Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 3, 2026
Tuesday, June 9, 2020
How a Powerful Elevator Speech Can Generate Energetic Dialogues That Will Increase Your Recognition and Attract More Clients?
An elevator speech is a short verbal snippet that clearly and memorably introduces you. It highlights your uniqueness and focuses on the benefits you provide.
Imagine ... you step onto an elevator and there is a lone occupant waiting to travel with you to another floor.
You are together for less than a minute, but long enough to make polite conversation.
What you don't know is this person is your ideal client. She has a problem you can solve.
She cuts through the awkward silence and says, "I see you're attending the networking event as well. What do you do?"
Here it is! Your chance to make an impression and secure a new client.
After a short stammer, you answer with, "I'm a coach and a copywriter. I hold a Masters in Business Administration and have been running my own home-based business for ten years."
With only a few seconds left, the elevator doors open. She politely responds with a smile, then steps off the elevator, gone ... forever.
After you finish banging your head against the button panel, you realize you not only blew it, but you now have an indentation of the twenty-first floor button on your forehead.
What if instead you had answered with:
"I help women entrepreneurs get more clients than they know what to do with and triple their profits in six months."
If she were your target client, do you think the second response would have sparked her interest and kept her on that elevator a little bit longer?
We all ask ourselves, "What's in it for me?" when engaged in any type of communication, whether written or spoken.
You want to take something of value from a conversation, learn something new, create a certain feeling, or receive information that will help you solve a problem or meet a need.
If you spend the first 30 seconds labeling yourself and listing your credentials, or going into a technical spiel of your product or service, you will be met with nothing more than a big fat yawn, a glazed-over look or even worse, "Excuse me, I have to make a call" and a quick exit.
Take the time to develop a benefit-rich, passionate elevator speech that will engage your listeners to want to hear more.
Write down a list of benefits your clients/customers receive from working with you or buying from you, and use those words and phrases in your benefit statement.
There's no need to label yourself. Labels don't provide the benefits the listener is looking for.
Once you have your elevator speech developed, practice it over and over until it's as natural as stating your name. You'll be able to use it at networking events, in telephone conversation, when leaving voice mail messages, in any type of written communication, and yes, especially in the elevator!
So, ____________, what do you do?
Thursday, November 28, 2019
All Wind and Sun Energy Lie: Truth, Deception and Green Religion
FREE energy from the sun and the wind! Isn’t that a wonderful idea? And it’s clean too! Yeah, right.
No, it’s not.
So-called free clean energy from the sun and the wind is neither clean nor free. Nor is it produced when the sun does not shine or when the wind does not blow (despite the headlines and the passion with which they are both promoted).
Neither source of electricity is cheap when subject to common sense economics—the cost of the steel, the plastics (yes), the concrete and the energy needed to produce them. Then there is the cost of connecting wind and solar plants to the national grid which is born by utilities like Eskom. Not to mention the cost of their back up petroleum-fuelled generators needed to balance their output. And finally, the fact that their promised output of energy rarely if ever, materializes.
Yes, some wind and sun-generated electricity can be stored in batteries but they are not yet able to perform as well as power stations the world is familiar with – those operating on coal, diesel, gas, and nuclear fuel.
Wind and sun are, we are told, the answer to an existential threat to human survival, the alleged but scientifically unproven and unproveable theory that the world’s climate is heating up to apocalyptic levels.
Ok, ready steady go! Half of those reading this can now go outside, scream blue murder, and run to the Press Council for my daring to express a view they think is akin to religious heresy: the other half can read on for a few salient facts not often aired or written about in the media, and judge for themselves if climate hysteria is justified and the trumpeted solutions are better for the planet.
It should be hammered home that all predictions of climate doom have been made by computers fed historical temperature records than conveniently exclude periods in history that were clearly much warmer than today’s and because the thermometer was not yet invented.
All earlier temperature records (before the thermometer) are guesses or second hand deductions from tree rings or ice cores or whatever else gets thought of: other words, theoretical temperatures. Nevertheless, this mishmash of temperature data is fed into a computer, “adjusted” and used to produce graphs that project expected temperatures into the 22nd century. It is a perfect recipe for getting the future wrong and producing scary headlines to order.
Add to this method of predicting scary future temperatures, the unproven theory that the world is getting bunged up with too much carbon dioxide (that is the invisible stuff that all plants need to survive) and the confident statement that mankind’s guilty habit of keeping itself warm in winter, plus its desire to travel in comfort, and the result is a guilt trip of a power not seen since the Middle Ages and the unreformed Roman Catholic church.
In the process of constructing this Green religion in which belief rather than reason holds sway, some dirty secrets about “clean energy” sources have been brushed under a metaphorical carpet.
In contrast to the hysterical fear of nuclear radiation that has produced stringent rules for dealing with nuclear waste, the by-products of solar panel production have been allowed to go unchecked, largely one suspects because most manufacture takes place in Communist China where loud, theatrical demonstrations have about as much chance of lasting for more than a few seconds than the snowball’s chances of surviving a spell in Hades.
Yet measured against nuclear waste that does erode in toxicity over time, waste produced in photovoltaic panel manufacture lasts FOR EVER, and ever, and ever.
It has been estimated that solar panels generate 300 times more toxic waste than that produced by nuclear power stations when they generate electricity. Try finding that factoid in the main stream media of the western world. None of it is buried in concrete drums is specially selected landfills of impermeable clay. Instead it is allowed to leach from factory to farmland to the water table like so much bath water.
And what you may ask is this toxic solar panel waste? Well it’s pretty filthy, dirty enough to get every environmentalist green with anger and righteous indignation. There is a lot of it too. Solar panel manufacturer produces lots of waste, unlike a nuclear power station than barely manages a ton in a year of operation.
Already, Japan generates 10 000 tons every year. In twenty years, it will be – 800 000 tons. There are no plans to dispose of it safely. But that is nothing compared to the toxic waste generated by China where they not only make solar panels they operate twice as many as the United States. In thirty years’, time China will be producing some 20 million tons.
So much for the quantities of solar panel waste. Now for what it consists of. All those who think all nuclear waste is dangerous, however small, standby for a really shocking fact.
To make solar panels you need sulfuric acid, and phosphine gas. After use they contain lead, chromium and cadmium — all carcinogens. The manufacturing process also emits nitrogen trifluoride. This gas is the king of greenhouse gases. Its presence in the earth’s atmosphere has dramatically increased in recent years.
Surprise! You don’t hear much about it among the green enthusiasts.
Instead, we all are subjected to a steady stream of shock horror headlines, blatant misrepresentation of the science, and lately speeches in the United Nations General Assembly by Swedish teenagers angry with their parents for allegedly destroying their future.
As they say, you could not make it up.
Source: Cape Business News
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
Wednesday, November 20, 2019
The Whole Climate Change Fear-Mongering Needs to Stop
Climate change, real or hoax?
There has been a lot of talk about climate change, but is it as serious as people have been saying? Our world, just like everything in life, changes, but the whole fear-mongering needs to stop.
In the ’70s, scientists were talking about our world would end in the year 2000. Scientists would say that the world would be covered with water in the year 2000. It never happened.
In the ’90s, Democrats, based on scientific information, would say that we have to do something about our climate for our children’s children. These are the same scientists that during the late ’90s were going on and on about, with the prediction based on facts, the internet and all the computers would shut down in the year 2000. It never happened.
Every year, or close to an election, Democrats start fear-mongering about a lot of things, specifically climate change. Each one of the potential Democratic candidates running for president has given different answers about climate change. One of them says we have got 13 years left; the others give different numbers. And the Democrats give you hare-brained solutions to the problem; they talk like Dr. Evil from the Austin Powers movies.
The Democrats think that if we get rid of all straws, stop flying airplanes, go to a plant-based diet ... and one Democrat even said we need to resort to cannibalism and eat babies. It’s ironic that the Democrats want us to stop using airplanes, but they can get on an airplane and go from state to state trying to win the bid to be the next Democratic president of the United States. If climate change is as serious as they say it is, they would not be using airplanes or cars to get from one place to another; they do not practice what they preach.
For every reputable scientist that says that climate change is an issue, there are also reputable scientists that say that climate change is not as serious as others have gone and on and on about. Basically, it’s putting the fear in people when there really is no reason to fear.
Source: Robert Schweigert
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
Saturday, November 16, 2019
Wind Farm Developers Should Not Be Given a Free Rein to Destroy Birds, Bats, Insects and Ecosystem
Studies have found that wind turbines are a dangerous threat to bats, high-conservation value birds, and insect populations that are a major supply of food to bats and birds. Insects, birds, bats, and wind farm developers are attracted to the same thing—high wind speeds. Wind farms in Europe and the United States are being built in the path of migration trails that have been used by insects and birds for millions of years. Researchers found that wind turbines in Germany resulted in a loss of about 1.2 trillion insects of different species each year. Researchers in India found almost four times fewer buzzards, hawks, and kites in areas with wind farms—a loss of about 75 percent. They found that wind turbines are akin to adding a top predator to the ecosystem, killing off birds, but allowing small animals to increase their populations resulting in a trickle effect throughout the ecosystem.
Migratory Bats and Birds
Wind turbines are the single greatest human threat to migratory bats, which live in different habitats during summer and winter months. Some, like the hoary bat, fly south to Mexico during the winter as insects become scarce in North America. In 2017, scientists warned that the hoary bat could become extinct if the expansion of wind farms continues.
Wind turbines have also become one of the greatest human threats to many species of large, threatened and high-conservation value birds. Wind energy threatens golden eagles, bald eagles, burrowing owls, red-tailed hawks, white-tailed kites, peregrine falcons, and prairie falcons, among others. The expansion of wind turbines could result in the extinction of the golden eagle in the western United States, where its population is at a very low level.
Researchers at the Indian Institute of Science in Bengaluru studied lizard and bird populations at three wind turbine sites. In areas without turbines around 19 birds were spotted every three hours, while only five were sited nearer the turbines. The lower rate of predatory birds led to an abundance of the fan-throated lizard. The lower number of predatory birds has a “ripple effect” across the food chain with small mammals and reptiles increasing in number as their natural predators disappear and changing their behavior as they become less fearful of predators.
Deaths of big birds have a greater impact on their population than smaller birds because they have lower reproductive rates. For example, golden eagles will have only one or two baby chicks at most once a year while robins could have three to seven baby chicks as often as twice a year.
Insect Populations
For three decades, scientists have reported the build-up of dead insects on wind turbine blades in different regions around the world. Researchers in Germany found a 76 percent decline in flying insect biomass in conducting a 27-year population monitoring study. Wind turbines are contributing to what is called the “insect die-off.” The German insect death toll from wind turbines of 1.2 trillion per year is one-third of the total annual insect migration in southern England.
Insect die-off also reduces the efficiency of the wind turbines. In 2001, researchers calculated that the build-up of dead insects on wind turbine blades can reduce the electricity they generate by 50 percent.
In the 1990s, the wind industry claimed its turbine blades were too high to threaten flying insects and that insects flew too slowly to be impacted. Since then, it has been found that insects cluster at the same altitudes used by wind turbines. Scientists in Oklahoma found that the highest density of insects is between 150 to 250 meters, which overlaps with large turbine blades that stretch from 60 to 220 meters above the ground.
Government Intervention
While government agencies require the oil and gas industry to report bird deaths and pay fines for any found, wind farms are exempt, even though the wildlife impacts can be far greater. Wind developers are allowed to self-report violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
According to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, wind developers can avoid prosecution for killing eagles by applying for licenses to cover the number of birds who might be struck by their wind turbines. In rare circumstances when governments require the wind industry to mitigate the impact of bird deaths, such as by setting aside land elsewhere, there is often little or no enforcement.
Curtailing wind energy by halting the turbine blades is the only way to reduce the killing of birds, bats and insects by wind turbines. Scientists have found that curtailing wind turbines when wind speed is low can reduce bat fatalities by 44 percent to 93 percent. However, very few wind farm developers are willing to curtail their wind production. An NREL study found that curtailment levels are lower than 5 percent of total wind energy generation.
Conclusion
Wind developers and operators should not be given a free rein to kill birds, bats, and insects and to disrupt the ecosystem. They should be held accountable for these deaths and be fined as any other industry. The problem will only get worse as more wind farms are forced onto the grid as state mandates for renewable energy are achieved.
Source: Institute for Energy Research
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
Republicans Have Walked Into the Trap of Fixating on Financial Cost of Leftist Energy Policies
Millennials and Generation Z have been inundated with the notion of climate change as undisputable fact. A March 2019 Gallup poll indicates 67 percent of those aged 18-29 are “concerned believers” in “global warming”. With voters under 35 expected to be the largest voting age group in the upcoming elections, they cannot be written off, but must be engaged.
For decades the left has been promoting a narrative of upcoming climate change catastrophe. Articles warning of impending doom from dependence on oil and capitalistic excesses began appearing regularly in publications like Time and Newsweek in the 1970s. In the late 70s and 80s, politicians like Representative Al Gore Jr. began pushing the narrative that the earth was doomed if fossil fuels weren’t eliminated. Later becoming Vice President, his influence infiltrated the mainstream of the Democrat party. In 1993, Dr. William Halper was fired from his position as Director of Energy Research at the Department of Energy after his congressional testimony that scientific data did not support manmade climate change claims. Since then, the left has continued the promotion of the narrative of upcoming climate catastrophe. Their claims have not only remained unchecked and unchallenged but supported by the media.
Remember the image of the polar bear population being at risk from melting ice? Ever wonder what happened to them? — The US Geological Survey found, instead of the 67 percent population decline predicted in 2007, their estimated population grew from 24,500 in 2005 to 29,500 in 2018 – the highest since 1973. Or what about the claim ice would disappear in the North Pole by 2016? Claims go back decades, such as the 1970 claim that oceans would be dead in less than a decade.
Not only do the claims remain unchallenged and protected, but Democrats get even some of the basics wrong. Fossil fuel emissions are regularly referred to as “carbon” by the left, including current Democrat presidential hopefuls. The reality is, CO2, or carbon dioxide, is not just “carbon” and is essential to life. Plants use it in photosynthesis to produce energy, emitting oxygen as a byproduct…essential to humans and animals. Research by Ranga Mynei of Boston University indicates the earth has had greened significantly over the last 38 years, with carbon dioxide emissions being 70 percent of the cause.
Republicans have walked into the trap of fixating on financial cost of leftist energy policies. In response, the left continually insists there is a high cost of not implementing the policies, painting Republicans as “greedy capitalists”. What Republicans lack is discussion of the issue as a whole. Yes, leftist energy policies would impact the price of food and goods; they’re transported using fossil fuels. But the impact is the disproportionate effect on low-income families, due to their lack of resources to shoulder increased costs of food and other necessities — the very people the left claims to care about. At the same time, CO2 is essential for life… plants need it to survive, impacting animals that rely on plants for food (and oxygen), and impacting humans who rely on plants and animals for food (and on plants for oxygen).
For Republicans to engage millennials and Generation Z – they need to take on the issue as a whole, reveal the flaws in claims in an engaging way, champion private sector innovation, and avoid falling into the trap of focusing only on financial costs of proposed policies. Also, emphasize that while stewardship of the environment is important (no one wants dirty air or dirty water), it can be done without destroying quality of life. Besides, eliminating “carbon emissions” would require eliminating all life forms (including animals) that emit carbon dioxide.
Source: Town Hall
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
Tuesday, October 15, 2019
It Revealed That Climate Changes Activists Are Paid Up to £400 a Week in London Protests
Extinction Rebellion is paying activists up to £400 ($505) a week to lead the protests that have brought chaos to the streets of Britain, documents seen by The Mail on Sunday reveal.
Protesters have received payments totaling more than £70,000 ($88,538) in four months alone.
But the eco-protest group privately fears it could face a six-figure tax bill if the money, which is given as expenses, is deemed to be a payment for work done on XR’s behalf.
Last night, one Tory MP called on HMRC to launch an immediate investigation into the movement’s tax affairs.
Most of the thousands of activists who brought chaos to London last week were unpaid volunteers, but a select number are claiming the funds, which enable them to dedicate their efforts to the protest group, also known as XR.
This newspaper has seen claims for expenses from 168 activists, including Tamsin Omond, a baronet’s granddaughter who has appeared in Tatler and rubbed shoulders with Boris Johnson – and who asked for money after ditching some public relations clients to concentrate on protests.
A dossier of files from within XR reveals the inner workings of the protest movement and its finances.
They show how:
- Activists have been paid more than £200,000 ($252,966) since the start of the scheme;
- The cost of the payments is increasing by ‘at least £40,000 ($50,593) a month’;
- Activists are targeting ‘high net worth individuals’ for more funds;
- They spent £5,000 ($6,324) on a camping tour of Europe for key members.
- The revelations come as the number of activists arrested in the current XR protests approaches 1,300.
A document entitled Finance Policy And Processes seen by this newspaper in a ‘work in progress’ version state:
‘The maximum claim for volunteer living expenses is £400 a week (or £200 for someone volunteering part-time). No more should be claimed than a volunteer needs to cover basic living expenses.’
The document states that claims ‘may cover a maximum period of four weeks’, but adds: ‘Further applications may be made to cover additional periods of time.’
Tamsin Omond claimed a total of £1,340 ($1,694) for November and December last year. Educated at Westminster School and Trinity College, Cambridge, the granddaughter of Dorset baronet Sir Thomas Lees is an actor who also works in public relations and chooses to use gender-neutral pronouns, including Mx in place of Ms. or Mr.
Mx Omond’s expenses claim was based on being out of pocket after giving up some clients to spend more time campaigning.
Mx Omond offered to give up commercial work altogether to focus more on XR but asked for at least £800 a month to cover housing, food, and transport in that case.
Film-maker Joel Scott-Halkes has received up to £800 ($1,011) a month after deciding to give up working to become a full-time activist.
Gail Bradbrook, the self-proclaimed ‘neo-pagan’ who was inspired to create the eco-protest group after taking psychedelic drugs, requested payments of £600 ($759) a month this year.
And XR co-founder Roger Hallam asked for £300 ($379) a week.
But XR’s documents raise concerns about the fact that it has paid no tax or National Insurance on these sums and questioned the employment status of activists.
A document dated August 13, 2019, addresses the fear that HMRC is likely to ‘crawl all over us’ and that in ‘the worst-case scenario’ the sum payable, including fines, is ‘probably in the range £150,000 to £200,000’ ($189,725 to $252,966).
Plans have been drawn up to remind volunteers that they are responsible for their own tax affairs.
It is not yet clear whether XR has contacted HMRC to admit their concerns or whether the taxman has moved to recover any tax that may be due from XR.
Last night, Tory MP David Davies called for an immediate investigation, saying:
‘It is utterly outrageous if Extinction Rebellion is not paying its fair share of tax.
‘These self-appointed, holier-than-thou guardians of the planet may think they are somehow above the law but they are not. What’s needed now is a root-and-branch investigation of how this organization operates, starting with an immediate inquiry into its tax affairs. I shall be writing to HMRC tomorrow to demand nothing less.’
Compassionate Revolution, the registered company used for XR activity, has £371,000 ($469,252) in the bank.
Crowdfunding for the ‘October Rebellion’ currently stands at £859,534 ($1,087,165) and XR’s fundraising efforts have brought in more than £2.5 million ($3.16M) in the past year.
Major donors include rock band Radiohead, which gave £250,000 ($316,208), and City billionaire Sir Christopher Hohn, who gave £50,000 ($63,242)
Oil mogul John Paul Getty’s granddaughter part-funded a donation of £330,000 ($417,394) through the Climate Emergency Fund.
A designated group of activists has been set up to target further ‘major donors and high net worth individuals’.
With a growing pot of funds, XR has financed new projects, including £5,000 ($6,324) for a group to tour Europe ‘camping and connecting to nature and with each other.’
They are also considering spending £3 million ($3.8M) on a restructure.
XR said last night:
‘We have sought professional advice on financial support and expenses to volunteers. That advice is that in most cases no tax is payable and, where it is, those of us who receive financial support or expenses will be advised to declare income in our tax returns.
‘From the advice we received, it doesn’t look like we’ll have a liability to HMRC. It is our aim to be free from hierarchy.’
Find Some Poor People…We’re Too White And Middle Class
Extinction Rebellion activists have drawn up plans to attract activists who are ‘poor’ and from ethnic minorities in a bid to change the white, middle-class make-up of the movement.
A document seen by The Mail on Sunday reveals that members have considered an ‘announcement to the working class’.
The proposed text says: ‘Are you working class? We need you! We are incredibly keen to increase the socio-economic diversity of XR. If you are poor or working-class and already a member, please get in touch,’ with an email address underneath.
Minutes from last month’s meeting of the group’s head ‘Anchor’ group highlighted ‘a lack of representation from disabled people and people of color.’
In a June proposal to reach out to marginalized London communities, one member wrote:
‘XR has been following the conventional model of virtue signaling (‘yes, we agree working people are oppressed, etc’) and tokenism (‘we need to get more black people into working groups’ – as if this is just a matter of ordering them out of catalog).’
The member bemoaned ‘the almost complete absence of working-class people in the London office and the massive representation of Oxbridge graduates’.
Another activist says the movement ‘needs to sound less hippy’, while others fear the group’s aim of mass arrests will alienate ethnic minority communities who historically suffered racial injustice at the hands of the police.
One document admits this has caused an issue in the public perception of the group.
It said:
‘If you were to come to our actions and only walk straight up to the people being arrested on the front line, such as the affinity group members blocking the bridges on Rebellion Day, you’d probably end up seeing the same type of people.
‘This is where you’d likely see the ‘stereotype’ of XR: white, British national, middle-aged or a pensioner, middle-class, educated, and probably a Left-leaning Guardian reader.’
The documents also reveal that children are viewed as a key target for the organization in winning support for their radical demands.
Spokesman Rupert Read published an online pamphlet in August which claimed: ‘Imagine an October with tens of thousands of children and students on the streets of London.’
The protest group said last night: ‘It is important that there is conflict within Extinction Rebellion over lack of diversity. We live in a racist system, and Extinction Rebellion and the people within it are not separate from that system.’
Source: Climate Change Dispatch
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
Imagine if These Lunatic & Socialist Extinction Rebellion Activists Had Real Power
CLIMATISM posts often begin with poignant quotes from past philosophers, scholars, academics, poets. Not only as a link to the subject matter, but as a guide to past thinking that can engender clues to our current existence and provide insight for future pathways.
THIS author is staunch in the belief that climate change has absolutely nothing to do with the ‘environment’ or “saving the planet”.
IF it did, every climate change activist, such as Extinction Rebellion, would be castigating China for unlimited emissions until 2030, as per their Paris Accord commitment.
TO suggest that China signed the Paris agreement (with their opulent concession) in a deliberate effort to further weaken Western economies, with a keen awareness as to their gullibility and virtue-signalling penchant to appease the loud minority with UNreliables (wind/solar) to “power a clean, green, sustainable future”, would be an understatement.
THE result of this ruinous, climate virtue-signalling by the West? Weak state governments, beholden to the loud minority and gods of climate change, literally blowing up cheap, reliable coal-fired power stations to make way for costly, weather dependent UNreliables — wind and solar — resulting in inevitable blackouts, brownouts and skyrocketing power bills.
CHINA, on the other hand, is massively ramping up their coal-fired power arsenal to gain an obvious economic and geopolitical advantage that only cheap, reliable, 24/7/365 thermal energy can provide.
A brilliant op-ed from Todd Royal sums up China’s domestic and global positioning using cheap, reliable energy as its literal ‘1st Infantry Division‘.
AN entirely deliberate geo-political strategy, open for all to see, if one is open to cold-hard-reality …
SO, where are Extinction Rebellion or Great Thunberg or the UN, on China’s massive coal expansion? Could it be that they are only interested in breaking down Western civilisation? The system that employs democracy rather than communism/socialism?
COULD it be that all around the globe, Climate Change is being exposed as simply a moral issue for the wealthy urban elite?
COULD it be that campaigning on climate guarantees political death?
RECENT Western ‘democratic’ elections, the world over, are surely proving that blue-collar workers, and the silent majority are simply not buying into the relentless fear-mongering and warming hysteria driven by climate theory-obsessed politicians, propped up by a compliant, (97% Leftist) mainstream media…
ENOUGH of the politics! Now for some fun…
AN excellent and entertaining video on XR via Paul Homewood’s excellent site “Not A Lot Of People Know That” :
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
Saturday, October 12, 2019
Stupid Extinction Rebellion Protesters Will Put the World Economy in Danger
It will soon be impossible to criticise the fanatics of Extinction Rebellion.
In fact, I will not be at all surprised if, in years to come, I and others face prosecution for having dared to doubt them.
Soon we will be sitting in an impoverished, dark country, with a trashed economy, incessant power cuts and dismal standard of living, caused by their dogma.
Putting people on trial for warning against this will be one way to keep warm and occupied.
So, while I still may, I’ll say that this is one of the nastiest and stupidest outbreaks of intolerant, irrational zealotry since mankind emerged from the Dark Ages. I speak as a former intolerant zealot, who grew out of it.
I know the fierce joy which comes from despising others, only too well. And I fear it.
Perhaps the most dispiriting version of it is to be seen in the painted, beatific faces of the red-robed mime-artists who are to be found on so many of the demonstrations demanding that this country commits economic suicide.
Who can tell what is going on behind those self-satisfied, ethereal expressions? But they give these marches a strong whiff of the Age of Inquisitions, which I once thought we had escaped.
I won’t try to argue here on the rightness or wrongness of the Warmists’ theory about the causes of climate change.
I know from long, multiple experience that they respond to reasonable doubt with fury and defamatory cries of ‘denier’.
I spend much of my life in debate, and will take on any rational opponent. But there are some causes you can’t reason with, and this is one of them.
They prefer fury to logic. This is always the sign of someone who is not sure of his own case, and hates to hear his inner doubts spoken.
I have yet to get one of them to respond to this simple point. We recently closed and demolished Didcot ‘A’ coal-fired power station, an efficient, reasonably modern plant with a generating capacity of about 1.44 gigawatts.
Why? Why not at least mothball it? But no such caution is allowed in the great cause of cutting CO2 emissions.
Look at the facts: an enormous 259 gigawatts (180 Didcots) of new coal-fired capacity are under development in China. That’s on top of the 993 gigawatts of coal-burning capacity China already possesses (690 Didcots).
The UK’s whole electrical generation capacity, in all forms of power, is 85 gigawatts (59 Didcots). If we gave up using electricity entirely, it would make no difference at all to the impact of Chinese coal burning on the atmosphere.
None. Not any. Zero. If we completely abolish all our fossil-fuel generation, including gas, it would likewise not matter in the slightest – except to us, our economy and our standard of living.
China’s planned increase, yes, increase, in coal power is three times the size of our whole electricity-generation industry – wind, nuclear gas, and all. India is also increasing coal generation and last March reached a coal capacity of 200 gigawatts (139 Didcots).
I have said it before. I’ll keep saying it. Thanks to the political and media class’s dim acceptance of shouted propaganda, and their rejection of reason, we are already damaging ourselves.
Wind generation only functions thanks to huge hidden subsidies, paid for by the poor, and is vulnerable to power cuts unless it is backed up by fossil fuel or nuclear generation.
We are like a thirsty man refusing to drink from a tap because of a water shortage, while his local water company leaves hundreds of leaks unrepaired, allowing thousands of gallons to drain away each hour.
This is a futile, self-harming gesture. And these demonstrators, ignorant and engorged with self-righteous rage, demand more futility.
Will sane people have to glue themselves to aircraft and bridges to get anyone to listen? And if they do, will they be indulged by our politicised, biased police, as the Warmists are?
So, off we go into the cold and dark, while the red-clad propaganda mummers simper and gesticulate.
Hate speech is no crime – so long as you’re a vicious Lefty
What would you think would happen to a man who posted on Twitter the following words: ‘I dearly wish a reactivated IRA would successfully blow up that scumbag Johnson and his evil cabinet’?
Given what happened in Brighton on October 12, 1984, is this not especially revolting?
Lest we forget, the IRA, by planting a bomb in the Grand Hotel, murdered Sir Anthony Berry, Eric Taylor, Lady (Jeanne) Shattock, Lady (Muriel) Maclean and Roberta Wakeham.
Many others were severely injured, including Lord (Norman) Tebbit and his wife Margaret. Not funny.
Surely the police, who relentlessly patrol Twitter for signs of political incorrectness, failures to respect the transgender community and so forth, would react with speed and strength?
Well, more than a month after the offending tweet was posted on August 20, they did visit the author, a Mr Mark Powell who tweets under the name ‘Markhayo’.
But there was no heavy-footed dawn raid, of the type so often favoured by the modern police.
Nor was his house suddenly flooded by officers going through his bedroom, as happened to Field Marshal Lord Bramall after a mad fantasist accused him of child abuse.
No, he got a wimpy letter from a police person saying, with almost unbelievable feebleness, and a clear signal that he was in no danger of prosecution: ‘I apologise for the unsolicited nature of this letter, and do not wish to cause you any undue alarm; however, I do need to discuss some sensitive issues that may concern you. I would like to stress that this letter has not been sent as part of any criminal proceedings, nor are you in any trouble whatsoever.’
It sought to arrange a ‘convenient time to meet’.
Mr Powell displayed this letter on Twitter, saying the police had been ‘very civil’. But he hadn’t been. He boasted that he’d sworn at the officers, and refused to withdraw his words.
He later apologised for the swearing in an email to the officers, but repeated that ‘I shouldn’t be sorry to see this Cabinet of traitors blown up by a rejuvenated IRA’. He then posted that email on Twitter.
One of those who had reported the outburst, a Tory councillor from Aylesbury called Gary Powell (emphatically no relation), got in touch with me after getting nowhere with Scotland Yard.
He’d been told by a ‘staff officer’ to Commissioner Cressida Dick that the National Digital Exploitation Service and the National Counter Terrorism Security Office had deemed the tweet to be an offence.
But because it was a single incident, nothing was done except ‘words of advice’. So there you are. You can call for the IRA to blow up the Cabinet, and nothing will happen to you.
Alison Saunders, then Director of Public Prosecutions, announced in August 2017 a tough new policy for people who incited hatred on Twitter.
Saunders said: ‘Left unchallenged, even low-level offending can subsequently fuel the kind of dangerous hostility that has been plastered across our media in recent days. That is why countering it is a priority for the CPS.’ Obviously not in all cases.
Someone should tell Norman Tebbit, who knows in great detail what it is like to be blown up by the IRA. He might have some ‘words of advice’ for Dame Cressida.
Earth is greener largely thanks to China and India, NASA satellite study finds
Source: Peter Hitchens - Daily Mail
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
Tuesday, October 8, 2019
White Supremacy Was Behind Greta's Climate Strike Movement
Organizers say millions of youth around the world have joined the Fridays for Future student walkouts to protest climate change.
They have hailed its founder, 16-year-old Greta Thunberg of Sweden, who is currently on a North American tour to join protests and speak out on the alleged emergency facing the world, including at the United Nations last month.
And while Thunberg has been careful to cater to indigenous groups and their activist supporters – she has claimed some protests are taking place on indigenous land – many are now turning on her, claiming that she is getting attention because she is white and that support for her is proof that white supremacy and white privilege are alive and well.
“Y’all need to ask yourselves why you find it so much easier to hear from white people, regardless of age, when it comes to the violence they have caused across the world,” No White Saviours tweeted.
“It is a SYMPTOM of global white supremacy that certain people are HEARD & given a platform, certain people have access to the RESOURCES to be the HEROES that the world will pay attention to.” 7:30 AM – Sep 27, 2019
“Greta should have grabbed some children from Flint or NJ and took them to the UN. They are impacted right now by environmental terrorism caused by racism, White Supremacy, and racialzed governance. Greta at the UN was the epitome of White Privilege/White power= Save white kids!” Marley K tweeted.
“Propping up Thunberg over Indigenous people who have been fighting this battle for ages can’t be reduced to it’s the message that counts.”
Thunberg’s message isn’t an accurate assessment of the threat of the climate crisis (if it was white supremacy would be more explicit),” Hari Ziyad tweeted.
“Thunberg’s message is that we need to always think of protecting the little white kids. The same message that is part of the problem in the first place,” Ziyad tweeted.
Activists seem to believe that this has long been an issue with “people of color” have long been believers manmade climate change.
“No disrespect to Young Greta, but a quick tutorial on “White Supremacy”… El Viejo Ebro tweeted.
“INDIGENOUS PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WARNING EVERYONE ALL OVER THE GLOBE ABOUT “CLIMATE CHANGE” FOR DECADES!!” one person tweeted.
“There is no mention of them now that this is mainstream. Just Greta…” he tweeted.
“I’m glad to see so many sharing @GretaThunberg ‘s #HowDareYou message,” another tweeted.
“However, Indigenous peoples have been saying this for 500 years. So it is not a new message. Her message has political and cultural authority due to white supremacy.”
“White environmentalists are instead urged to support and raise awareness of the work being done by people like Canadian Indigenous teen Autumn Peltier, an advocate for water protection of the Great Lakes, and ‘Little Miss Flint’, a youth activist raising awareness of the US city of Flint’s water crisis,” the New Zealand-based Newshub website reported on the backlash.
Advertisement
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia:
The 10 largest coal producers and exporters in Indonesia: