Saturday, 6 February 2010

Somethings Stirring....

Over at EUReferendum.

Looks like more holes in the IPCC's last report. Its got to look like swiss cheese by now surely?

Certainly the huge questions regarding the stewardship of the IPPC with so many flaws and unfounded claims in their reports must now be answered and action taken.

Wednesday, 3 February 2010

O . M . G . . . . .

A passenger in a car has been jailed for dangerous driving.....


"At an earlier hearing, Nichols, the owner of a packing firm BM Partnership Ltd of Ely, Cambridgeshire, was found guilty of two counts of causing death by dangerous driving because he had failed to tell his fellow company director and partner to slow down."

Hang on a minute: just because he knew she was drunk, let her drive and didn't tell her to slow down, that somehow makes him responsible for the actions of his driver?

Some people might applaud this, but to me, its a step too far. Guilt by association is wrong. He was not driving the car, therefore he can not be guilty of dangerous driving. End of. Had he snatched the wheel of the car and caused the accident, then he holds the responsibility.

I'm sure the families of the bereaved will see it differently, but he didn't hold a gun to her head. Yes he handed the driver the keys, but she could have refused. She agreed to drive knowing full well that should anything happen she would be responsible.

I'm sorry, but to me this is just courts pandering to emotion and public opinion and has nothing at all to do with justice or the enforcement of personal responsibility. This is the law of the playground: "He made me do it, so he's guilty as well..." I would hope that by adulthood we all would accept our responsibilities, but it appears not. So now it seems the law is using "You're all staying behind for detention" as a valid deterrent. It is wrong, wrong, wrong, on so many levels. It seems the Nanny State is here with a vengance.


Having thought about this a bit more, I just wonder where this new responsibility we've all been handed ends? Is the publican responsible for selling them drinks and/or letting them get into their car? Does it extend to the rest of the patrons in the bar, who saw that they were too drunk to be in charge of a car and did nothing to stop them or alert the Police?

Will therefore landlords be forced to request driver's car keys unpon entry to the bar and only return them upon a negative breathalyser test? Will it now bcome the norm that we can all be prosecuted for any offence if we fail to notify the Police of the crime in progress?

Tuesday, 2 February 2010

More on Big Pharma and the Nicotine Supply War.

Remember not long ago I had a rant about big pharma corporations? Dick Puddlecote has more details here.

How Policing Has Changed...

I came across this video on YouTube of a demo in 1979 demanding Citizens band Radio in the UK.

Ignore the 70s clothes and haircuts and look at the Policing style. Remember, the people on the demo were at the time most probably engaged in an illegal activity (using illegal imported AM CB Radios) and are seen here on a demo actively promoting that this illegal activity be legalised.

What do you think would happen these days? Dawn raids on those illegal radio users? Something to be stamped out before it got started? Online profiling and surrepticious infiltration of the demonstrators by plain clothes Police? Intrusive recording of the demonstration? Huge databases of names, addresses, vehicle number plates? Police tooled up in anti-stab vests, crash helmets and riot shields? Aggressive Police tactics?

Look at the video. Look at how our Police have changed from being part of the community with respect for the public and in return being respected.

Look at the video. Look how much we have lost.

The Corporatisation of Space?

It seems that the Sainted Obama wants public money out of space travel to clear the way for more corporations.

It seems that Richard Branson is a canny fellow: his launch system doesn't need much more development to provide Earth-Orbit capability. Once the Shuttle is retired, he'll have the only U.S. based method of putting people into space.

If I was the European Space Agency, I'd get cracking on modifying the automated delivery vehicle for the ISS to carry people. Knowing how badly US corporations have done getting to space in the past without serious backing from the taxpayer, I'd say its worth the investment to get into a pretty limited club.

If I were the Russians, I'd be saluting Saint Obama, as very soon they'll have the monopoly on manned earth-space vehicles for a while.

If I were the Chinese.. well actually I haven't a clue what the Chinese having a manned earth-space capability when the US don't would mean, but it does show the paradigm shift in world economics.

ClimateGate: How Complicated Can it Get?


Okay, let me explain: there have been numerous reports now of how closed the scientific community around man made global warming is. The incestuous relationship between government, NGOs and big corporations is becoming more visible. There's now a realisation that even big oil companies are in on the act, like I mentioned back in December here.

EUReferendum has done a good job of following the money trail, but to be honest, the whole scam is awash with the stuff: we are talking, in global terms of a trillion-dollar fraud, brought about on the world population.

Why? You may ask.

To make more money and stay making money, thats what. And I mean LOTS of money.

The Oil companies are already firmly linked to commodities traders. Its part and parcel of what they do. For example, if you have a tanker full of billions of litres of oil, if the price of that oil goes up just a fraction on the commodities markets while it is being transported to a refinery, then someone, somewhere gets very, very rich. Just a fraction of a percent increase on the price can fetch a significant return.

But what happens when the Oil runs out? Well, traders trade in carbon instead. You want to use dirty energy fuelled by Oil? You pay extra for it. Aha! The price of the oil just went up by a factor, thanks to some artificial tariff imposed by governments. Kerchingg! More money for the traders!

That Kerchingg feeling of money being made from nothing also extends to governments: they get significant duty and tax revenues from the oil business, so they really coin it in whether its from tax and duty on fuel sold at the pump, tax on the crude oil landed at the port, the tax on corporate profits made by commodities traders, or tax on their wages and bonuses. Don't forget the added scam that they can also fine us for using dirty transport by manipulating the road tax disc. I have yet to understand why what is essentially a permit to drive on the roads (ostensibly to fund the upkeep of those roads) is now linked to CO2 emissions. There is a load more benefits (i.e. your money) that governments rake in thanks to the global warming scam, so its in no way suprising that governments have taken to it like born again evangelists.
Not only that, but if they can shackle emergent countries with paying expensive tariffs for energy in order to produce similar things that they made profits on decades ago using  cheap energy, then they'll do it. Not for nothing did China throw it's toys out of the pram in Copenhagen. Not for nothing it is now being decried once again in the western MSM as a pariah. It failed to uphold its end of the bargain and the status quo when it noticed the cost was too high.

Back to the Oil companies for a second: you'd think that they would hate the idea of global warming tariffs, but you're wrong. Extracting Oil is a costly and risky business, with ever-decreasing returns on dwindling yields. So what better than to force people to use a clean alternative like hydrogen, which is so much easier to extract. Even better, they already have a fuel distribution network, so all they really have to do is shut down those costly, polluting refineries and build nice, clean hydrogen production plants instead. It might earn them a few billion in carbon credits in the process.

I can hear you saying, surely someone in the current energy chain would lose out thanks to global warming? Say for instance, the Oil producing countries? Surely they would lose out once the oil is gone? Well, no. To produce hydrogen we still need energy to separate water (for instance) into Hydrogen atoms and Oxygen atoms. Here in the higher lattitudes we could use coal, but that defeats the object. Nuclear is an option, but it has its own unique environmental issues. We could use renewables, but to be honest, the efficiency is poor and despite being "green" creates new environmental issues.
I know, lets use solar power! Great idea! Now then, where is it hot and sunny on a consistent basis all year round? Freakily, that just happens to be the desert countries that sit on top of the oil fields. Is it coincidence then that they aren't purturbed by this huge environmental lobby? Of course not. They can set up huge solar fields in the desert and produce large quantities of electricity, feed it to the coast and use it to split sea water.

So, no matter what anyone says, the man made global warming scam is nothing at all to do with the environment. Its all about money: huge sums of money for all the parties currently invested in the energy industry. Its about maintaining the status quo and if they can manage it, a little bonus on top.

So if big business are the winners (or in effect manoeuvring to stay in the race), who are the losers?
Well, if things pan out the way they are going at the moment: you and me. We'll pay more for our energy. Not because its more expensive to produce (like I said, hydrogen is cheap to make compared to oil), but because we'll have been brainwashed into believing the scam and will gladly pay more for the energy. What you have to ask yourself at that point is: why hasn't the cost of energy come down now we're no longer polluting the planet? I expect we'll be given some guff about how we're paying through the nose for clean energy and if we ever wanted cheap energy we'd have to go back to burning babies or pressing them in huge presses in order to extract the oil from them. Or something just as catastrophic.

The other big losers will be the world's poor. Shackled by western-devised rules, the eastern emerging nations will not have the opportunities our western societies did based on cheap energy when we emerged. Instead their path to glory will be long and drawn out, hideously prolonging the suffering those at the bottom of society, who could be benefitting from a less restrictive trading world. Instead their companies will have shackles of carbon at hand and wrist, holding them back.

Just how deep and how broad does the man made global warming scam go? You literally have no idea. I really believe that no-one can comprehend the scale of this worldwide abomination that we have allowed to fester and grow without question. Hopefully now, we are starting to ask those questions we should have asked a decade or more ago. Hopefully now, the truth will be brought into the light of day. Hopefully now, those people that would have been impoverished by it will be held back no longer.

I hope one day to see those responsible for this travesty punished for the collossal wrong they have wrought on mankind.

Monday, 1 February 2010

ClimateGate: BBC Institutionally, Inextricably, Involved?

It seems that the BBC has more than a vested interest in the man made global warming scam.

Go and have a look at Old Holborn, EUReferendum and BiasedBBC for references.

It makes interesting reading and does explain that the BBC and their workers would have take a huge loss if man made global warming and the financial industry set up around it ever failed. It certainly focusses the mind if your (not insubstantial) retirement nest-egg relies to an extent on an industry that you report on.

It goes to show quite well how a supposedly impartial organisation can be corrupted. Certainly it goes some way to explaining some of the bias we've seen from the BBC and the sluggish nature with which its taken up the controversy around ClimateGate, the IPCC, R K Pachauri, GlacierGate, AmazonGate, the unsettled science, the basic unscientific nature of AR4  and the other unravelling threads of the twisted web that started being unpicked by the release of the UEAs emails.

The climategate affair shows how we should really never, ever take anything at face value. We should challenge authority at every opportunity. The whole thing has proved to a a very complex interwoven web of many strands