Fiona Bruce seems to be settling in to her role and acting as a proper referee, rather than Dimbleby and his attempts to show he was the cleverest person in the room. Bruce certainly appears to have quickly learned that the Left bias she showed in her first programme doesn't protect her from that Wings' hate mob.
Last night was interesting though. Nick Ferrari was OK and made useful and verifiable points as did Suella Braverman and the audience generally responded well to their points. But then there was Labour's Healy. Oh good grief. Proof that neither Cambridge nor a BA (politics though) signifies intelligence any more. Party line doctrinaire crap.
Then the mad looking and sounding marketing guy, who in typical Leftie fashion shouted over people he disagreed with as soon as they started talking. He was pretty sure Dyson is a hypocrite (and had to be shut up by Fiona before he uttered clearly made up, libellous stuff), going on to say that his company was set up in Ireland specifically to be in the EU. Or maybe it was more because of the tax incentives they offer companies?
But best of all, was ranty Sonia Sodha, who writes for The Observer. Repeating the tired, cliched tripe we and she have heard before as if it represented useful input. After Suella had given a fairly comprehensive overview as to why there won't be any problems with traffic through Dover, all sourced, Sonia had one of her fits.
Of course the boss of Calais would say there won't be any delays, she averred. Don't know what particular bias she was attributing to him. Maybe she thought that he thought that any suggestion of delays at Calais would lead to traffic going to another port. Where they wouldn't face EU mandated delays?
Being French and as part of an organisation that has received EU funding, I would have considered him unlikely to be keen to stick his head above the parapet.
Sonia also had a couple of stabs at convincing us that Dyson building an HQ in Singapore and moving 2 of his 4000 UK workforce there, made him a hypocrite for backing Brexit. Luckily there was a child in the audience who absolutely skewered her (it is usual to feel that a child knows more about life and the real world than a Marxist, but nice to see it in action!).
He queried whether what she was saying was that Dyson should make business decisions based on sentimentality, rather that moving into and developing new and expanding markets for his products in the Far East. Queue Sonia doing an impression of a fish. She also got agitated by people with different views from hers, being allowed to talk.
The audience, apart from the well-fed woman at the front who was clearly a plant, could not understand why politicians are engineering so many problems.
To end with Dyson though. How can it be hypocritical to believe the UK should break free of the shackles of the backward, stifling political project of the EU and start trading with the whole world and so build infrastructure elsewhere that Europe?
Friday, 25 January 2019
Tuesday, 20 November 2018
Brexit Blues
Well the Conservative party continue to display how unbelievably hapless they are in ever more inventive ways. We now know that they no longer think they should base their policies on sound economic principles, that law and order are not hugely important, small government is a ridiculous idea for a politician to believe in and democracy should be ignored when inconvenient.
Along with all the members of other parties, they also hold dear that they should be able to act and operate in any way they see fit, basically feeling they are above the law. That lying is not of any consequence either, particularly when it fits their own, personal, narrow agenda. It's about me, stupid.
And then at the head of the pus filled hill is Theresa May. What a piece of work she is; tough, bombastic, resolute, not afraid to offend, able to lie incessantly for tactical reasons and generally not for turning. When talking to the people who elected her and when denying a binding instruction from the country.
In front of the EU bureaucrats (her kind of people) she is a doormat. The only question about her Draft Agreement is, did the EU give it to the Tories before or after the referendum? It is written in a way that gives precedence to the EU throughout, deferring to the EU as the senior partner always.
Now, unless someone like Rees-Mogg led the Conservative party (and with a good majority would be an immense benefit for the country), I would now find myself in a position I have never even had to contemplate before, voting for the socialists. But in a perfect storm kind of way, we have simultaneously lost any last vestige of socialism in this country, replaced by the (currently) led extreme Marxists of Jeremy Corbyn.
So, Theresa May and a grossly under-performing, shackled UK buried in a Franco-German version of the USSR, or Venezuela style communism? Which do you want, because nothing else is on offer?
Along with all the members of other parties, they also hold dear that they should be able to act and operate in any way they see fit, basically feeling they are above the law. That lying is not of any consequence either, particularly when it fits their own, personal, narrow agenda. It's about me, stupid.
And then at the head of the pus filled hill is Theresa May. What a piece of work she is; tough, bombastic, resolute, not afraid to offend, able to lie incessantly for tactical reasons and generally not for turning. When talking to the people who elected her and when denying a binding instruction from the country.
In front of the EU bureaucrats (her kind of people) she is a doormat. The only question about her Draft Agreement is, did the EU give it to the Tories before or after the referendum? It is written in a way that gives precedence to the EU throughout, deferring to the EU as the senior partner always.
Now, unless someone like Rees-Mogg led the Conservative party (and with a good majority would be an immense benefit for the country), I would now find myself in a position I have never even had to contemplate before, voting for the socialists. But in a perfect storm kind of way, we have simultaneously lost any last vestige of socialism in this country, replaced by the (currently) led extreme Marxists of Jeremy Corbyn.
So, Theresa May and a grossly under-performing, shackled UK buried in a Franco-German version of the USSR, or Venezuela style communism? Which do you want, because nothing else is on offer?
Thursday, 8 November 2018
We Are In A Mess
How did it come to this? In 1972, in a fit of hubris bizarrely based on weakness, the Prime Minister Ted Heath, masquerading as a Conservative lied to the country and slid the UK into the slime pit of the EU. In those days Heath was known as a 'wet' Tory - one from the Left of the party. He was of course, much worse than that. A self-important socialist, out of his depth.
Now, with that innate common sense with which the country has been traditionally blessed, we have seized the opportunity to extricate ourselves from the Franco-German empire. (It is constantly said that the idea of the EU was to end European war and it has achieved that inasmuch that France and Germany have not had to start another war, as they got their empire without one).
However, with dreadful irony the UK now finds itself saddled with a Prime Minister every bit as disingenuous, careless of the needs of the country and duplicitous as Heath. Despite the efforts of Project Fear, business doesn't care about leaving the EU, what they care about is knowing what is going to happen and so be able to plan. For her own selfish reasons, May is keeping them in the dark. She cannot tell us what she is up to, because it isn't what she has pledged or promised and it is not what the people required her to do.
She should have no choice; the people gave her an instruction that parliament overwhelmingly accepted, yet still she thinks her personal opinion carries more weight. And in her ramblings as party leader she threw away an undoubted majority, when she started copying Labour's Marxist ideas and continues to attempt to out Left the Left.
Our police are now little more than virtue-signalling social workers, running around after crimes have been committed. Yet never embarrassed by their manifest failures. Graduates wonder to older colleagues in the workplace if Africa is a country (I didn't do geography at school!), yet have a range of opinions about correct social behaviours and an identikit believe that the Tories are the devil incarnate and are deeply uncurious.
Step forward with pride the education establishment that successfully created this and much beyond. Churning out kids infused with Left ideology and little actual knowledge has been very effective. They are easier to manipulate and cannot see the glaring faults in Left logic. They never learned how to think for themselves, to research but were imbued with a sense of their own self-importance.
Left educated police graduates were fast tracked into senior positions, there to destroy proper policing with their tree-hugger mentality and lack of any real experience of policing. And so on, right across all sectors. A country being wrecked internally by Left ideology serving only to bring about a Marxist government that will end democracy.
We see the headlines asking why the police cannot stop the rise in knife crimes, in murders, but this is the wrong question. We should be asking why are they not trying to.
Now, with that innate common sense with which the country has been traditionally blessed, we have seized the opportunity to extricate ourselves from the Franco-German empire. (It is constantly said that the idea of the EU was to end European war and it has achieved that inasmuch that France and Germany have not had to start another war, as they got their empire without one).
However, with dreadful irony the UK now finds itself saddled with a Prime Minister every bit as disingenuous, careless of the needs of the country and duplicitous as Heath. Despite the efforts of Project Fear, business doesn't care about leaving the EU, what they care about is knowing what is going to happen and so be able to plan. For her own selfish reasons, May is keeping them in the dark. She cannot tell us what she is up to, because it isn't what she has pledged or promised and it is not what the people required her to do.
She should have no choice; the people gave her an instruction that parliament overwhelmingly accepted, yet still she thinks her personal opinion carries more weight. And in her ramblings as party leader she threw away an undoubted majority, when she started copying Labour's Marxist ideas and continues to attempt to out Left the Left.
Our police are now little more than virtue-signalling social workers, running around after crimes have been committed. Yet never embarrassed by their manifest failures. Graduates wonder to older colleagues in the workplace if Africa is a country (I didn't do geography at school!), yet have a range of opinions about correct social behaviours and an identikit believe that the Tories are the devil incarnate and are deeply uncurious.
Step forward with pride the education establishment that successfully created this and much beyond. Churning out kids infused with Left ideology and little actual knowledge has been very effective. They are easier to manipulate and cannot see the glaring faults in Left logic. They never learned how to think for themselves, to research but were imbued with a sense of their own self-importance.
Left educated police graduates were fast tracked into senior positions, there to destroy proper policing with their tree-hugger mentality and lack of any real experience of policing. And so on, right across all sectors. A country being wrecked internally by Left ideology serving only to bring about a Marxist government that will end democracy.
We see the headlines asking why the police cannot stop the rise in knife crimes, in murders, but this is the wrong question. We should be asking why are they not trying to.
Thursday, 6 September 2018
BBC Puff Pieces
Obviously, the |BBC has been trying to overlook the anti-Semitism in the Labour party, taking an inordinate amount of time to even mention it, let alone anything like the full range of terrorist associations of the beloved Leader Corbyn.
Today they took an initiative of their own. Acting at the behest of lobby groups, they did a lovely puff piece for the wind power industry. A kind of Ponzi scheme, but most people would understand it as a scam.
Basically, the main highlight was the chat with three people. A University professor, a representative of the company installing the huge offshore turbines and someone from RenewableUK, the trade body. Now, the sound of them all singing from the same hymn sheet is to be expected, but rarely if ever have I seen one comment being enthusiastically nodded at by another.
We were told that offshore wind turbines are really easy to erect (done in one day - after the foundations are in place), that wind now generates 15% of our electricity and is the cheapest form of electricity generation in the UK.
BBC man accepted all of this with saying a thing, either because he knows nothing about the subject he is 'reporting' on, or because he is happy to comply with nonsense.
Offshore wind generation is the most expensive way to provide electricity. I have just checked and wind is currently supplying 1.03GW or 2.91% of our electricity and gas 48.47%. Gas of course will provide that power whenever you want it, wind farms only when the wind is in the Goldilocks zone, not too fast and not too slow. Oh, and the offshore turbines don't last anywhere near as long as predicted and no one has costed the bill for removing any wind turbines.
In fact, if we started insisting that the 'Green' industry told the truth, by using correct labels then traditional power generation would be called reliable and 'renewables', unreliable.
It is indeed an interesting blend, the Greens with their Marxist anti-capitalist agenda to get us to spend our wealth on a chimera and the greedy crony capitalists building the largely pointless wind and solar farms (that only 'farm' subsidies).
Today they took an initiative of their own. Acting at the behest of lobby groups, they did a lovely puff piece for the wind power industry. A kind of Ponzi scheme, but most people would understand it as a scam.
Basically, the main highlight was the chat with three people. A University professor, a representative of the company installing the huge offshore turbines and someone from RenewableUK, the trade body. Now, the sound of them all singing from the same hymn sheet is to be expected, but rarely if ever have I seen one comment being enthusiastically nodded at by another.
We were told that offshore wind turbines are really easy to erect (done in one day - after the foundations are in place), that wind now generates 15% of our electricity and is the cheapest form of electricity generation in the UK.
BBC man accepted all of this with saying a thing, either because he knows nothing about the subject he is 'reporting' on, or because he is happy to comply with nonsense.
Offshore wind generation is the most expensive way to provide electricity. I have just checked and wind is currently supplying 1.03GW or 2.91% of our electricity and gas 48.47%. Gas of course will provide that power whenever you want it, wind farms only when the wind is in the Goldilocks zone, not too fast and not too slow. Oh, and the offshore turbines don't last anywhere near as long as predicted and no one has costed the bill for removing any wind turbines.
In fact, if we started insisting that the 'Green' industry told the truth, by using correct labels then traditional power generation would be called reliable and 'renewables', unreliable.
It is indeed an interesting blend, the Greens with their Marxist anti-capitalist agenda to get us to spend our wealth on a chimera and the greedy crony capitalists building the largely pointless wind and solar farms (that only 'farm' subsidies).
Friday, 10 August 2018
Big Beast Boris's Burqa
You measure a man by what he does rather than what he says. Being completely gender non-specific (rather than fluid, a non-existent type), Theresa May has rather proved that point. Boris has his heart in the right place, but is a bit inept when trying to play political games. Now, whilst that might suggest he is ill suited to politics, this would only be correct if you believe the sole purpose of politics is to corrupt the meaning of words, rather than sometimes manipulating.
As such he has an appeal to the ordinary voter, precisely because he doesn't seem like the machine politician with which our parliament is very much plagued. In that regard, we emulate the US, but perhaps without quite the flamboyance. But isn't it ever this way between us and the USA?
In the extraordinarily closed world of the Westminster bubble this is something that is understood, even if the general workings of the world outside the bubble is magnificently beyond their recognition.
When I was being obliged to sit still, face the front and listen, I was given history as it was instinctively taught within the British culture. When the story of the peasants revolt was told to me, what actually sank into my consciousness was, that the people had become fed up with the way those in charge ran things. Sure there was detail, but it was the overview, the impact at a subconscious level amongst those peasants that was what I understood.
We have the same today with the decision to leave the European Union, a vanity project of shining hubris, too bright for anyone to see. Except the we-own-the-law, different old British. When Ted Heath lied with great passion about how happy he and a bunch of other blithering idiots would be, if only he could be allowed to join and be a part of this lovely edifice, we obliged his whim. A bureaucrats wet dream.
As loving, obliging parents we let him have his way and in an almost patronising way ignored the politicians playing with their tea set, dolls house, train set and cars for decades, in the firm belief that 'Europe' was over there and of no consequence, really, to us. It didn't matter. Nobody knew or cared who 'their' MEP was, what they did or even bothered to vote in Common Market, EEC, EC, EU elections.
And in this way the British were the ideal dupes dreamt of by the founders of the Project; the people had to be kept in the dark, the mission of the Project had to be kept from them. After all, like full blown Communism, who in their right mind ever voted for that? And European history is full enough of revolutions (or in Britain petitions), to suggest care and secrecy were needed.
If you are old enough to have lived some decades under the EU, ask yourself a question; can you remember ever hearing a debate about the EU? You can't, because (as with Man Made Global Warming) you got lots of instructions about how important it was (that was actually propaganda), but no unbiased information and certainly no debate.
The truth is dangerous to any organisation that is really, at root a bunch of international gangsters.Empire builders by the back door. Consider, why are we so afraid of the consequences of leaving the EU? Sure the detail would be messy, like any cancer, it seeks to spread throughout your system, but really it is because we know, we have seen that the EU cannot be trusted. It is not a machine based on logic and it certainly has no intention of allowing International Law to interfere in its malice (Sudetenland, anyone?)
So, the actual objection, the reason why Britain still managed, despite a long time under incessant propaganda, to vote down the EU membership, was because at a visceral level we just knew it was a wrong 'un. Maybe in these deliberately uneducated times, you need to look to the American Constitution to understand the true British character, the way we do government, because it was based on British constructs. Magna Carta means more to them than us, because we have been told that freedom doesn't matter any more.
But the reason we left the burgeoning empire of the EU, was the same as for the Americans. They did not seek to break with Britain and initially the broad feeling was that injustice must be dealt with as a detail, no greater change was required. But, imperial and impervious the upstarts had to be ignored. And so they proved that another course was open to them.
But they still continued to base their lives and laws on what they knew and what worked; British law and custom. 'We the people' is a great start to any sweeping document of state and it cannot be said too often that Britain evolved (through some trial and error) the best system of government in an imperfect world. We own the law and our politicians fear the people. In the EU, the State owns the law and the people need to fear their government.
The biggest mistake? Drawing attention to the EU. Once we started looking at what they were up to, what they stood for, what they did and intended to do it became inevitable that we would revolt (or, send in a petition). And we did. 52 to 48% is a decent difference and remember, for once a lot of people voted. That it was not wider is entirely due to the success of the weakening of our education system, but enough traditional British grit remained.
But then, in all the agonised ranting about how damaging leaving a bureaucrats paradise will be, we forget that the very act of being subsumed by the EU was illegal. Sure we talked of 'joining', but when you are handing political and economic power to a foreign government, it mirrors the way Poland 'joined' Germany in 1939.
No British government has that power, that authority and yet Ted Heath did it. The Conservative Prime Minister Ted Heath. And what mocking irony it is that, at the denouement of our dalliance with corruption, we should be under the 'guidance' of such a similar creature, the British Prime Minister Theresa May. Ted Heath lied shamelessly to get us in and Theresa May is lying just the same, to keep us in.
There used to be a fire safety advert that ran 'Get out, stay out and get the Brigade out', which is excellent advice regarding the EU (though here it would be the Brigade of Guards).
So, all the confected outrage about Boris and some misquotes about what he said and intended, is actually about how scared a bunch of ne'er do well politicians are of Boris Johnson and the likelihood that he would do a proper job of Brexiting. The Burqa is peculiar, it's like a bag and it is a symbol of the beginnings of extremist attitudes. We would do well to heed wise words.
As such he has an appeal to the ordinary voter, precisely because he doesn't seem like the machine politician with which our parliament is very much plagued. In that regard, we emulate the US, but perhaps without quite the flamboyance. But isn't it ever this way between us and the USA?
In the extraordinarily closed world of the Westminster bubble this is something that is understood, even if the general workings of the world outside the bubble is magnificently beyond their recognition.
When I was being obliged to sit still, face the front and listen, I was given history as it was instinctively taught within the British culture. When the story of the peasants revolt was told to me, what actually sank into my consciousness was, that the people had become fed up with the way those in charge ran things. Sure there was detail, but it was the overview, the impact at a subconscious level amongst those peasants that was what I understood.
We have the same today with the decision to leave the European Union, a vanity project of shining hubris, too bright for anyone to see. Except the we-own-the-law, different old British. When Ted Heath lied with great passion about how happy he and a bunch of other blithering idiots would be, if only he could be allowed to join and be a part of this lovely edifice, we obliged his whim. A bureaucrats wet dream.
As loving, obliging parents we let him have his way and in an almost patronising way ignored the politicians playing with their tea set, dolls house, train set and cars for decades, in the firm belief that 'Europe' was over there and of no consequence, really, to us. It didn't matter. Nobody knew or cared who 'their' MEP was, what they did or even bothered to vote in Common Market, EEC, EC, EU elections.
And in this way the British were the ideal dupes dreamt of by the founders of the Project; the people had to be kept in the dark, the mission of the Project had to be kept from them. After all, like full blown Communism, who in their right mind ever voted for that? And European history is full enough of revolutions (or in Britain petitions), to suggest care and secrecy were needed.
If you are old enough to have lived some decades under the EU, ask yourself a question; can you remember ever hearing a debate about the EU? You can't, because (as with Man Made Global Warming) you got lots of instructions about how important it was (that was actually propaganda), but no unbiased information and certainly no debate.
The truth is dangerous to any organisation that is really, at root a bunch of international gangsters.Empire builders by the back door. Consider, why are we so afraid of the consequences of leaving the EU? Sure the detail would be messy, like any cancer, it seeks to spread throughout your system, but really it is because we know, we have seen that the EU cannot be trusted. It is not a machine based on logic and it certainly has no intention of allowing International Law to interfere in its malice (Sudetenland, anyone?)
So, the actual objection, the reason why Britain still managed, despite a long time under incessant propaganda, to vote down the EU membership, was because at a visceral level we just knew it was a wrong 'un. Maybe in these deliberately uneducated times, you need to look to the American Constitution to understand the true British character, the way we do government, because it was based on British constructs. Magna Carta means more to them than us, because we have been told that freedom doesn't matter any more.
But the reason we left the burgeoning empire of the EU, was the same as for the Americans. They did not seek to break with Britain and initially the broad feeling was that injustice must be dealt with as a detail, no greater change was required. But, imperial and impervious the upstarts had to be ignored. And so they proved that another course was open to them.
But they still continued to base their lives and laws on what they knew and what worked; British law and custom. 'We the people' is a great start to any sweeping document of state and it cannot be said too often that Britain evolved (through some trial and error) the best system of government in an imperfect world. We own the law and our politicians fear the people. In the EU, the State owns the law and the people need to fear their government.
The biggest mistake? Drawing attention to the EU. Once we started looking at what they were up to, what they stood for, what they did and intended to do it became inevitable that we would revolt (or, send in a petition). And we did. 52 to 48% is a decent difference and remember, for once a lot of people voted. That it was not wider is entirely due to the success of the weakening of our education system, but enough traditional British grit remained.
But then, in all the agonised ranting about how damaging leaving a bureaucrats paradise will be, we forget that the very act of being subsumed by the EU was illegal. Sure we talked of 'joining', but when you are handing political and economic power to a foreign government, it mirrors the way Poland 'joined' Germany in 1939.
No British government has that power, that authority and yet Ted Heath did it. The Conservative Prime Minister Ted Heath. And what mocking irony it is that, at the denouement of our dalliance with corruption, we should be under the 'guidance' of such a similar creature, the British Prime Minister Theresa May. Ted Heath lied shamelessly to get us in and Theresa May is lying just the same, to keep us in.
There used to be a fire safety advert that ran 'Get out, stay out and get the Brigade out', which is excellent advice regarding the EU (though here it would be the Brigade of Guards).
So, all the confected outrage about Boris and some misquotes about what he said and intended, is actually about how scared a bunch of ne'er do well politicians are of Boris Johnson and the likelihood that he would do a proper job of Brexiting. The Burqa is peculiar, it's like a bag and it is a symbol of the beginnings of extremist attitudes. We would do well to heed wise words.
Monday, 30 July 2018
Hot Weather, Man Made Global Warming And Hot Air
It's been hot recently and not just here in the UK. So the Global Warming leeches come slithering out to say it is extreme (it isn't), it's due to Global Warming (it isn't), which is caused by Man pumping CO2 into the atmosphere (or Carbon as 'scientists' insist on calling it. Carbon is an element, C, and Carbon Dioxide, CO2, is a compound. They confuse the two because they think Carbon sounds worse to you. And they know you are thick, because you believe in Global Warming even though they can't prove it).
I mentioned in an earlier post what is causing our current weather and that, by observation, we can see there is no Global Warming taking place. Now, let's be clear Global Warming as a natural, cyclical event is real. It is warmer now than when the Thames froze over in 1814, but less warm than in medieval or Roman times.
Also, CO2 is a potential 'greenhouse' gas, meaning it can help trap heat inside the atmosphere and thus warm the planet. This was first postulated in the 1960's and after research it was decided that Man's output of CO2 is insignificant in the grand scheme of things and will have no noticeable affect on climate. We have no idea what might be a 'tipping point', as temperatures have been much lower at times when atmospheric CO2 was very much higher.
We don't know how all the interlocking natural relationships work to respond to changes. But greenhouse gas is a sound theory. More effective than CO2 is Methane and by far the most causative of weather and climate variations is water vapour. Or clouds as we more commonly refer to them.
So, if the theory is sound but we don't understand the mechanisms and interactions sufficiently, how is Global Warming a thing? Why are governments so stressed about it and reactive? (To be fair all government has actually done is increase taxes on us to give to rich people as subsidies for wind farms and solar farms that don't really help much and not all the time).
Global Warming is being used by anti-capitalists to get idiot Western governments to ruin their economies chasing a chimera and by scientists and activists (like Greenpeace and WWF) to get grants and funding. No Global Warming, no money.
How do the scammers have all this proof of Global Warming then? Well, they don't. Most stories they tell are demonstrable lies which the lazy MSM journalists just cut and paste. Any refutation is ignored by the media. The 'proof' the pushers produce is completely, 100% based on computer models that they programmed with biased inputs and consequently always predict Global Warming.
The models are predicated on CO2 having an influence way out of kilter with observable fact and beyond anything we have direct knowledge of. You might as well believe in fairies.
I mentioned in an earlier post what is causing our current weather and that, by observation, we can see there is no Global Warming taking place. Now, let's be clear Global Warming as a natural, cyclical event is real. It is warmer now than when the Thames froze over in 1814, but less warm than in medieval or Roman times.
Also, CO2 is a potential 'greenhouse' gas, meaning it can help trap heat inside the atmosphere and thus warm the planet. This was first postulated in the 1960's and after research it was decided that Man's output of CO2 is insignificant in the grand scheme of things and will have no noticeable affect on climate. We have no idea what might be a 'tipping point', as temperatures have been much lower at times when atmospheric CO2 was very much higher.
We don't know how all the interlocking natural relationships work to respond to changes. But greenhouse gas is a sound theory. More effective than CO2 is Methane and by far the most causative of weather and climate variations is water vapour. Or clouds as we more commonly refer to them.
So, if the theory is sound but we don't understand the mechanisms and interactions sufficiently, how is Global Warming a thing? Why are governments so stressed about it and reactive? (To be fair all government has actually done is increase taxes on us to give to rich people as subsidies for wind farms and solar farms that don't really help much and not all the time).
Global Warming is being used by anti-capitalists to get idiot Western governments to ruin their economies chasing a chimera and by scientists and activists (like Greenpeace and WWF) to get grants and funding. No Global Warming, no money.
How do the scammers have all this proof of Global Warming then? Well, they don't. Most stories they tell are demonstrable lies which the lazy MSM journalists just cut and paste. Any refutation is ignored by the media. The 'proof' the pushers produce is completely, 100% based on computer models that they programmed with biased inputs and consequently always predict Global Warming.
The models are predicated on CO2 having an influence way out of kilter with observable fact and beyond anything we have direct knowledge of. You might as well believe in fairies.
Water, Water - Nowhere
With a prolonged hot, dry spell visiting the UK recently the focus has been on Global Warming. There have been no records broken, it hasn't been as unendingly hot as 1976 and this one (as most are here), was caused by the Jetstream being pushed North by unusually cold water in the North West Atlantic.
Nothing to do with Global Warming, which isn't a thing with no temperature rise for over 20 years and certainly no identified mechanism at work, caused by Man (such as CO2).
What should be the focus is the water supply. Now, with a wet early start to the year the supplies were at a high level, but nothing lasts forever. But more damaging is the fact that, despite the massive influx of people to the UK since the moron Tony Blair allowed unrestricted immigration, no new capacity exists.
Yes, that's right, no new reservoirs to meet the additional needs. Mad eh? Well the reason is even more insane. Following an EU directive we must have less water supply than is needed by design. This is to make us use less water, which we must do due to Global Warming (which as stated earlier doesn't exist).
So, you may be familiar with the population increase, in the late Eighties it was 56,953,861 and is now 65,511,097 but when was the last reservoir built? 1989, that's when. In Devon. Unbelievably, no added capacity from before unlimited immigration began.
And then there are the legendary scale water leaks, which the water companies really cannot be bothered to fix despite legal obligations and targets. This is because our politicians, currently scrabbling to keep all the real work of governing in Brussels, are weak and believe in fairies, which is what Global Warming is.
Nothing to do with Global Warming, which isn't a thing with no temperature rise for over 20 years and certainly no identified mechanism at work, caused by Man (such as CO2).
What should be the focus is the water supply. Now, with a wet early start to the year the supplies were at a high level, but nothing lasts forever. But more damaging is the fact that, despite the massive influx of people to the UK since the moron Tony Blair allowed unrestricted immigration, no new capacity exists.
Yes, that's right, no new reservoirs to meet the additional needs. Mad eh? Well the reason is even more insane. Following an EU directive we must have less water supply than is needed by design. This is to make us use less water, which we must do due to Global Warming (which as stated earlier doesn't exist).
So, you may be familiar with the population increase, in the late Eighties it was 56,953,861 and is now 65,511,097 but when was the last reservoir built? 1989, that's when. In Devon. Unbelievably, no added capacity from before unlimited immigration began.
And then there are the legendary scale water leaks, which the water companies really cannot be bothered to fix despite legal obligations and targets. This is because our politicians, currently scrabbling to keep all the real work of governing in Brussels, are weak and believe in fairies, which is what Global Warming is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)