for example.

There are now so many statistics available on earth warming and what percentage of what produces most dangerous carbons, that the mind literally boggles.

But if energy production produces 70% of damaging carbons then it doesn’t really matter if that is through transport or animal farming or fermentation. It is just including everything that uses energy.

Unfortunately those at the top are unable to just analyse and change tac, the politicians have to please the sponsors of parties and those sponsors are the ones who run business and those are the makers of our world today.

Perhaps we need to look at another way of shifting power to those who are not dependant on any financial support from business leaders. We need neutral observers and decision makers.

Human evolution or putting earth first

Humanity has reached an important stage in its evolution and the marker is not whether people are meat-eaters or not it is how they related to the opposite or same gender. But all this has to be related to our environment too.

I think there is a rough split across the board, which can be distinct by the way women (child-bearing ones) are treated by the opposite sex.

The societies, which treat women as child-bearers, home-makers and dependants on the dominant male are distinct from the ones where this male domination is being phased out and in those societies the border between genders is also becoming less distinct.

Of course gender markers come hand in hand with religious beliefs and those soceities most religious also generally have the most distinct policies towards women in that women are not allowed to have their own choices, have to live to please dominant males and be either seen as child bearers or sexual objects.

This policy goes right across religions Muslim, Jew and Christians.

The least variation of female discrimination can be found in Muslim-type societies.

Obviously to me, that many religions have similar threads but where the gods are just claled different names but they all have been established at similar times in history, shows that the creation of those modern religions was a policy that had been developed at that point in time. I think leaders of history were much more coordinated as we are lead to believe.

Back to the point of gender policy. People tend to drift away from classical religion the more scientific understanding they have about the world. Obviously the relgious books, having been written over 2.000 or around 2.000 years ago has an impact on our understanding. We can no longer connect to the logic applied and in fact many bible stories are seen as unlawful these days if they are quoted as a remedy to today’s problems.

We now have civil partnerships instead of marriage, a very important marker of our evolution.

People can change gender if they wish and even parents can refuse to have a gender assigned to those babies born with both genders.

Just imagine we could self-fertilize if we stop to eradicate those humans born with both sex organs. Though I am not certain whether that would not lead to genetic mutilation.

What is certain that if we have any type of life-form that this life form will want to survive in the environment that it can live in.

Yet so many people today do not care about the environment any longer but only for the profit they can make for themselves.

We need to make a stark choice, to either curb those who just want to make profits and stash the cash or whether we want to promote choices that save our planet for us to live on.

Banking on finding another planet are pipe-dreams and very unrealistic. Those solutions are promoted by those who make all that money and rather spend it on looking at other planets or living in space, rather than make less money but save our planet.

To sum up, human evolution has to coincide with a clear choice. Those who simply see women as child-bearing and home-making instruments do nothing towards saving this planet and those who use women to support policies that enable distruction of our current planet help us neither.

People have to decide whatever our civil laws decide is right for our human rights, we need to decide whether we put this planet first.

There is total indecision whether the billionnaires of this world can continue to create huge carbon emissions on earth but are allowed to use all their resources for space exploration. Because that is what’s happening right now.

We’ve had political parties called

the Britain First group was a fascist club. But we do need a political movement that puts earth first. We always see our home as our castle, we need to see the earth as our home.

Earth First was founded in 1979 and I have never heard of them previously as our media does not push them, though there are many branches of that movement throughout the world now. I shall look into this as I have come across that by using pure logic and a thought stream that led me to finding out about them.

 

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 53,624 hits