Global Warming Once More

As mentioned previously, I don't know whether there is any global warming going on, or whether we humans are responsible for it. The evidence as I see it is too mixed: any search on the Internet comes up with wildly differing views, out of date evidence, hearsay, scaremongering and more. Real, hard information is not really available to Joe Public.

Nevertheless, there is another way to look at the problem that suggests a course of action that we, as individuals, can take, almost regardless of the actual situation. Consider the Copenhagen Summit, where the 'great and the good' (and the bad and the ugly) got together to try and cobble together some worldwide scheme to cut emissions of greenhouse gases that are claimed to be endangering the future survival of our civilisation (at least). Unsurprisingly, they failed to come up with a substantial agreement. China, a vile dictatorship, and a few other countries, it is claimed, held the talks to ransom and refused to agree to cuts in their emissions. Well, I don't like the Chinese government system, so why should I support it by buying their goods? Furthermore, I can help the poor Chinese cut their emissions in the same way: by not buying their goods (when there is a choice, I suppose).

The counter-argument to this is that we should link these dangerous foreign countries to our economies so that it would be too costly to them to go to war with us. Well, it might work, but what psychopathic dictator really cares about the welfare of his people enough to avoid war if he thinks he can gain from it himself? I think that once the sales of goods starts to fall off, even a psychopath's mind can be focused on doing what other people want - or on starting a war to make more profit, and sooner... It is a difficult call to make, really. However, in these days of nuclear weapons, I don't think they'd want to be nuked and it's really not so terrible to reduce pollution and sell more goods, is it? So on balance, I favour not buying their goods where possible.

And... actually, not buying needless goods in general is a good way to go. Bad for the economy? Well, partly: but is an economy based on burning up limited resources to make unnecessary gimmicks really such a good thing? I know we all want a nice standard of living, but it is possible to go too far with that when there are so many people on the planet. Focusing on necessary items like education, especially of third-world females because it has been shown that educated females have fewer children, can help solve both problems at the same time. Where will the money come from for this? Ultimately the economy can be reorganised so it doesn't simply produce junk to be taxed - anyway, most of the money in the system is debt not cash: it is all fiction, and it can be arranged differently, if we really want it to be.

We all want a few luxuries, but do we need them all? Think of the money that is wasted on unproductive junk like ringtones, 100 varieties of mobile phone, 100 varieties of shampoo, and... all those cars.

Yes, cars. I know all the lads need one to impress the girls, and all the girls need one to prove their independence, but those reasons aside, most people could, in fact, use the bus, train or taxi - and it would be cheaper too. In the UK running a car costs at least £4,000 a year. You'd have to travel a lot to pay that much on public transport or even with taxi fares (over 300 journeys at £13.33 each). Yes, cars are more convenient, and possibly for parents with young children, one car may, arguably, be 'essential', even though previous generations seemed to manage all right without any. But cars are expensive, they pollute the environment badly, they are dangerous, and they require enormous quantities of limited resources to make and to run. Mind you, maybe I'm biased: I don't have one. The ridiculous expense, danger and damage to the environment have always put me off. Taxis have always seemed more efficient to me: I can take a journey, and instead of the car sitting by the kerb for the rest of the day getting in the way and rusting, it can be used by other people: one car for some 20 people, instead of 20 cars for 20 people. The saving to the environment is huge.

Think about it. It's your fault. Maybe.

More Global Warming

So, OK, following Stu's comment to the below global warming article, let's see a bit of the other side of the argument. This video debunks the global warming debunkers... so what the heck is the truth???

Global Warming: Bad Science?

Ever since I noticed in Al Gore's famous global warming video 'An Inconvenient Truth' that his graphs showed carbon di-oxide throughout pre-history increasing and decreasing 400 years *after* changes in the climate that it was supposed to be causing, I thought that something was up. This video explains pretty well that the world is probably not in fact overheating, with some real science and some real investigative journalism (for a change).

You might also like to look at some of the articles on this page if you would like some more details:
The Myth Of Global Warming

Swine Flu Vaccine: Dangerous?

The conspiracy theorists are saying that the swine flu vaccine is highly dangerous for a number of reasons (poisonous adjuvants, nanochips and more), and that the whole thing is a plot to cull a large number of people for the purposes of power and profit. Now, of course, conspiracy theories can be quite fun, but what is the evidence behind these accusations? Is there any basis to them? Should I avoid the vaccine? Well, I've been doing some reading, and... well, actually... I think I will skip the vaccine. Have a read of the articles below if you like, or just watch this video (Jane Burgermeister has apparently filed charges against various bigwigs in Austria and elsewhere accusing them of plotting mass murder):



This video describes how mercury (present in some vaccines) damages the brain.



What's in the currently approved vaccines?

The following is an old, old book; how true it is I can't say but the author claims the 1918 flu was spread by the vaccine:

Swine Flu Expose

In Britain, a third of nurses are refusing the jab because they feel it is unsafe.

The vaccine is linked to a killer nerve disease, Guillain-Barre Syndrome.

This is an interesting article about the squalene adjuvant used in the vaccines. If an advert pops up you can still read the article with a bit of careful scrolling...

This article, about how there has been a surge in polio in Nigeria following vaccination against it (i.e., that the vaccine is causing polio), seems to have been deleted from a lot of news services - it was on Yahoo! news, comcast, The Washington Post and many others and is now missing. OK, it is currently here.

An article on why to avoid taking vaccines.

A report of a study showing that flu vaccination increases risk of hospitalisation in children.

It seems that GP's (doctors) are also refusing the vaccine out of safety fears.

A rather rabid and not so well written article about the huge quantity of squalene in the H1N1 vaccine. Worth a look. More detail here and here.

Another article about how dangerous the vaccine may be.

Fears about vaccine dangers.

I'll add some more to this article another time... dinner's nearly ready!

Enlightenment

On my enlightenment page I talk about how to achieve that state. This lecture (1h 40m long) discusses it from the point of view of the way the brain works and I think it provides further insight into the process, and how to achieve it.

Enlightenment, Self and The Brain by Todd Murphy.

World Trade Center Conspiracy Theories

I like to trawl the Internet reading the various conspiracy theories about what's going on in the world, not so much because I believe them necessarily, but because I think it is mind expanding to evaluate different points of view carefully. After all, what if any of it is true?

For a long time now, people have been saying that the World Trade Center 9/11 disaster was sabotage: a set-up; an inside job. Well, that's all very well, and the videos in my previous blog entries show a good deal of circumstantial evidence that is very suggestive and quite convincing in itself, I think, but in the end, I always prefer good old-fashioned hard evidence. Where is that?

Well, guess what? There is hard evidence too. This scientific paper shows conclusively (to my mind) that the twin towers were deliberately blown up:

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

If that's a bit heavy, here's a lay person's explanation (it is still somewhat technical, but well worth reading if you really want to know the truth):

Active Thermitics Made Simple

If you just want a quick summary, this TV interview with one of the scientists involved in the above study is pretty good (it is in Danish but has English subtitles):



And for a second opinion, an architect talks about it too:



One question that gets asked is, why would anyone want to do such a thing deliberately? However, it has to be remembered that a) the biggest profits come from i) drugs (heroin from Afghanistan); ii) oil (from Iraq); and iii) war (such as a never-ending ‘war on terror’, and b) as many as 1 in 20 of the Western population is a psychopath: to them, other people are disposable.

So: it's make your mind up time. There is no doubt in my mind that the above demolition could only have been organised by a government. What do you think? Is the world being run by evil people, or not? And what does it mean for our day-to-day lives? What precautions should we take to ensure our own safety and well-being?

The Century Of The Self

I watched this excellent documentary the other day. It is about how the public are conned by big business into believing that ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’ in the form of free enterprise (business) must go together: we are, it seems, conned into believing that you can't have democracy without free enterprise, when in fact the two have little to do with each other. Also, it shows how we are manipulated into wanting things we don't need so we'll spend our hard-earned money on the products of the rich people's factories. Episode 1 is here; there are four in all on Google Video, each just under an hour long.

The Great Depression Again

Well, it must be pretty clear to everybody now that what I wrote about on my Great Depression page back in 2003 is arriving with a vengeance now, in 2009.

But there's more that I didn't know about then, and it is worth saying. That is, after reading around, and observing the pattern of political pronouncements over some time, I have come to the conclusion that this depression is deliberate. It has been purposefully engineered for a reason.

I used to think that conspiracy theories, whilst amusing, were unrealistic. Surely someone would blow the whistle out of spite, or for money, or some such? But now, I'm not so sure. People who blow whistles can be made to disappear, after all - assuming anyone listens to them, and assuming anyone reports them: and the media do not report them: you have to seek them out.

Firstly: how can a depression be engineered? It is easy, if you are in control of the world's economies (in other words, the banking and political systems). You discard Keynsian economics and adopt that of Friedman and Hayek instead. Market forces are made supreme and deregulation rules. As a result of deregulation, the banks can make dodgy loans. Inevitably, because there is short-term money to be made, they will: history has shown how this works many times in the past - 1929 was only the most recent and it happened in much the same way. Clearly, with the historical record to guide them, people who wanted to engineer this depression could have done so by following the template of history.

OK: perhaps they could have, but did they? And what for anyway?

I think the purpose of it, looking at recent pronouncements after the G20 meeting and otherwise, is to introduce, step by step but nevertheless quite quickly, the "New World Order" described by George Bush Sr in 1991 and others (including Gordon Brown). This appears to involve a single world currency - currently being spoken of as a "supercurrency" or a "new world reserve currency to replace the dollar". So what? Consider the case of the Euro. Europe is in depression now, and Italy is suffering badly - but because its currency is no longer the Lira, they don't have any control over it. They can't devalue it, or take other such measures to boost their economy. Their new currency, the Euro, is in the hands of bankers in Germany. And it doesn't suit them to devalue the Euro. Furthermore, in the new European Constitution, which although voted down by the populace of Europe was implemented anyway as a bunch of separate statutes so that no further consultation with the people was required, it states that these bankers are to determine interest rates and so on without reference to anyone else whatsoever - not to parliament, not to the European Commission (another undemocratic body) - nobody. They will, inevitably, do what suits themselves. And we all know what altruistic people bankers are.

You can be certain that a global currency will be run in the same stupid and undemocratic way. Countries that join such a currency will have lost much of their sovereignty at a stroke. That appears to be part of the purpose of it. Certain people, presumably bankers, want total control of the world. And, not in a democratic way.

Why are our leaders signing over to it - and clearly they've been moving us in this direction for decades? They are bought and paid for. They see themselves as part of this future ruling elite, I think.

Here are a couple of videos to watch. The first is a bit lurid, but it summarises the idea. And as for microchipping the population, well, it could happen. And wouldn't it be interesting if the prophecy in the biblical Book of Revelation about the Mark of the Beast turns out to be correct? How does one survive without being able to buy or sell? Especially in an urban environment. Remember, the prophecy also says that anyone accepting the mark will not be saved. The Beast will rule the world for a short time only, (maybe up to 3.5 years) if that prophecy is correct.

Video: New World Order

The second video is an interview with David Icke. Yes, the madman who thinks the world is ruled by lizards from another dimension. However, lizards or no, the rest of what he says fits the pattern of what is happening today. Trust me - it is worth watching. It is a long video - 2 hours or so.

Video: David Icke Interview

A few more words about the microchipping idea. If every purchase or sale goes through the system - there would be no cash - it can all be taxed. And indeed, the bank could charge, say, a 5% commission on every purchase or sale of even the poorest people. And what if the bankers decide, in their infinite wisdom, to put interest rates up? 10% commission anybody? The only alternative would appear to be (illegal) independent currencies, and barter, and running your own farm (without purchasing fertilizers, tools, seeds, animals, household items, and so on).

I'll think about that and maybe put some more info here if I can come up with any. In the meantime, if you have another two hours to spare (!) this video, Zeitgeist, is also worth watching if you want to see how the conspirators mislead us. If you are not familiar with this information, you may find it shocking and in part, blasphemous - and a bit boring near the beginning, but stick with it, it soon livens up. It covers the 9/11 incident, the banking conspiracy, and more.

Video: Zeitgeist