Sky News:
Coronavirus poses greater global threat than terrorism, leading doctors warn
In other news:
Terrorism is a greater global threat than global warming, leading police chiefs warn
Global warming is a greater global threat than the Coronavirus, leading climate scientists warn
Smoking is a greater global threat than terrorism, leading public health campaigners warn
Obesity is a greater global threat than smoking, other leading public health campaigners warn
Etc
The Moose says:
Nothing to see here, move along
Plant Life
What the blithering fuck is "Plant Based"?
It's not the virtue signalling from The Oscars that grips my shit. That's only to be expected. It's the use of that term that keeps cropping up everywhere these days - Plant Based
What is a plant? It's a pretty thing you put on the windowsill and water once a week. It's not food
Plant Based is just a trendy new term for vegetarian or vegan, but it's meaningless gibberish, which is unfortunately what the English language is turning into these days
Everyone is using it at the moment, because veganism is being pushed for January. All the retailers are milking it for all it's worth, from plant based fast food burgers, to the 'plant based' range in every supermarket.
These businesses are not trying to save the planet or caring about vegans, they're just making a buck off the backs of a bunch of virtue signalling, middle class twats, who don't have the courage of their convictions unless their trendy vegan diet tastes of cow and pig
A true vegan will have a lentil salad for lunch. A faux vegan will have a 'sausage' roll made from mushroom paste and then go running the The Mirror when the poor minimum wage bugger at Gregg's mistakes it for the real one and they 'take a bite'.
Plant Based? If it doesn't sit on the mantelpiece and flower in Spring, it isn't a plant. If it does, it ain't food
*Update*
Also Plant Based. Geddit?
What is a plant? It's a pretty thing you put on the windowsill and water once a week. It's not food
Plant Based is just a trendy new term for vegetarian or vegan, but it's meaningless gibberish, which is unfortunately what the English language is turning into these days
Everyone is using it at the moment, because veganism is being pushed for January. All the retailers are milking it for all it's worth, from plant based fast food burgers, to the 'plant based' range in every supermarket.
These businesses are not trying to save the planet or caring about vegans, they're just making a buck off the backs of a bunch of virtue signalling, middle class twats, who don't have the courage of their convictions unless their trendy vegan diet tastes of cow and pig
A true vegan will have a lentil salad for lunch. A faux vegan will have a 'sausage' roll made from mushroom paste and then go running the The Mirror when the poor minimum wage bugger at Gregg's mistakes it for the real one and they 'take a bite'.
Plant Based? If it doesn't sit on the mantelpiece and flower in Spring, it isn't a plant. If it does, it ain't food
*Update*
Also Plant Based. Geddit?
You're gonna need a very long cord
Electricity is the future, apparently. Only wind, water and solar driven electricity though, not that generated from coal / oil fired power stations or nuclear
This is because we believe in a religion called climate Change. A religion where CO2 is the Devil and some small Swedish pixie is God
In order to pay homage to the Climate Change God, our Government in its infinite wisdom has decided to ban petrol and diesel cars by 2040.
The big problem is, Climate Change is a fantasy and the technology to replace petrol and diesel cars does not exist yet
Electricity? Nope. Wind and solar are so unreliable, we wouldn't be able to supply our current energy needs through only them. If we make every car electric, that's a huge amount of additional electricity we need to generate
Also, lithium batteries do not last for ever. I don't know how long they last in cars, but if the lifespan is about the average for such a battery, a great many people are going to have to start replacing them very shortly. Imagine buying a car where you have to replace the entire engine every 100k miles?
We do not yet have the technology to power our society with 'green energy' and we don't have the technology to make our entire transport needs electric either. The time for announcing bans on petrol, diesel, coal, oil and nuclear is a very long way away indeed. The correct time for this would be when new technology has been developed, proven and eventually taken over, when a ban would not be necessary anyway
And now we're building electric planes. That's fine in itself, but to declare the start of the electric aviation age after a fifteen minute test flight of a small electric twin seater is just bananas
How much electricity does it take to fly a load of lithium batteries across the Atlantic? Can you fit that amount of electricity in those batteries or do you need to fit more? If you fit more, how much electricity does it take to fly those extra batteries across the Atlantic and can you fit it in those batteries?
I don't know, but reading the article, the technology, just like that for power generation and cars, is too far in it's infancy to be relied on
Which means it's probably time for the Government to announce a ban on jet flights
This is because we believe in a religion called climate Change. A religion where CO2 is the Devil and some small Swedish pixie is God
In order to pay homage to the Climate Change God, our Government in its infinite wisdom has decided to ban petrol and diesel cars by 2040.
The big problem is, Climate Change is a fantasy and the technology to replace petrol and diesel cars does not exist yet
Electricity? Nope. Wind and solar are so unreliable, we wouldn't be able to supply our current energy needs through only them. If we make every car electric, that's a huge amount of additional electricity we need to generate
Also, lithium batteries do not last for ever. I don't know how long they last in cars, but if the lifespan is about the average for such a battery, a great many people are going to have to start replacing them very shortly. Imagine buying a car where you have to replace the entire engine every 100k miles?
We do not yet have the technology to power our society with 'green energy' and we don't have the technology to make our entire transport needs electric either. The time for announcing bans on petrol, diesel, coal, oil and nuclear is a very long way away indeed. The correct time for this would be when new technology has been developed, proven and eventually taken over, when a ban would not be necessary anyway
World's first fully electric commercial aircraft takes flight in Canada
Company hails start of the ‘electric aviation age’ after 15-minute test flight in Vancouver
And now we're building electric planes. That's fine in itself, but to declare the start of the electric aviation age after a fifteen minute test flight of a small electric twin seater is just bananas
“This proves that commercial aviation in all-electric form can work,” said Roei Ganzarski, chief executive of Australian engineering firm magniX.Not really. It proves you can do a fifteen minute flight in a small seaplane. But what's in store for actual flight times and distances that would be useful?
How much electricity does it take to fly a load of lithium batteries across the Atlantic? Can you fit that amount of electricity in those batteries or do you need to fit more? If you fit more, how much electricity does it take to fly those extra batteries across the Atlantic and can you fit it in those batteries?
I don't know, but reading the article, the technology, just like that for power generation and cars, is too far in it's infancy to be relied on
Which means it's probably time for the Government to announce a ban on jet flights
Richard Murphy - Idiot
Richard Murphy has the economic knowledge of a pigeon
Because he has the economic knowledge of a pigeon, he's obviously a socialist and spends all his time bleating on his socialist blog about how Capitalism is evil and doesn't work
Neither the English or American Governments believe that markets work, because they are always meddling in them. If they really thought the markets worked, they would leave them alone to, well, work. But they don't, they interfere in the markets at every little opportunity they can get. Very little happens in the world of business and economics that isn't regulated to some degree by the state
Murphy and his ilk love to say that real socialism has not yet been tried, even though it's plainly obvious to most pigeons that it's been tried and failed many times over, but one thing we can say with certainty, is that Free Market Capitalism has never been tried
When I studied economics at college, I learned the surprising fact that the economy that came the closest ever to being a free market, was Hong Kong. If I had to guess (and I think I did) I would have said America. And I would have been wrong
Since then, successive Governments the world over have tightened the reins on business and economics, slice by slice, taking us ever further away from that holy grail of the free market
The idea of Free Market Capitalism may indeed say anyone with a good idea and the determination to see it through can build a business and become a success, but as I've stated, we do not live in a free market. It's is not Capitalism that has evolved to make sure the markets don't work, it's Government
A free market requires low taxation, minimal regulation and minimal Government interference (preferably zero), but we have the highest taxation, most stringent regulation and most Government interference, ever in history. And it's probably the same for most countries
The markets may well be failing, but the cause is not Capitalism, it's Government. And idiots like Richard Murphy
One of the great myths of modern capitalism is that markets work. Moreover, they supposedly work on the way that economists like to think they do. The Conservative Party is built on that myth. So too is the American Dream.
Because he has the economic knowledge of a pigeon, he's obviously a socialist and spends all his time bleating on his socialist blog about how Capitalism is evil and doesn't work
Neither the English or American Governments believe that markets work, because they are always meddling in them. If they really thought the markets worked, they would leave them alone to, well, work. But they don't, they interfere in the markets at every little opportunity they can get. Very little happens in the world of business and economics that isn't regulated to some degree by the state
Murphy and his ilk love to say that real socialism has not yet been tried, even though it's plainly obvious to most pigeons that it's been tried and failed many times over, but one thing we can say with certainty, is that Free Market Capitalism has never been tried
When I studied economics at college, I learned the surprising fact that the economy that came the closest ever to being a free market, was Hong Kong. If I had to guess (and I think I did) I would have said America. And I would have been wrong
Since then, successive Governments the world over have tightened the reins on business and economics, slice by slice, taking us ever further away from that holy grail of the free market
The myth suggests that anyone can build a business from scratch, entering a market of their choice and end up, with hard work and determination, making a fortune.
This is not true. Modern capitalism has evolved to make sure that markets do not work.
The idea of Free Market Capitalism may indeed say anyone with a good idea and the determination to see it through can build a business and become a success, but as I've stated, we do not live in a free market. It's is not Capitalism that has evolved to make sure the markets don't work, it's Government
A free market requires low taxation, minimal regulation and minimal Government interference (preferably zero), but we have the highest taxation, most stringent regulation and most Government interference, ever in history. And it's probably the same for most countries
The markets may well be failing, but the cause is not Capitalism, it's Government. And idiots like Richard Murphy
It's not Mrs World
A Miss World contestant stripped of her title for being a mother has launched a human rights challenge against the “sexist, outdated” pageant.
Veronika Didusenko was disqualified from the competition, run by British businesswoman Julia Morley, for being a parent and a divorcee.
The 24-year-old model was crowned Miss Ukraine in 2018 and was set to appear at the Miss World final in China that year, but was barred over her personal life and had her £10,000 prize money taken away despite it being pledged to a charity.
It seems she didn't find the pageant sexist and outdated when she entered it and started winning stuff
Funny that she's changed her mind now...?
Even funnier that she's suing for her human right to enter this sexist and outdated event...
Strange girl
Just Do It!
Because the police bloody well won't
I'm a few days behind the times on this story as I'm busy. When I went on holiday, I gave my boss a full handover of what needed to be done while I was off. When I returned, he said, "Here are the things I didn't manage to do", and handed me the document back
So I've been busy
But partway through the post holiday blues and the mountain of paperwork, there was one small moment of joy as I watched the video of Extinction Rebellion protesters being dragged off the roof of a tube train and given a kicking
You've all seen the videos by now, but if not, they're here and here, amongst many other places
Don't get me wrong, the title of this post is not me advocating violence and calling for the public to start dragging protesters out the back and giving them a good hiding. What I do believe though, is that it's time the public did step in to put an end to this kind of nonsense
The police have been far too passive in their response to Extinction Rebellion and their ilk, disrupting the daily lives of ordinary people, so where the police cannot be counted on to do their job, the public should feel free to step up
Not to dish out punishment beatings, but where necessary, to remove protesters from trains, planes, runways and roads, so that people can continue about their business without interruption
After all, the original remit of the police was to support the public in the enforcement of law. Now they have a complete monopoly on law enforcement (and the use of force), but do not use it when it is needed
And who are these boneheads telling us we have to live in the dark ages in order to prevent an imaginary climate catastrophe?
The Daily Mail:
My money is on him inheriting some money and never having had to work a day in his life; totally disconnected from the people he is dictating to. Life of Riley and too much time on his hands. I could be wrong
So it seems this stunt was a huge own goal and as a result, XR cancelled another planned demonstration at Gatwick Airport:
The Sun
Also: "We can meet by Costa and discuss". I hope nobody intends on actually going inside Costa and getting a brew. It would take a first order hypocrite to do such a thing
I once had a discussion with Longrider on his blog, regarding the right to protest. I can't find a link as it was a long time ago. Longriders position is that peaceful protest is a right and part of the freedom of speech. As he explains here, what XR are doing, intimidating, harassing and preventing people from going about their daily lives is not free speech nor peaceful protest. It's wrong and it should be stopped
I agree with the above, but only to a certain extent. If XR were simply walking down Trafalgar Square holding placards and singing songs, that would be defined as free speech and peaceful protest
I am not of the opinion that all peaceful protest, whatever the protesters are calling for, should be allowed
What if the protesters are calling for Communism in Britain, execution of smokers, segregation of blacks and whites etc? I believe that if people are protesting for something fundamentally at odds with life in a Western Democracy, they should be stopped
Why? An example: Incitement to violence is illegal. Communism is ultimately violence, so calling for Communism in my opinion, is incitement to violence. So is demanding we tax the rich, ban automobiles, ban meat, ban fossil fuels etc
Extinction Rebellion would definitely fall into that category, even if their protests were peaceful, which they are not. They want everyone to be hugely worse off in order to combat an imaginary problem that they have been hoodwinked into believing is real and imminent. And there is a real danger that people will take their stance as credible and join them. There is an even bigger danger that the Government will do the same, because what Government does not like taxes and controls?
Peaceful or not, I think these people are a danger to our way of life and should be moved on wherever they crop up, forcefully if necessary
What do you think?
I'm a few days behind the times on this story as I'm busy. When I went on holiday, I gave my boss a full handover of what needed to be done while I was off. When I returned, he said, "Here are the things I didn't manage to do", and handed me the document back
So I've been busy
But partway through the post holiday blues and the mountain of paperwork, there was one small moment of joy as I watched the video of Extinction Rebellion protesters being dragged off the roof of a tube train and given a kicking
You've all seen the videos by now, but if not, they're here and here, amongst many other places
Don't get me wrong, the title of this post is not me advocating violence and calling for the public to start dragging protesters out the back and giving them a good hiding. What I do believe though, is that it's time the public did step in to put an end to this kind of nonsense
The police have been far too passive in their response to Extinction Rebellion and their ilk, disrupting the daily lives of ordinary people, so where the police cannot be counted on to do their job, the public should feel free to step up
Not to dish out punishment beatings, but where necessary, to remove protesters from trains, planes, runways and roads, so that people can continue about their business without interruption
After all, the original remit of the police was to support the public in the enforcement of law. Now they have a complete monopoly on law enforcement (and the use of force), but do not use it when it is needed
And who are these boneheads telling us we have to live in the dark ages in order to prevent an imaginary climate catastrophe?
The Daily Mail:
Another of the activists who climbed on top of a tube train this morning has been identified as a 36-year-old Buddhist.This man was originally training full time to become a Buddhist teacher and now he is a full time protester. That means he's either financially independent or he's living off the taxpayer
Mark Ovland gave up his full-time Buddhist teacher training studies earlier this year to join XR as a 'full time protestor'.
My money is on him inheriting some money and never having had to work a day in his life; totally disconnected from the people he is dictating to. Life of Riley and too much time on his hands. I could be wrong
So it seems this stunt was a huge own goal and as a result, XR cancelled another planned demonstration at Gatwick Airport:
The Sun
The group's leaders have called off a planned protest at Gatiwck airport "in light of" today's Tube disruption.Read between the lines for the reason why they cancelled the protest - "Don't wear any XR branding". They are in fear of reprisals from the general public. Pity they cancelled it, I would have liked to have seen an incident similar to the tube, unfold at Gatwick Airport. It may have been the start of something. For now, we'll just have to see
In a group message on Telegram one leader wrote: "In light of this morning's events, we have considered further and it's felt best to postpone.
"For people who are already on their way, we can meet by Costa and discuss, but please don't wear any XR branding.
Also: "We can meet by Costa and discuss". I hope nobody intends on actually going inside Costa and getting a brew. It would take a first order hypocrite to do such a thing
I once had a discussion with Longrider on his blog, regarding the right to protest. I can't find a link as it was a long time ago. Longriders position is that peaceful protest is a right and part of the freedom of speech. As he explains here, what XR are doing, intimidating, harassing and preventing people from going about their daily lives is not free speech nor peaceful protest. It's wrong and it should be stopped
I agree with the above, but only to a certain extent. If XR were simply walking down Trafalgar Square holding placards and singing songs, that would be defined as free speech and peaceful protest
I am not of the opinion that all peaceful protest, whatever the protesters are calling for, should be allowed
What if the protesters are calling for Communism in Britain, execution of smokers, segregation of blacks and whites etc? I believe that if people are protesting for something fundamentally at odds with life in a Western Democracy, they should be stopped
Why? An example: Incitement to violence is illegal. Communism is ultimately violence, so calling for Communism in my opinion, is incitement to violence. So is demanding we tax the rich, ban automobiles, ban meat, ban fossil fuels etc
Extinction Rebellion would definitely fall into that category, even if their protests were peaceful, which they are not. They want everyone to be hugely worse off in order to combat an imaginary problem that they have been hoodwinked into believing is real and imminent. And there is a real danger that people will take their stance as credible and join them. There is an even bigger danger that the Government will do the same, because what Government does not like taxes and controls?
Peaceful or not, I think these people are a danger to our way of life and should be moved on wherever they crop up, forcefully if necessary
What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)