Tuesday, 22 April 2014

Well, Here We Are

Welcome all those sharing my existence, by which I don't mean reading this blog, but in fact just being alive at the same time. What is consciousness is a big question, but let's not do that just now and agree for now that it is 'not being asleep'.

So the primroses have given way to a massive bloom of bluebells in the woods and the warmer days see a good scattering of butterflies. Can it be true that warmer weather beckons? As the days grow longer, the trees green over and the Sun becomes stronger, I usually say, on the dog walk that 'soon we will be doing this in T shirts'. (It is more depressing when it turns to 'not so long ago we were doing this in T shirts').

Optimism and taking joy in the simple fact of a summers day are wonderful things and stave off the depression of greed and never having enough. We see this from the benefits claimant who thinks of themselves as a victim because they cannot afford the latest trainers or TV and in the mega rich who are searching for something that apparently money can't buy, but their ability to dodge needing an education (in life, but often it seems, at all) has left them ill equipped to identify what that might be.

David Moyes is no longer Manager of Manchester United which spurs many thoughts. Should he have been given the summer to reorganise the team and to hell with this season? Was it just too much for him and if so was he 'set up' by Ferguson to fail, to show even more clearly what a great Manager he was? Did Ferguson choose his moment with precision, even if he meant no harm to his replacement, as the team was becoming staffed with mediocre talent?

In the last game, against Everton Fletcher was probably Man U's best player, which is a terrible place to be as he is usually someone you can rely on to be useless. The defence is disorganised and was under Ferguson, the 'strike force' non existent. And the continued over-rating of Rooney continues. At the weekend he was less a £300,000 a week player and more £25,000. A year.

Usually, getting rid of the Manager is to increase the productivity on the pitch, but here it needs to be the start of a wholesale clear out. But can they afford what needs to be done?

Tuesday, 1 April 2014

BBC: No Point Complaining

To support the lies of the anti-capitalists pushing the Global Warming scam, the BBC has gone into overdrive with its propaganda. Now, whilst in a sane world this would attract a sustainable complaint, it is not the worst of it.

Last night the BBC wheeled on Roger Harrabin to talk about Global Warming. He said the glaciers in the Himalayas are melting (we dealt with that ages ago- isn't happening), the Arctic melting (he means in the summer, not mentioning it comes back in the winter) and other tired lines.

The problem is though, the BBC omitted to mention that their employee, given this airtime, has a vested interest in the continuation of the Global Warming theme. He has a financial interest. He is involved with Green projects from which he personally benefits.

The BBC feels that it is so morally superior that anything is justified. What is actually the case is that the stench of corruption is so prevalent, that they can't smell a new arrival.

Expert, Textpert, Choking Smokers

Are there any honest scientists around these days? Any who got into science for the science and the thrill of discovery? Because the airwaves are constantly referring to 'experts' pontificating about something or other and they are usually more interested in their involvement than its veracity of accuracy.

Today, strangely soon after 5 a day was questioned due to the new hatred for sugar, we are told that 5 a day is not enough. No, to hell with the sugar, you need 7 portions a day of fruit and vegetables. Now I don't know about you, but I would expect this to be science based and tell us something important and provable.

I would expect that the science would show how our bodies interact with the food we eat and helps to prolong our lives. But nope, we still don't really understand that so it is a survey. Wonderful 'experts' have told us that they have found that people who live longer eat lots of fruit and vegetables. Were other aspects of their lifestyle factored out?

In fact, how do they know that the food they ate was a causative factor in their long life? What about genetics, exercise, wealth?

Then we have the wailing banshees of Global Warming. I cannot believe, actually, really cannot believe the news stories that reported the latest IPCC comedy script. How could anyone say, with a straight face that Global Warming has been worse than we feared, when there hasn't been any for 17 years?

Why are we even listening to people who a) can't explain why they didn't predict the lack of warming and b) can't explain how the supposed Global Warming actually occurs? Anyway, the rise in temperature over the last 150 years has been 0.7 degrees. This is not only insignificant and irrelevant, we also have no idea how out of kilter that is with historic climate variations.

What we do know is that it has been warmer and colder before without our CO2 having any input and that as we continue to pump out CO2 the temperature hasn't risen. Sure, anti-capitalist, AGW alarmists and even some people who support them and are scientists as well, have come up with some catch-all, speculative comments to explain away everything they get wrong, but generally they don't want to talk about it.

There is proof that CO2 isn't warming the globe, but none to say it does. All of the posing by the IPCC led by a railway engineer, doesn't change the fact that the only story they have is, there has been some overall warming and at the same time we have produced more CO2, so they must be linked.

Or maybe it was because Charles Dickens wrote some books, in that time window and reading them causes Global Warming. Really, that is no wilder than what we are asked to believe by the alarmists. Why otherwise would the latest IPCC report say Global Warming, even in the weird world they inhabit  is less than we thought and the summary says 'we're doomed, doomed I tell you'.

Is it because the summary is for 'policymakers' so it is the bit that has to contain the con?