Featured

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

Politicians Turn to National Grid for Net Zero Advice

Details: Category: Free Citizen; Published: 31 August 2024; Hits: 829

2024-08-31

May the Lord be praised, the government is reported to be asking National Grid for advice on how they can support the Net Zero religious cult's objectives.

With not long to go before the 2030 deadline, will they ensure that the "Fourth Turning" becomes an extinction event, or will they listen to the advice proffered and adjust Net Zero expectations accordingly? (No prizes for guessing the correct answer)

Go on, you know you want to!

(NB: this is not a party political article taking aim at the current governing party. We regard all the parties as equivalently compromised in their support for "Net Zero".
That said, at least the current government has asked a sensible question of the right people, even if it remains to be seen how they will disregard the answer)

The Fourth Turning is Upon Us?

Details: Category: Free Citizen; Published: 30 August 2024; Hits: 859

2024-08-30

"Fourth Turnings NEVER de-intensify. There will be blood, death, and war on an enormous scale before this Crisis is resolved"

"I believe the next six months will determine the course of humanity for the next century and beyond"

"Most people are unwilling or unable to confront the brutal facts of our current reality"

"Last week they quietly reported that 818,000 jobs they reported as existing were entirely fake. They knew they were fake when they reported them, but you gotta do what you gotta do to maintain your wealth, control and power"

"Events have been happening at a breakneck pace and it is difficult to determine which incidents are being engineered and which are occurring naturally"

Sadly he's not just remarking on the state of play in the USA (although his remarks are centred on that country). This is global.

Jim Quinn lays it out for ZeroHedge.

How "Sustainable" is my "Biomass"?

Details: Category: Green; Published: 29 August 2024; Hits: 795

2024-08-29

"Biomass" (or "wood" to you and me) Is essentially the product of chopping down trees, and drying and pulping and pelleting them (using energy in the process).

The resulting nuggets / pellets / however you want to describe them are then shipped across oceans (using more energy) and burned in power stations such as Drax in Yorkshire (creating as much CO₂ as from fossil fuel).

How is this more sustainable than just burning coal (or better yet gas or oil since these can be transported by pipeline whereas coal needs to be shipped like wood pellets)?

We might as well have created the same amount of CO₂ from burning fossil fuels and left the trees alone to remove it, saving everybody much expense!

And are we really replanting and regrowing the "biomass" sufficiently fast to replace the "biomass" that we are burning away? Is anybody checking, or are the loggers just coining it? And if fines really are levied, is that just a "cost of doing business"?

Obviously, it doesn't take long to fell a wood these days but it will take many multiples of the time taken to regrow the same - I don't know how long, but say only 5 times as long (to be rather generous to the "sustainable" fanatics). If we rotate growing and logging operations then we would need to dedicate in total 6 times the land area that would grow one year's "biomass" to make it "sustainable" - land that could have been used to grow food from all the extra CO₂ that would have been produced from burning fossil fuels ... but now has to be used for regrowing the "biomass" destroyed.

And I would hazard a guess that 5 years to regrow is an underestimate ...

See what you think:

(12 minutes)

Like / Dislike this video here.

Big Pharma on the Ropes?

Details: Category: Free Citizen; Published: 29 August 2024; Hits: 756

2024-08-29

Now that Trump has teamed up with RFK Jr, it looks like the gloves are finally coming off - and in public.

This goes back a long way.

How long? Probably as long as the 1918 flu pandemic in which (a) nobody could demonstrate transmission of the disease via "bodily fluids" (but boy, did they try!) and (b) more (US) soldiers reputedly died of the vaccine (the term warp speed hadn't been invented then but I don't doubt there was an equivalent) than died of battle.

More recently, the tetanus vaccine produced under the aegis of the WHO would seem to have something very "unfortunate" to hide - but as Mike Yeadon tends to say these days, maybe "mistakes were not made"?

I haven't any information about the tetanus vaccines used outside Africa, but Big Pharma's reputation being what it is ... why would they let investment in vaccine development go to waste?

(29 minutes)

Who Assesses my Benefits Claim?

Details: Category: Free Citizen; Published: 28 August 2024; Hits: 855

2024-08-28

Well, according to Big Brother Watch, maybe nobody. It might all be handled by machines. If not now, then soon.

Does anybody know how the AI works? Nobody accessible to the public.

"Black box algorithms and secretive AI tools sit at the heart of the UK's welfare system - with little accountability. Our investigation offers a glimpse into life inside the UK’s poverty panopticon"

So here's a simple enough question:

If the tools of the process are opaque and protected by commercial confidentiality, how can the process be accountable to the public that it is meant to serve? And if not accountable, how is a realistic challenge possible?

I have postulated before that government is simply a vast Artificial Intelligence encoded on paper into statutes rules and regulations (not to mention "guidelines") that are (or inevitably become) horrendously complex (as they are tweaked to cover circumstances not previously identified or envisioned). They are very likely beyond the time-and-comprehension space of the vast majority of claimants (not to mention the officials and administrators charged with implementing them).

But at least being written on traditional documents (and capable of being printed), the rules-regulations-guidance could be accessed by mere mortals and subjected to scrutiny.

Now in as much as they are at least in part encoded within AI algorithms and defended by commercial confidentiality agreements (not to mention inaccessibility within corporate servers), for practical purposes they have been placed well beyond public scrutiny.

Meaning in effect that we have become the servants of those that control the AI - i.e.: the corporate interests, given the nod by "our" government.

See what you think.

Page 166 of 312