Featured

Tip - If you are using a phone, set the "Desktop Site" option in your browser

Burning Forests Is Not Green and Never Will Be

Details: Category: Green; Published: 04 October 2022; Hits: 1407

2022-10-04

It always struck me as a daft idea that felling and burning "renewable" forests whilst promising to plant more and more trees wherever there is a "spare" patch of land and paying farmers to grow trees i.p.o. food is good, whilst just burning coal and gas is bad.

Even assuming that you grow as much wood as you burn (highly doubtful - trees take years longer to grow than to burn) you would still get the same amount of CO₂ (or less!) into the atmosphere by not bothering and continuing to burn the coal and gas. Even the pollutant content would be worse from burning wood than from coal and gas.

Why not just burn the coal or gas and keep the existing forests to take up the CO₂? And think of the fuel (and CO₂) that would be saved by not transporting the wood pellets half-way across the world.

OK I simplify, but I'm in the right ball-park. The BBC admits it all:

"The BBC report explains that although burning wood produces more greenhouse gases than burning coal, the electricity is classed as renewable because new trees are planted to replace the old ones and 'these new trees should recapture the carbon emitted by burning wood pellets'. However, 'recapturing' the carbon takes decades"

Only decades? Has anybody done the maths?

So the idea is a non-starter in the first place even on the green advocates' own terms.

And the balance sheet of CO₂ production against absorption is in practice too complex to monitor and thus to control (prove me wrong!).

But of course it's worse ... the rules of the game are being flouted.

"Ecologist Michelle Connolly told Panorama the company was destroying forests that had taken thousands of years to develop"

The Daily Sceptic has the story.

Purge of "Scientific" Papers

Details: Category: Free Citizen; Published: 03 October 2022; Hits: 1225

2022-10-03

Alas, the actual papers are not yet identified, but Wiley is one of the biggest publishers of science in the world.

And we are not talking about the odd paper - we are talking an initial tranch of over 500 papers published in only the last two years. "Tip of the iceberg" comes to mind.

"Further retractions are expected as the investigation proceeds"

All credit to the publishers for (perhaps belatedly) grasping the nettle.

Money talks as they say, and big money rests upon the publication of such papers. And competition is fierce to get one's work published in reputable journals, so admitting that your reputation may not reflect the reality is a huge move.

Let's hope this signals the breaking of the dam.

The Epoch Times has the story.

Hindawi Blog post by Liz Ferguson, Senior Vice President, Research Publishing, Wiley.

Call for a Referendum!

Details: Category: Free Citizen; Published: 01 October 2022; Hits: 1350

2022-10-01

The Covid screws may have been loosened but the same censorship is evident on the Ukraine issue - no viewpoint other than the mainstream Russia Bad / Ukraine Heroic is permitted to be shared around.

Our government has no mandate from the people to sideline negotiations and to continue their proxy war against the Russians.

A referendum to decide the frontier issue was good enough for Scotland and there is no reason that the same is not good enough for the Eastern regions of the Ukraine. We had the chance to cooperate with Russia to negotiate a peace deal on that basis and to act as peacemakers, but Boris chose not to - Putin has now held his own referenda with predictable results.

" ... the dictatorship of the Western elites targets all societies, including the citizens of Western countries themselves. This is a challenge to all. This complete renunciation of what it means to be human, the overthrow of faith and traditional values, and the suppression of freedom are coming to resemble a “religion in reverse"

(read more here)

The UK and Europe as a whole have no causus belli against Russia. This war cannot end well. Indeed the NATO objective seems to be not to win, but to bleed Russia of men and materiel to the point where Russian leadership is discredited and Russia itself dismembered.

That is not a short term prospect - we are looking at the Vietnam war or worse all over again.

It is also a delusion. Russia will send us packing sooner rather than later but the Ukraine will (and NATO countries may) suffer devastation in the process. Gas shortages may be just the foretaste. Putin has no reverse gear. He remembers Stalingrad and he remembers the losses that Russia suffered last time around - he won't tolerate the same again and his call-up of the reserves underlines this.

He has half the world's finance backing him with the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (download), he has the industrial base and he has the fuel to drive it - we have collapsing financial systems, eviscerated industries, unparalleled fuel shortages and "leadership" skilled only in grift self-delusion and incompetence (yes, I'm being charitable here).

NATO can only 'win' this war by going all-out nuclear ...

The Russians have so far been remarkably restrained given that the UK and the US have been the cheerleaders for this proxy war, have provided training for Ukrainian troops, and have sent money and weapons (and no doubt military "advisers") in quantities that have temporarily cost the Russians in men and territory - but the set-backs won't last, nor will Russian patience with the NATO war-machine.

We have had Afghanistan, Irag, Libya, Syria (continuing), Kosovo, Yemen, and the Middle East in general for many years, and with what result?

And now the Ukraine? Where will it end? It's time to call a halt.

Liz Truss has an opportunity to make her own mark as peacemaker - but she will need some encouragement, and only we can provide it ...

We can make a start here - share far and wide.

Mind Your Ps and Qs

Details: Category: Free Citizen; Published: 29 September 2022; Hits: 1769

2022-09-29

This video is not for everyone - for a start it's over three hours long and most of us don't have that sort of spare time unless we really are wanting to know more about the topic.

But it is a presentation by somebody who does claim to have made a considerable study of the subject matter, and I've only really found one other who has done the same.

So which Ps and Qs are we talking about here?

Popcorn and Quavers?

Perceptions and Quandaries?

Presidents and Q(ANONs)?

This is a deep dive indeed - and it's about all of these things (but I don't think it covers the snack versions).

" ... the most sophisticated, widespread, psychological operation movement ever seen"

(Posted January 2021)

(3 hrs 10 mins)

Not Safe - Unprecedented Harms

Details: Category: Free Citizen; Published: 29 September 2022; Hits: 1275

2022-09-29

Oracle Films' documentary on the Covid "vaccine".

And the consequences.

(55 minutes)

Show your appreciation here.

Page 285 of 315