A Place to Stand

Labels: eco-fascism, global warming, Media

Sir Arthur C. Clarke, the science fiction writer, has died aged 90 in his adopted home of Sri Lanka, it was confirmed tonight (March 18th).

The visionary author of more than 70 books, who was nominated for a Nobel Prize after predicting the existence of satellites, was most famous for his short story "The Sentinel", which was expanded into the novel that was later adapted for Stanley Kubrick's film "2001: A Space Odyssey".

He was also credited with inventing the concept of communications satellites in 1945, decades before they became a reality.

Clarke was the last surviving member of what was sometimes known as the "Big Three" of science fiction, alongside Robert A. Heinlein and Isaac Asimov.

He was responsible for the last time I was a religious believer. At about the age of 12 I read his short story The Star which reverses a great Christian myth to show how invalid the premise is. Being a contrary bugger even then I saw that the reverse premise was also unprovable & being rather to young & serious to see that Arthur wasn't insisting on the literal truth of the story either I immediately decided that a belief in the wonder of God was an equally good explanation. This lasted for all of 20 minutes.

Some of his predictions. Most of them either haven't happened or don't seem likely to. That doesn't mean he was wrong - in many of the cases it is clear reality has got it wrong & we could have done it:

2001 Jan. 1 The next millennium and century begin.

- Cassini spaceprobe (launched October 1997; arrives Saturn July
2000) begins exploration of the planet's moons and rings.

- Galileo probe (launched October 1989) continues surveying Jupiter
and its moons. Life beneath the ice-covered oceans of Europa
appears increasingly likely.

2002 The first commercial device producing clean, safe power by
low-temperature nuclear reactions goes on the market, heralding
the end of the Fossil-Fuel Age. Economic and geopolitical
earthquakes follow, and, for their discovery of so-called "Cold
Fusion" in 1989, Pons and Fleischmann receive the Nobel Prize for
Physics. P & F have clearly got some results though it may not actually be fusion, the shameful thing is that the effort has not been put into finding out

2003 The motor industry is given five years to replace all fuel-burning
engines by the new energy device.

- NASA's robot Mars Surveyor (carrying Lander and Rover) is
launched.

2004 The first (publicly admitted) human clone.

2005 The first sample launched back to Earth by Mars Surveyor.

- The Dalai Lama returns to Tibet.

2006 The world's last coal mine closed in India. the "environmentalist" Luddites have stopped this but the world could now be running on nuclear power

2007 NASA's Next Generation Space Telescope (successor to the Hubble)
launched.

- President Chandrika Kumaratunga gets the Nobel Prize for
restoring peace to Sri Lanka.

2008 On what would have been his 80th birthday, July 26, the film
director Stanley Kubrick, who made 2001: A Space Odyssey,
posthumously receives a special Oscar for Lifetime Achievement.

2009 A city in North Korea is devastated by the accidental explosion
of an A-bomb. After a brief debate in the U.N., all nuclear
weapons are destroyed.

2010 The first Quantum Generators (tapping space energy) are
developed. Available in portable and household units from a few
kilowatts upward, they can produce electricity indefinitely.
Central power stations close down; the age of pylons ends as grid
systems are dismantled. Cold fusion

- In spite of protests against "Big Brother" government, electronic
monitoring virtually removes professional criminals from society. Since Britain has the world's largest number of CCTV cameras & a lot of crime it seems there are enough amateurs to go round

2012 Aerospace-planes enter service. The history of space travel has
repeated that of aeronautics, although more slowly, because the
technical problems are so much greater. From Yuri Gagarin to
commercial space flight has taken twice as long as from the
Wright Brothers to the DC-3.

2014 Construction of Hilton Orbiter Hotel begins, by assembling and
converting the giant Shuttle tanks which had previously been
allowed to fall back to Earth.

2016 All existing currencies are abolished. The megawatt-hour becomes
the unit of exchange.

2017 December 16. On his 100th birthday, Sir Arthur Clarke is one of
the first guests in the Hilton Orbiter.

- China holds the first nationwide popular elections to its
parliament.

2020 Artificial Intelligence (AI) reaches the human level. From now
onward there are two intelligent species on Planet Earth, one
evolving far more rapidly than biology would ever permit.
Interstellar probes carrying AIs are launched toward the nearer
stars.

2021 The first humans land on Mars, and have some unpleasant
surprises.

2036 China overtakes the U.S. in gross national product to become the
world's largest economy.

2045 The totally self-contained, recycling, mobile home (envisaged
almost a century earlier by Buckminster Fuller) is perfected. Any
additional carbon needed for food synthesis is obtained by
extracting carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

2047 Hong Kong celebrates its 50th year as an SAR by completely
eliminating border controls and barriers between itself and the
rest of China.

2051 Ground is broken on the moon for self-sustaining, robotized
colonies, where the elderly will survive longer, thanks to the
low lunar gravity.

2057 October 4. Centennial of Sputnik 1. The dawn of the space age is
celebrated by humans not only on Earth, but on the Moon, Mars,
Europa, Ganymede and Titan - and in orbit round Venus, Neptune
and Pluto.

2090 Large-scale burning of fossil fuels is resumed to replace the
carbon dioxide "mined" from the air and postpone the next Ice Age
by promoting global warming.


Copyright Arthur C. Clarke 1999

Labels: conspiracies, EU, Government parasitism

In a decision which makes the previous decision to award the Nobel Peace Prize to Henry Kissenger look honourable, the committee have made a corrupt decision which must have Alfred Nobel spinning in his grave, awarding it jointly to Gore & the IPCC.

Meanwhile quite coincidentally our court has decided that his film has a number of not remotely truthful statements in it:

The decision by the government to distribute Al Gore's film An Inconvenient Truth has been the subject of a legal action ... the Court found that the film was misleading in 11 respects and that the Guidance Notes drafted by the Education Secretary’s advisers served only to exacerbate the political propaganda in the film.

The inaccuracies are:

The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government’s expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.

The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found that the film was misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.

The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that it was “not possible” to attribute one-off events to global warming.
The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government’s expert had to accept that this was not the case.
The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant’s evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. In fact the evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.

This internal memo from the BBC, published by CCNet, explains how the BBC is going to spin it

From Roger Harrabin
BBC Environment Analyst

In any future reporting of Gore we should be careful not to suggest that
the High Court says Gore was wrong on climate.......

We might say something like: "Al Gore whose film was judged by the High
Court to have used some debatable science" or "Al Gore whose film was
judged in the High Court to be controversial in parts".

The key is to avoid suggesting that the judge disagreed with the main
climate change thesis.

I like the use of the word "debatable" to mean "clearly untrue". The suggestion that the BBC is anything other than a wholly corrupt state propaganda organisation deliberately spinning the facts is debatable - but the evidence absolutely shows that that is what it is.

As I was writing this the radio reported the court decision getting a soundbite from Greenpeace & not from the winner of the case.

Meanwhile, in a news item entirely censored by the BBC, ITV etc Stephen McIntyre, who disproved the Hockey stick graph has gone on to disprove the US figures purporting to show, as proof of at least some trend of warming, that 1998 was the warmest year for thousands of years up till then. It turns out that it was the warmest only for the last 64. While theoretically this doesn't affect figures outside the US in practice US records are far better kept over a wider area & longer period than anywhere else & it would not be credible to pretend the US alone was bucking the global trend.

Steve McIntyre, the Canadian statistician who helped to expose massive holes in Michael Mann's hockey stick methodology, looked into it. After some poking around, he began to suspect that the GISS data base had a year 2000 bug in one of their data adjustments.

One of the interesting aspects of these temperature data bases is that they do not just use the raw temperature measurements from each station. Both the NOAA (which maintains the USHCN stations) and the GISS apply many layers of adjustments, which I discussed here. One of the purposes of Watt's project is to help educate climate scientists that many of the adjustments they make to the data back in the office does not necessarily represent the true condition of the temperature stations. In particular, GISS adjustments imply instrument sitings are in more natural settings than they were in say 1905, an outrageous assumption on its face that is totally in conflict to the condition of the stations in Watt's data base. Basically, surface temperature measurements have a low signal to noise ratio, and climate scientists have been overly casual about how they try to tease out the signal.

Anyway, McIntyre suspected that one of these adjustments had a bug, and had had this bug for years. Unfortunately, it was hard to prove. Why? Well, that highlights one of the great travesties of climate science. Government scientists using taxpayer money to develop the GISS temperature data base at taxpayer expense refuse to publicly release their temperature adjustment algorithms or software (In much the same way Michael Mann refused to release the details for scrutiny of his methodology behind the hockey stick). Using the data, though, McIntyre made a compelling case that the GISS data base had systematic discontinuities that bore all the hallmarks of a software bug.

Today, the GISS admitted that McIntyre was correct, and has started to republish its data with the bug fixed. And the numbers are changing a lot. Before today, GISS would have said 1998 was the hottest year on record (Mann, remember, said with up to 99% certainty it was the hottest year in 1000 years) and that 2006 was the second hottest. Well, no more. Here are the new rankings for the 10 hottest years in the US, starting with #1:

1934, 1998, 1921, 2006, 1931, 1999, 1953, 1990, 1938, 1939

This actually came about over 2 months ago. Consider the amount of coverage the media give to retread stories where Madonna, Sir David King or others of similar eminence make a remark about warming, or some minor researcher claims some unverified new scare. It is clear that this, which destroys the entire thesis that unprecedented, let alone catastrophic, warming is even taking place is being deliberately censored.

On a previous occasion I lietsecNroman Volrlaug as pretty much the one deserved winner of the Nobel Peace Prize.

1970
NORMAN BORLAUG , Led research at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, Mexico City. Major figure in the real Green revolution (ie increasing agricultural yields. Not a politician & the most worthy recipient. GRAND Mughal Akbar once remarked he would venerate the person who could grow two blades of grass where one grew previously - this scientist qualifies.

From Reason magazine

Norman Borlaug, the man who saved more human lives than anyone else in history, has died at age 95. Borlaug was the Father of the Green Revolution, the dramatic improvement in agricultural productivity that swept the globe in the 1960s...

Borlaug grew up on a small farm in Iowa and graduated from the University of Minnesota, where he studied forestry and plant pathology, in the 1930s. In 1944, the Rockefeller Foundation invited him to work on a project to boost wheat production in Mexico. At the time Mexico was importing a good share of its grain. Borlaug and his staff in Mexico spent nearly 20 years breeding the high-yield dwarf wheat that sparked the Green Revolution, the transformation that forestalled the mass starvation predicted by neo-Malthusians.

In the late 1960s, most experts were speaking of imminent global famines in which billions would perish. "The battle to feed all of humanity is over," biologist Paul Ehrlich famously wrote in his 1968 bestseller The Population Bomb. "In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now." Ehrlich also said, "I have yet to meet anyone familiar with the situation who thinks India will be self-sufficient in food by 1971." He insisted that "India couldn't possibly feed two hundred million more people by 1980."

But Borlaug and his team were already engaged in the kind of crash program that Ehrlich declared wouldn't work. Their dwarf wheat varieties resisted a wide spectrum of plant pests and diseases and produced two to three times more grain than the traditional varieties. In 1965, they had begun a massive campaign to ship the miracle wheat to Pakistan and India and teach local farmers how to cultivate it properly. By 1968, when Ehrlich's book appeared, the U.S. Agency for International Development had already hailed Borlaug's achievement as a "Green Revolution."

Unlike today's "Green" doomsayers Borlaug devoted his life to the Green Revolution - the creation of new varieties of crops. Even if the statement that he "saved a billion lives" is somewhat exaggerated he is one of the few Nobel Peace Prize winners who stands tall compared to winners of the non-political prizes.

Labels: International politics

This was sent to the Herald & the Daily Record & published by the Record on Wednesday

The Chinese recently surfaced an undetected submarine in the middle of a US carrier group thereby "accidentally" proving that carriers can be sunk almost at will. There are other weapons systems that make carriers obsolete. If the real purpose of spending £5 billion on them is to save 4,000 jobs, as the statements of Scottish politicians would indicate, we could save far more, across all of Scotland, by accepting the cancellation & seeking a few hundred million extra regional aid as compensation.

Spiked does a lot of interesting articles. They, in a previous incarnation did the article revealing that IRN had faked, allegedly accidentally, their Bosnian "Concentration Camp" Video which ITN successfully sued them for - the court finding that what they had said was "essentially true" & thus found against them. They did not appeal but were not bankrupted & the assumption must be that an agreement was readied whereby they would not have to pay but would agree to steer clear of the subject in future.

There was a recent article, by a Swede, on objections to a "right winger" getting a Nobel for Literature & pointing out a number of artists who have supported dubious left wingers. Among them was the mention of Harold Pinter supporting Milosevic. So i sent in this - it is a bit ranty & unpolished because I, considering what I have just said, I didn't expect to see it published & was agreeably surprised when it was.

Norberg writes that Harold Pinter supported Slobodan Milošević. This is a curious one seeing as the allegation in Norberg’s article is that Vargas Llosa’s leftie critics have not objected to extreme left wingers winning the Nobel Prize. But unless the entire British media are wholly and completely corrupt, Milošević was so extremely right wing that he was described by the press as ‘another Hitler’.

Of course there is no actual evidence of that, nor of Milošević being an extreme leftist – perhaps he was simply a national leader from a socialist party with such a liberal nature that he went to great lengths to placate terrorist organisations openly committed to genocide (the KLA, Croatian ex-Nazis, Bosnian Muslim ex-Nazis, NATO, Germany, the Vatican the US and UK governments etc).

Is it contended here that Pinter is open to criticism because he supported a left winger or because he supported a right winger? If so, why not include the entire run of media celebrities who went round to Downing Street for drinks whenever Tony Blair, a man who is by the standards used at Nuremberg a war criminal and practitioner of racial genocide, called. By any objective standards they supported someone far worse than Milošević.

That I both support our own country having a credible defence & oppose using it to commit war crimes may make it difficult to pigeonhole me in the current political system. That is because i am a traditional liberal - a theory so successful that most parties want to claim the title despite the fact that none of them are entitled to it.

Labels: British politics, letters, Yugoslavia

Labels: global warming, letters, Science/technology

Steve McIntyre - not somebody who poses for photos

Once again Steve McIntyre has proven a crucial part of the global warming swindle to be without factual merit. In this case he has proven statistically that Michael Mann, in producing his Hockey Stick theory has deliberately faked his most basic evidence.

After 10 years of data being withheld that would allow true scientific replication, and after dozens of requests for that data, Steve McIntyre of Climate Audit finally was given access to the data from Yamal Peninsula, Russia. He discovered that only 12 trees had been used out of a much larger dataset of tree ring data. When the larger data set was plotted, there is no “hockey stick” of temperature, in fact it goes in the opposite direction. Get your primer here.

Since all 12 trees were very much at variance with the average readings from that group it is just statistically impossible that Mann selected all 12 at random. Therefore it is fraud. These particular tree rings were the evidence on which the entire Hockey Stick theory, that we had flat temperatures for the previous, originally, 1,500 years & an unprecedented sharp rise this century. This is effectively the entire "global warming"/""climate change"/"dangerous climate change" case.

McIntyre has previously found that the Britain's Climate Research Unit, charged with collating world climate records, whereby official records allegedly show warming this century had "lost" all their original data. This excuse after their chief had said "Why should I make the data available to you when you are going to try to find something wrong with it". Even if it were true that "the dog ate the homework" that remark alone proves the CRU is a corrupt propaganda organisation not a scientific one.

Previous to that he found a somewhat different group of scientists had fabricated data purporting to show Antarctic ice melting.

Previous to that he obtained the US official climate records, found they were deeply flawed, stations being moved or built over & no corrections made and that in fact the claim that 1998 had been the warmest year there was false & it was actually 1933.

Previous to that it was he who analysed the algorithms in Mann's Hockey Stick computer programme which magnified the tree ring data & was should would magnify almost any set of data to produce his Hockey Stick graph. Scandalously Nature refused to publish his paper, while publishing attacks, mainly of an ad hominum nature, on him.

The degree of praise Stephen McIntyre is due can hardly be understated. He should be the 2nd person, after Marie Curie, to get a Nobel Prize & bar for mathematically dissecting this (technically this shouldn't be as difficult as most Nobel winning stuff but no better mathematician did it) & the Peace Prize, if that has not been rendered worthless by Al Gore.

This final nail in the coffin of "climate change" obviously is by definition more important than all the false stories & "studies" alleging that warming "may" be worse than previously thought. It proves that ALL the members of an entire allegedly scientific discipline have been either engaged in deliberate fraud or have been hoodwinked by colleagues because they failed to show basic scientific scepticism or make the sort of investigation government was, officially, paying them for.

As such it has, naturally been front page news in every single remotely honest newspaper in the western world (so that would be not one in Britain then); every journalist who has appeared to endorse warming & is not a wholly corrupt whore willing to tell any lie to promote modern big government fascist fear mongering (at time of writing that is 1, worldwide, in Australia); & of course the whole GW scam is now being denounced by every single politician who is sane & not a wholly corrupt, lying, thief intent on establishing fascism through fear such as.

In my increasing opinion that 99% of all government is parasitic & corrupt (& failure to find counter examples) I should point out that while billions have been poured into doing "climate science" from government none of it could find out the basic facts & it depended on Stephen McIntyre, who funds himself, to prove it. Nor is this unique.

UPDATE I have received this email:

Please note: Steve McIntyre's post concerns work by climate scientist Keith Briffa and not Michael Mann. You will probably wish to correct your post.
Cheers
Avisame

My understanding is that while Briffa did the tree ring measurement, Mann, in his paper, chose to choose 12 atypical tree rings out of at least 34 to fabricate the global warming trend. My assumption is that Mann is responsible for fabrications in his own paper & that this is a damage limitation exercise. I am open to correction on this & indeed have emailed Professor Briffa to see.

UPDATER My email has surfaced within the leaked emails. This is the reply they decided not to send which is wise since it is both a simple piece of fluff which makes no specific answer & as events have shown, untrue.

If we are to respond, it would be to indicate that there are multiple sources of supporting
evidence and that we continue to place our confidence in the international scientific
assessment process. This confidence has proven to be well placed.
Roger

Labels: Fear, global warming, Government parasitism

Labels: Fear, nuclear, Science/technology

Labels: BBC, British politics, Media

Neil Clark has a good post on Martti Ahtisaari's receipt of the Nobel Peace Prize. He considers him unfit for being considered a peacemaker because during the negotiations over ending the Kosovo war he threatened the Serbs that “Belgrade will be like this table. We will immediately begin carpet-bombing Belgrade.” Repeating the gesture of sweeping the table, Ahtisaari threatened, “This is what we will do to Belgrade.” A moment of silence passed, and then he added, “There will be half a million dead within a week.” . Of course it could have been argued that he was overstating the genocidal ambitions of western leaders. Or at least it could until he won the prize, awarded by Norway's politicians in a way that clearly always has the approval of western politicians, since had he not been speaking for them he clearly wouldn't have got the gong.

On the other hand looking through past winners it seems that he is very much in accord with many previous recipients:

2007
INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE (IPCC) and AL GORE for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.
The IPCC are a political organisation pushing the warming scam to make the world's populations more manageable. Gore's film & most of what he says has been proven to a deliberate pack of lies.

2006
MUHAMMAD YUNUS and GRAMEEN BANK for their efforts to create economic and social development from below. Runs a grassroots bank which actually only survives because of western "aid". Very politically correct, of more marginal usefulness.

2005
INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY and MOHAMED ELBARADEI Political agency & its Director which has, at least, not encouraged the use of commercial nuclear power & promotes the fear inducing LNT theory of radiation damage when all the scientific evidence is for the hormesis theory, that minute levels of radiation are actually beneficial.


2004
WANGARI MAATHAI
For planting trees in Africa - this may have done some good though it is hardly heroic

2003
SHIRIN EBADI
Iranian ex-judge & government opponent. May indeed be on the side of justice but definitely a foe of America's chosen enemy "rogue state".

2002
JIMMY CARTER JR.,former President of the United States of America,

2001
UNITED NATIONS, New York, NY, USA KOFI ANNAN, United Nations Secretary General In effect a New World Order controlled organisation which provides a pretext for western interventions. Annan became boss because the US was so impressed by the way he lied & twisted to help the NATO/Nazi cause in Bosnia & Hercegovina.

2000
KIM DAE JUNG Former South Korean President. Did come to power by opposing the previous dictatorship & despite western approval probably a worthy candidate.

1999
DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS (MÉDECINS SANS FRONTIÈRES) As proven by Bernard Kouchner's lies & assistance to the Bosnian Moslem ex-Nazi leader this is a nominally charitable body but actually a Nazi & NATO propaganda organisation actively involved in promoting NATO imperialism & genocide


1998
JOHN HUME and DAVID TRIMBLE for their efforts to find a peaceful solution to the conflict in Northern Ireland. Obviously assisting British wishes in Northern Ireland but nonetheless worthy. On the other hand their electors didn't think so & got rid of both of them & both of their parties.

1997
INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO BAN LANDMINES (ICBL) and JODY WILLIAMS for their work for the banning and clearing of anti-personnel mines. Worthy winner, not least because this campaign, while becoming politically sexy enough to attract Princess Di, was actually opposed by the western military who don't like having their toys taken away.

1996
CARLOS FELIPE XIMENES BELO and JOSE RAMOS-HORTA for their work towards a just and peaceful solution to the conflict in East Timor. Yes - the western powers initially happy to have the somewhat leftist Timorese regime exterminated by Indonesia were, half a million deaths later, shamed into supporting independence.

1995
JOSEPH ROTBLAT and to the PUGWASH CONFERENCES ON SCIENCE AND WORLD AFFAIRS for their efforts to diminish the part played by nuclear arms in international politics and in the longer run to eliminate such arms. Worthy though their effectiveness may be questioned.


1994
YASSER ARAFAT , Chairman of the Executive Committee of the PLO, President of the Palestinian National Authority.
SHIMON PERES , Foreign Minister of Israel.
YITZHAK RABIN , Prime Minister of Israel.
No comment needed

1993
NELSON MANDELA Leader of the ANC.
FREDRIK WILLEM DE KLERK President of the Republic of South Africa
Like the Northern Ireland one - for reducing the embarrassment of western leaders.

1992
RIGOBERTA MENCHU TUM, Guatemala. Campaigner for human rights, especially for indigenous peoples. A worthy winner & almost alone in not supporting what western governments wanted done.

1991
AUNG SAN SUU KYI, Burma. Oppositional leader, human rights advocate. Worthy

1990
MIKHAIL SERGEYEVICH GORBACHEV , President of the USSR, helped to bring the Cold War to an end. Worthy in the same way that Trimble & Hume were & like them repudiated by his own people. Still they did give it to him but not to Reagan as well which is something. How much he was the actor & how much merely the guy in place when an inevitable collapse came may be debated.

1989
THE 14TH DALAI LAMA (TENZIN GYATSO) , Feudal overlord who kept serf in Tibet. When the Chinese displaced him he reinvented himself as both a western front man & religious icon for westerners bored with traditional religion.

1988
THE UNITED NATIONS PEACE-KEEPING FORCES New York, NY, U.S.A. There is no such force. There is a UN flag used as a flag of convenience by western or western supported forces from Korea to Kosovo.

1987
OSCAR ARIAS SANCHEZ , Costa Rica, President of Costa Rica, initiator of peace negotiations in Central America. Probably worthy.

k1986
ELIE WIESEL , U.S.A., Chairman of 'The President's Commission on the Holocaust'. Author, humanitarian. Wrote a book on the Holocaust which became Oprah's book club selection. Seems a decent guy despite the adulation. The President's Commission seems to be the result not the cause of his importance & it is interesting that the prize committee chose to single it out.

1985
INTERNATIONAL PHYSICIANS FOR THE PREVENTION OF NUCLEAR WAR Boston, MA, U.S.A.
Who can be against preventing nuclear war. Everybody knows doctors are respectable folk which is why Bin Men Against Genocide never won.

1984
DESMOND MPILO TUTU , South Africa, Bishop of Johannesburg, former Secretary General South African Council of Churches (S.A.C.C.). for his work against apartheid. Bishops are respectable folk too.

1983
LECH WALESA , Poland. Founder of Solidarity, campaigner for human rights. Not the saint he was portrayed as when he was so very useful to NATO but nonetheless the cause was just.

1982
The prize was awarded jointly to:
ALVA MYRDAL , former Cabinet Minister, diplomat, delegate to United Nations General Assembly on Disarmament, writer.
ALFONSO GARC�A ROBLES , diplomat, delegate to the United Nations General Assembly on Disarmament, former Secretary for Foreign Affairs . 2 diplomats

1981
OFFICE OF THE UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR REFUGEES Geneva, Switzerland. The UN again

1980
ADOLFO PEREZ ESQUIVEL , Argentina, architect, sculptor and human rights leader. Worthy

1979
MOTHER TERESA , India, Leader of the Order of the Missionaries of Charity. On the one hand clearly a saintly woman on the other hand whether, with her active opposition to birth control, she actually did more harm or good in India is questionable.

1978
The prize was divided equally between:
MOHAMED ANWAR AL-SADAT , President of the Arab Republic of Egypt.
MENACHEM BEGIN , Prime Minister of Israel.
for jointly negotiating peace between Egypt and Israel.
I'd forgotten that Beguin, who was undeniably a terrorist leader before the founding of Israel had got it twice.

1977
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL London, Great Britain. A worldwide organization for the protection of the rights of prisoners of conscience. Who publicised every lie told by NATO/the KLA/the ex-Nazi Bosnian Moslems etc to promote their genocidal wars. Generally to be found pushing any human rights story against people the New World Order want to bomb. To be fair they did, quietly, release a report about kidnapping & selling women in Kosovo.

1976
BETTY WILLIAMS and MAIREAD CORRIGAN Founders of the Northern Ireland Peace Movement (later renamed Community of Peace People). As with Trimble & Hume they did good.

1975
ANDREI DMITRIEVICH SAKHAROV , Soviet nuclear physicist. Campaigner for human rights. Another western favourite. Only inventor of the Hydrogen Bomb to get a Nobel Peace Prize.

1974
The prize was divided equally between:
E�N MAC BRIDE , President of the International Peace Bureau, Geneva, and the Commission of Namibia, United Nations, New York.
EISAKU SATO , Prime Minister of Japan. Diplomats

1973
The prize was awarded jointly to:
HENRY A. KISSINGER , Secretary of State, State Department, Washington.
LE DUC THO , Democratic Republic of Viet Nam. (Declined the prize.)
for jointly negotiating the Vietnam peace accord in 1973.
No further comment necessary

1972
The prize money for 1972 was allocated to the Main Fund.

1971
WILLY BRANDT , Federal Republic of Germany, Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, initiator of West Germany's Ostpolitik, embodying a new attitude towards Eastern Europe and East Germany. Western diplomat whose Ostpolitik did defuse tensions. A major statesman & worthy.

1970
NORMAN BORLAUG , Led research at the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center, Mexico City. Major figure in the real Green revolution (ie increasing agricultural yields. Not a politician & the most worthy recipient. GRAND Mughal Akbar once remarked he would venerate the person who could grow two blades of grass where one grew previously - this scientist qualifies.

1969
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANIZATION (I.L.O.) Geneva. Another UN agency

1968
REN� CASSIN , President of the European Court for Human Rights . We have seen recently how corrupt western controlled international "courts" can be.

The difference between what political lobbying achieves & what real evidence & achievement based science does is plain. The "Peace" prize should be ended since it denigrates the real Nobels.

Trinity A-Bomb test 1946

Among the various bits of evidence against the LNT theory (that radiation is dangerous even at low levels) & for radiation hormesis (that it is beneficial even as high as 260 mSv - 17 times the official unsafe level) was this:

In 1964, the cows exposed to about 150 rads after the Trinity A-Bomb in 1946 were quietly euthanized because of extreme old age.

Destroying data & scientific evidence is the 2nd worst crime in science, the worst being total fabrication. I thought this deserved deeper coverage.

I couldn't find anything new about the euthanizing but did find this pdf (p 29) from the report on Trinity

cattle that grazed on Chupadera mesa suffered local beta burns and temporary loss of dorsal hair (Hempelmann 1947, Hacker 1987, Stannard 1988). Patches of hair grew back discoloured. The army bought in 75 head of cattle from all ranchers, the 17 most significantly marked were kept at Los Alamos, while the rest were shipped to Oak Ridge for long term observation. It was estimated that the doses required to produce such effects were between 4,000 & 50,000 R, most likely around 20,000 R (Hacker 1987)

That must be it. This (page 4) refers to the EPA having maintained a cattle testing station at Oak Ridge since 1964 which I presume means they have taken over the military facilities once they had disposed of the evidence. Los Alamos also still have a facility which has been used for forensic tests on cattle mutilations.

By the somewhat varied units used to measure radioactivity 1 R seems to match 100,000 millisieverts so 20,000 R means 2 billion mSv!! This does not match the 150 rads mentioned, which would be a slightly more credible 15 million mSv & I suspect I am misunderstanding the units involved.

So we are talking about a herd in 1946 of between 75 & 58 cattle at Oak Ridge, depending on what happened to those at Los Alamos. That is a statistically significant number. We don't know how many were still alive in 1964 but if it was described as a herd being put down there must have been a fair number. The animals were a random selection from the cattle of a number of ranchers - the only obvious selection criteria being that they were the ones most effected or expected to be. That means their ages in 1964 should run from 0 to 7 years. Older than that they are no longer commercial & get sold. So in 1964 they were aged between 18 & 25. How "extreme" is that for well cared for cattle?

This chart provides the expected maximum life span for a variety of animals in years. Many of the values are based on record life spans taken from various sources.

Cow - 22

So when these cows were put down several of them would have passed the maximum longevity for cattle. Even if an assumption was made that none of those which had been adults in 1946 were more than 3 or 4 years old they would still be about to make records. If one assumes the LNT theory was being heavily pushed by government as the official truth one can see why they had to be disposed of. Because this is virtually irrefutable evidence of radiation hormesis & of it occurring even at high levels of radioactivity.

I regard the destruction of these animals not only as a crime against science but a crime against humanity since it has prevented study of a phenomenon that if made use of, over the last 46 years, could not have failed to extend many millions of lives.

My guess is that although the experiment was destroyed the files & results for the preceding 18 years could not have been since that would have made it blatantly clear what was being done & why. These records probably still exist filed in some warehouse beside the Lost Ark.

If so, bearing in mind how much easier it is to use data nowadays with personal computers available & that more information must have been collated about ordinary cattle providing control group statistics, it is possible, just from the measurements & death records left, to make a good calculation of the statistical effect of hormesis on longevity in large mammals. If so there is a PhD or perhaps even Nobel for some American who uses their Freedom of Information Act to get the data & use it.

A further thought occurs - did these animals have calves (it seems likely that at least in the early years when mutations were expected this would have been encouraged)? If so what happened to them?

Labels: eco-fascism, Hormesis, Science/technology

It is regretable how many times newspapers not only publish letters which are untruthful but much more importantly censor anything which rebuts by pointing out the facts. Stuff about Yugoslavia, of course, continues to be censored.

15/12/9 to the Telegraph - wrong to say nuclear power is not far cheaper

Dr Wolff is wrong (letter Tues) is wrong to say nuclear power is not far cheaper than what we have now. Despite reports written by opponents & quoted to each other ad nauseam the fact is that Franc's electricity, 85% of which is nuclear, is as low as 1/4 of our price & they happily & profitably sell to all their neighbours. Anyone can say A costs less than B but finding B on sale at a lower price trumps all the spin.

French nuclear is costed at 1.7P a unit & that is using last generation's equipment. If it were done here without unnecesarily expensive regulation a new generation of plants need not be in any way more expensive.

14/12 Herald - no actual evidence whatsoever for catastrophic global warming

Your lead letter today from Dr Richard Dixon (letters Monday) of WWF give a lengthy case for increasing the £500 million a day the world currently spends on the Kyoto process.

However the fact is that there is no actual evidence whatsoever for catastrophic global warming (computers models are a dubious theory not evidence). Moreover we now see concrete evidence of "juggling the figures" to "hide the decline" in temperature by the government funded CRU (£13.7 million to Professor Jones alone. Government here & abroad has poured 10s of billions into "research" trying to justify the trillions cost of extra regulations & taxes on us to stop nature. They have spent at least as much on advertising, including cartoons of crying bunny rabbits to promote this false fear hysteria.

Readers may also be interested to know that WWF also receives substantial amounts of money from government.

In light of the claims there is a "scientific consensus" on this despite 10s of thousands of real scientists signing petitions against this I have repeatedly asked politicians & lobbyists to name 2 real scientists, not funded by government or lobbyists, who say we are suffering catastrophic warming & are not funded by government or lobbyists but without success. Perhaps Dr Dixon can help?

12/12 Telegraph - is Sir Brian Hoskins actually saying he sees catastrophic warming?

Though it gives a fearsome impression I am not sure whether Sir Brian Hoskins is actually saying whether he sees catastrophic global warming or not. He says he believes the world is warming but, even if it were true & the net cooling over recent years were not to count, this is of little effect unless we are agreed on how much CO2 is warming the planet. Best calculations put it at about an extra 0.3 C if CO2 doubles. Since, as recent Greenland ice core measurements have also confirmed, the Medieval warming was a full degree warmer than currently that is hardly grounds for panic. Sir Brian does mention that a 4 degree warming would mean 30% more rainfall but doesn't say if he is predicting this, let alone if there is any evidence to do so. Incidentally 4 C warmer is what we had during the Climate Optimum of 9,000-5,000 BC & that increased rainfall may explain why hippopotamuses could live in the middle of what is now the Sahara. It is questionable how bad that was. He, quite properly, says recent floods are not linked to climate change even though the BBC, in years of flooding, have said it is, while in the year of drought said climate change would cause drought.

His conclusion "The impacts of climate change go far wider than coral reefs, however important they are" is probably not something the most sceptical could disagree with but surely, before we are asked to make war on fire to the extent of destroying anything up to 80% of our power generating & therefore economic capacity we ought to be very sure indeed that it is to stop something more certain & serious than that. For catastrophic warming to be true surely we should have credible promises of something catastrophic.

7/12 Scotsman - Simply untrue that the emails only leaked a week ago

John Webster (letter Monday) says that the fact that the news of the leaked "climategate" emails & orther documentation only came out a week before the Copenhagen meeting proves they must be disinformation. In fact I first blogged on it on 21st november when it was starting to become massive news on the blogsphere. This gave Professor Jones & co ample time to cry fake & the best they have done is saying that using a "trick to hide the decline" of global temperature merely meant he had done something clever. In fact the news has been around long enough for investigators to have shown there was nothing particularly clever or spohisticated in their data use, merely fraudulent. If the British media have taken a very long time to manage even the minimal reporting this has received, bearing in mind that in proving catastrophic global warming a sham it is as important as all the alarmist stories produced over the years put together, this failure can hardly be blamed on the sceptics.

28/11 Everybody - I swear I pulled every trick out of my sleeve trying to milk something

For years we have been told that there was a "consensus" on global warming. We see from the leaked email scandal that "climate scientists" have conspired to prevent publication of sceptical research, even to getting editors fired to pervert the "peer review" system. This is not how real science is done. It has also been known that the largest single expression of scientific opinion, the widely unreported petition of over 31,000 scientists, says that not only is there no catastrophic warming but that increasing CO2 is BENEFICIAL, because CO2 helps crops grow. It has long been obvious that a disproportionate number of scientists putting their heads above the parapet against warming were emeritus (retired) professors which raises questions answered by Dr Joanne Simpson (1st female President of the American Meteorological Society & has one of NASA's Cray supercomputers named after her) when she said on retiral “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receive any funding, I can speak quite frankly" & proceeded to demolish the alarmist case.

I have asked on a number of alarmist websites if it is possible to name 2 scientists not paid, directly or indirectly, by government or the likes of Greenpeace who actually say that catastrophic warming is real. So far none of them have produced even a single name so I appeal through your pages to see if anybody can. It is time to have an open & public enquiry, as with Iraq, taking evidence under oath to investigate all aspects of this campaign.

18/11 Herald - "As a young graduate engineer"

Duncan McLaren Chief executive of Friends of the Earth showed his credentials to claim impartiality in his opposition to nuclear power by saying "As a young graduate engineer, I believed in the technology" (letter 11th Nov). According to his entry on the FoE website he got an MBA in Business Administration in 2002 & became Chief Executive, Friends of the Earth Scotland in May 2003 http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/duncan-mclaren/4/808/882 . Unless he completed that engineering degree in a few months rather than years, which would be a spectacular achievement it seems the "environmentalist" movement has, yet again, made personal statements apparently irreconcilable with the facts in the same way they continuously make scientific & numerical claims that cannot be reconciled with truth in these areas.

Indeed in the same letter McLaren asserts that, even after we lose half our electricity capacity over the next few years we will still run no risk of blackouts & even be able to export some of the little remaining. There seems to be no way to reconcile this claim with the rules of arithmetic.

18/11 Times - MP's duty to push warming alarmism?

Bob Ward signs himself as being an employee of a government funded climate alarmist organisation. By doing so he entirely disproves his own thesis that "newspapers and broadcasters give disproportionately wide coverage to so-called “sceptics” who peddle inaccurate and misleading information." In fact coverage is overwhelmingly given to alarmists. Even the BBC, legally required to show balance, admits (Newsnight editor) that they deliberately do not show "due scepticism & balance" about catastrophic global warming scares. A balanced report would at least give equal mention to the fact that the globe is now cooling. As regards inaccurate & misleading information may I point him to the video of the alarmist guru Al Gore claiming that the Earth's temperature 2 km down is "millions of degrees" (it is actually well under 100 C).

In his letter Mr Ward makes no attempt to produce any evidence that such catastrophic warming is on the horizon merely asserting it. Nor did this government funded PR flack attempt to do so when he recently lectured Douglas Carswell MP on his blog that it was his duty to support warming alarmism.

While there may be a consensus among politicians & PR people that we are suffering catastrophic warming that is not the case among scientists. Indeed there is barely a scientist, not funded by government who claims it. On the other hand Nobel prizewinning scientist Kary Mullis says "“Global warmers predict that global warming is coming, and our emissions are to blame. They do that to keep us worried about our role in the whole thing. If we aren't worried and guilty, we might not pay their salaries. It's that simple” so perhaps less unanimity than claimed.

(Douglas Carswell subsequently pointed oput how, a few days later after the email leak, Bob Ward made a statement about how we should all be sceptical, though not to sceptical)

17/11 Herald - Lets answer "indefensible"

The Israeli operation in Gaza was embarked on purely because Hamas refused to stop firing rockets at civilian settlements. This was not war because they were aiming only to kill civilians because of their race, which, as both international law & history makes clear, is genocide. Yet Paul Scott says that for Israel to move was "indefensible." At the very least it is incumbent on anybody saying so to explain exactly what they propose Israel could have done to stop genocidal attacks on its own civilians but I know of no critic who has done so. As for "indefensible" - let Colonel Richard Kemp, former British commander in Afghanistan who may know a thing or 2 about war, make the defence:

"During
Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defense Forces did more to safeguard the
rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of
warfare.

Israel did so while facing an enemy that deliberately positioned its
military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population.

...The IDF faces a challenge that we British do not have to face to the same
extent. It is the automatic, Pavlovian presumption by many in the
international media, and international human rights groups, that the IDF are
in the wrong, that they are abusing human rights.

The truth is that the IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians
notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets, and making over
100,000 phone calls. Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military
capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties. During the conflict,
the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. To deliver aid
virtually into your enemy's hands is, to the military tactician, normally
quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks.

...More than anything, the civilian casualties were a consequence of Hamas's
way of fighting. Hamas deliberately tried to sacrifice their own civilians."

Compare & contrast the words of a real soldier with those of the political appointees of the UN. Compare & contrast also the complaints of British politicians of Israeli self defence with their enthusiastic involvement in a war waged overwhelmingly against civilians in Yugoslavia. That war was carried out mainly by bombing Yugoslav cities (80% of the casualties being civilians) & when NATO occupied Kosovo we enrolled the KLA, the only genocidal organisation in that province, as "police" & sent them out to ethnically cleanse, engage in massacres (e.g. the murder of at least 210 unarmed civilians outside our military HQ in Dragodan), ethnically cleanse 350,000, kidnap schoolgirls to sell to brothels & kidnap & dissect, while still alive, at least 1,300 civilians to sell as organs to our hospitals. That last, alone is more people than died in Gaza & should have had far more coverage.

Israel could, if it were so minded, ethnically cleanse the west bank as we cleansed Kosovo (& earlier Krajina). Let us be glad that under infinitely worse provocation, no Israeli politician has shown themselves 1,000th as uncivilised as almost all of ours have done.

16/11 Everybody - party has reported a major Nazi style atrocity

It is good to see that one political party has, at last, reported on its website news of a major Nazi style atrocity in Europe which has been on the record for a year & a half. That is when Carla del Ponte, the Chief Prosecutor of the Yugoslav war crime tribunal, that she had known for 8 years that NATO police, formerly the KLA, had been involved in kidnapping Serbs & Gypsies & cutting them up, while still alive, to steal their body organs for European hospitals. NATO, by grabbing Kosovo & earlier Croatia & Bosnia from Yugoslavia were following in Hitler's footsteps. The decision to effectively censor mention of this obscenity, at least comparable in evil though not numbers, to Auschwitz, by our major politicians & by the BBC, ITN & major newspapers has been a disgusting action by politicians who have thereby shown themselves to be genocide deniers working in Hitler's cause.

The BNP, as the party who finally mentioned this on their website, are to be congratulated as the only major party that can claim not to have censored to promote genocide in the Nazi cause.

14/11 Times - ministry's figures do not add up

Your report of 13th Nov shows the Ministry of Defence claiming "There are currently 85,730 civil servants .. the majority earned less than £20,000 a year, and the bonus (£287 million) accounted for less than 3 per cent of the staffing bill." Taking that £20,000 as the average the entire staffing bill would be £1.7 billion, 3% of which is £51 million. The nicest thing one can say is that the ministry's figures do not add up.

13/11 - Everybody - Subject: vote for the fascists at Springburn

The vote for the fascists at the Springburn by-election was only to be expected. It has long been said that this was the sort of loyal Labour constituency where you could put up a donkey in their rosette & it would win & once again this has been proven. The fact is that the Labour. Conservative, SNP & LibDem parties are essentially one group imposing fascism not through 1 leader but an amorphous political classwith similar attribute to the old Soviet "nomenklatura".. When Mussolini came to power he changed the system to give an automatic majority to the largest party even though it had only minority support & with the SNP & LDs dissenting, our political class supports a similarly corrupt electoral system here - they know that the only thing that gets people voting for them is that an anlternative vote is "wasted". These parties are also united in their commitment to an undemocratic empire controlling Europe; in their contempt for the electors, cynically making manifesto or "cast iron" promises of our right to a democratic referendum on the country's future & then cynically breaking them; in their enthusiasm for war crimes, mass murder, genocide, ethnic cleansing, the sexual enslavement of children & the dissection of Serbian "Untermensch" while still alive, for their body parts, all to support (ex-)Nazis) (to be fair the SNP were divided on these atrocities); this nomenklatura are united in spending £92 billion of our money on jobs for the boys quangos which cause immense economic destruction, though all of them promise a "bonfire of the quangos" & all of them break the promise after the election; they are unanimously committed to destroying half our economy, but subsidising their friends, in the name of "fighting global warming" when they know this is a lie designed merely to scare us & the globe is cooling; they all know how to end recession, by stopping their own parasitism which amounts to 75% of our entire economic potential; they are all committed to deepening the recession by preventing "continuous economic growth" (though only the Greens are honest enough to say so).

However this under the surface fascist alliance can depend on the total, loyalty of the media, not merely the directly state owned BBC with their enthusiasm for "lynchings" of politicians outside the nomenklatura. It is therefore unsurprising that the fascists took the first 3 places in the Springburn election though gratifying that their 4th segment, the "Liberal Democrats" (a party who have made it a condition of membership that one on no account support free market liberalism but are required to support war crimes & genocide) placed 6th. Such a party is clearly less entitled to the name "liberal" than Hitler was entitled to call his "Socialist Workers." Nonetheless the abysmal turnout proves that though they may be able to smear the opposition they can, under no circumstances, inspire the trust of the people.

11/11 Scotsman - a law to destroy 42% of our CO2 emitting energy

Friends of the Earth's assertion that blackouts will never happen because an "independent energy consultant" says so (letter Weds) should be taken no more seriously than the flattery by King Canute's advisors that the tide wasn't coming in. Their expert, Garrard Hassan advertises himself as the "worlds leading renewable energy consultant," a position he would clearly be unlikely to retain if he were to be independent enough to admit that the whole "alternative" energy business is a scam whose practitioners make far more money from subsidy, paid by the taxpayer, than from actually producing power. In fact I suggest he is totally dependent on this "industry."

The fact is that 1/3rd of our electricity comes from nuclear power & another 6th from coal power which will close in 2015 when new EU emission controls come in. The Scottish Parliament has made this worse by voting, unanimously, for a law to destroy 42% of our CO2 emitting energy over the next 11 years on the grounds that this will cut the world's CO2 release by less than one ten thousandth. This would have no remotely measurable effect on global temperature even if the globe were not in fact cooling. However such is the relationship between electricity & national wealth that the deliberate destruction of, at an absolute minimum, half our power production will destroy half of our national wealth.

I remember seeing the then leader of the Green Party publicly explaining his party had gone from "small is beautiful" to supporting a massive EU bureaucracy because they had decided that this bureaucracy was the only thing that would stop the "continuous economic growth" we were allegedly suffering from. While one may appreciate the dedication that has brought them the success of the current (& continuing) recession one need not support this aim. The same Luddite principles, combined with an anti-environmentalist desire to disfigure the countryside with pylons & windmills are clearly the driving force behind the self styled "Friends of the Earth."

4/11 Everybody - Not just whether we want a referendum but whether we want lied to

We have what he has described as a "cast iron promise" from David Cameron that we will actually get a chance to say, through a referendum, whether we want to be under the Lisbon Treaty. That goes with the manifesto promises of a referendum from the Labour & LibDem parties at the last election. There can be no more important promise from any political leader than an unequivocal promise, at election time, to maintain Britain's constitution & democratic freedom.

Now all of them have cynically broken their most solemn promise. There is not even the excuse George Bush Snr had when he broke his word on "no new taxes" - that he needed the money - for which the American electors, correctly, never forgave him. Compared to this the expenses row is nothing - that was merely money. It is now impossible for any member of any of our major parties ever to say that any promise they make, manifesto promises or just the ordinary sort, can ever be trusted at all. It is not even a matter of whether one wants a vote in the country's future but of whether one wants to be lied to. It is clearly impossible for anybody with any respect for democracy, or even any self respect, to vote for any of these parties.

30/10 Scotsman - Government takes up 80% of the economy

The old "socialist"nonsence is trotted out again by David Fiddimore when he says the voter and the private sector have opposed interests that only the state can hold together. This is the same thing that Mussolini said when he used this argument to support an overbearing state & it is even more wrong now than then. The private sector makes up less than half of Britain's spending (40% of Scotland's) yet provides all the wealth. Indeed the state. through regulation, actually has a net negative effect on wealth creation whether through the quadrupling of our electricity, housing & nursery school costs or the 5% of GNP the EU admits its regulations destroy. The best estimate is that the amount of wealth destroyed by regulation is equal to everything that remains. Thus our non-governmental economy is 20% of what it could be - no wonder we have a recession. It would obviously be in the interest of us voters/consumers to have a more productive private sector & a less parasitic state sector.

Wealth creation is clearly in the interests of those of us who do not wish poverty, which I suggest includes almost all of the voters. Their interest, like the interest of the private sector is not for an overbearing nanny state reducing freedom & increasing poverty. Both voters & the private sector have a joint interest in reducing the overwhelming degree of parasitism the government imposes on both of us. More freedom, more wealth & more progress, economic & otherwise, is the true interest of everybody - except those in charge.

24/1 Everybody - deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration"

A senior Labour advisor has let the cat out of the bag about recent immigration. Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett has said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration" but that ministers were reluctant to discuss such a move deliberately intended "to rub the Right's nose in diversity" publicly for fear it would alienate its "core working class vote".

Since we have just seen the BBC's Question Time wholly devoted to attacking Nick Griffin over his past (while ignoring the colourful opinions of the youthfall Jack Straw when he was a communist backed NUS leader) may we now expect next week's QT to be devoted to a lynching of the Labour representative for that dishonest & destructive fraud against the people? Or will it turn out that the BBC decide such things are not what their viewers would want to know about?

18/11 Scotsman - SNP aim for pork barrelling

The SNP consider it right, even sensible, to try to persuade people to vote for them on the grounds that if we have a hung Westminster Parliament they will be able to get vast amounts of pork barrelling money for Scotland. Since virtually all the seats they aim at are from non-Tory parties they can only hope for a hung Parliament if they think that without their intervention the Conservatives are not heading for a majority. The opposite side of that is that they are inviting a Conservative government which does not need their help (something the vast majority of observers expect) to take away all the extra money we already get as a "Union dividend" & invite them to girn as much as they want. Scotland out of the union may not look like an option with much downside to Westminster Conservatives.

12/10 Scotsman - Space has been a massive net profit to humanity

The imprisonment of a man for letting a child smoke is a perversion of the law. The legal charge was of "exposing a child in a manner likely to cause suffering or injury to health." Nobody disputes that smoking 40 a day for 40 years produces as strong possibility, though not more than that, of killing. Even then the risk drops dramatically if the smoking stops.

I challenge anybody involved in the case to produce any evidence that the kid, who was clearly perfectly happy since she was asking for more, has suffered measurable "suffering or injury to health." I also challenge them to explain why they don't believe locking him up won't cause emotional harm to the girl. If they can't then perhaps we should hear why any prosecution witness who said it would hasn't committed perjury.

Demonisation (or "denormalisation" as the PC brigade call it) of any group in society is not something governments in free societies exist to do. Perverting the existing law to make an example of one person to frighten everybody is disgusting. Anybody who believes in individual freedom must oppose this.

Labels: Unpublished letters

Labels: British politics, economic growth, Fixing the economy