I've listened , watched the debate etc about the above with disgust. It's pure lobby power, when the argument is straightforward IMO.
We banned cockfighting and bear baiting because it was cruel to the animals. If foxhunting with dogs is as cruel--- it should be classed the same way.
Chasing a fox until it is totally exhausted then allowing a pack of dogs to kill and effectively eat it- for fun - I think is- and so I agree with the Government in this instance.
A sentence from a character in the Archers last night [a radio farming soap ] was 'hunting vermin is one thing, but making a game of it ? '... which I think summed up most of the arguments.
Monday, January 31, 2005
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
Camelford Poisoning
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1490142.stm
THe above just says that the 1998 poisoning of 1000s of homes near Camelford in 1998 and has now re-appeared in the News today- basically stating that health problems still affect some of those people poisoned at the time.
The population was poisoned when a tanker sent aluminium sulphate directly into the water supply- and caused quite a bit of attention at the time [surprise ]
However, the media didnt seem to pick up on its possible long term implications of Alzheimers disease- aparently the victims are suffering from short term memory loss and other symptomsof the disease.
The article below is perhaps the most pro aluminium article I've ever read - but maybe its the most subjective.......
http://www.lef.org/protocols/prtcl-156.shtml#alum
I threw my mothers' aluminium pans out years ago .
THe above just says that the 1998 poisoning of 1000s of homes near Camelford in 1998 and has now re-appeared in the News today- basically stating that health problems still affect some of those people poisoned at the time.
The population was poisoned when a tanker sent aluminium sulphate directly into the water supply- and caused quite a bit of attention at the time [surprise ]
However, the media didnt seem to pick up on its possible long term implications of Alzheimers disease- aparently the victims are suffering from short term memory loss and other symptomsof the disease.
The article below is perhaps the most pro aluminium article I've ever read - but maybe its the most subjective.......
http://www.lef.org/protocols/prtcl-156.shtml#alum
I threw my mothers' aluminium pans out years ago .
EU Crazy Laws again
This is about the Competition Act 1998 .
It has several very good parts to it - no cartels , no agreements to not compete in regions etc- which are excellent.
Unfortunately there are a few bits that aren't *quite* so nifty.
It is against the law now, for instance, that different prices can be offered for the same product. This means that it is against the law for price haggling , in say a car boot sale---- and the seller could be fined up to 10% of his turnover !
Or a company negotiating rents on a building , now cannot negotiate !
The above may or may not be true - its certainly down in black and white, but I have complained to the OFT about this one as it affects me .
It has several very good parts to it - no cartels , no agreements to not compete in regions etc- which are excellent.
Unfortunately there are a few bits that aren't *quite* so nifty.
It is against the law now, for instance, that different prices can be offered for the same product. This means that it is against the law for price haggling , in say a car boot sale---- and the seller could be fined up to 10% of his turnover !
Or a company negotiating rents on a building , now cannot negotiate !
The above may or may not be true - its certainly down in black and white, but I have complained to the OFT about this one as it affects me .
Monday, January 24, 2005
Iran Now ?
The papers yesterday mentioned in passing that the war against Iran had already started . Presumably covert stuff or plans .
Its to be hoped that Iran doesnt get Dubya therapy or if it does that the UK stands aside- the world cannot cope with another adventure - its gonna get seriously anti USA .
I can't bring myself to condemn Iran for trying to get some serious ordnance- witness USA treatment of N.Korea and also Israel having a little something aside 'just in case' as it were.
If Israel were to disarm, then that would create a huge peace push for the Middle East. It wont happen , but one can dream !
Its to be hoped that Iran doesnt get Dubya therapy or if it does that the UK stands aside- the world cannot cope with another adventure - its gonna get seriously anti USA .
I can't bring myself to condemn Iran for trying to get some serious ordnance- witness USA treatment of N.Korea and also Israel having a little something aside 'just in case' as it were.
If Israel were to disarm, then that would create a huge peace push for the Middle East. It wont happen , but one can dream !
Thursday, January 20, 2005
Einstein and all that
Cor its Einsteins special aniversary year [relatively speaking].
One thing the papers seem to have latched onto [a tad anyway] is his idea that big bang couldnt have occurred- sort of showing him not to be as bright as he was.
Anyway in deference to my hero- here's my twopennorth- an Einstein vindication...........
Hawking says that time stops when a black hole exists and in his book says that before Big Bang there was nothing. He then goes to show properties of existing black holes in the Universe. Ergo time can exist before Big Bang.
If we use Occams razor and assume certain laws of thermodynamics exist then we can examine prior to that time intellectually.
Lets start with 1. 'matter/energy ' cannot be created or destroyed --- fairly controversial and also because it makes life easier but is not strictly necessary----- 2. The Universe started.
Item 2 is not reall needed but does make it soooo much nicer.
From 2 - the energy level of the Universe must be zero , ie before it started the energy must have been zero.
From NOT 2 - Occams razor..... a zero energy level is so much easier to go back infinitely in time than a positive [or negative ] one .
So far so easy , but thiss flows from the above [ no maths so read on]
Thus the energy of the Universe is Zero at this present time.
Thereby negative energy must exist
matter exists which is a complicated form of energy [ note we know matter is made up from protons/quarks /+ ? hence statement is true]
Matter must have been formed in the past ...... and must be being created now.
Anti matter must have been formed in the past .... and must be created now.
The fact that the Universe is nearly empty implies its not a too common event.
If a lump of space suddenly gets 2 particles, 1 positive the other negative with negative gravity between them, most gets zapped instantly. This would create a maelstrom in the Universe a huge storm doing absolutely NOTHING. However if a certain confirguration occurred in this creation/destruction where the force separating them were so strong that they flew apart quicker than they could be destroyed, we have a method of creating matter.
Thus all matter can be thought of being made of only 2 building blocks each the negative of the other - its simple to think of. Different particles could have different numbers of negative particles . It would probably create some weird properties very close to a block when the negatives may start to pull their weight [as it were].
Anyway, we can now start to build the Universes - they must be pairs [at least virtually- although the one being compressed into the centre may impede the outer one forming].
Without doing maths its difficult to know what happens next- one of 2 things :
1. Then centre block gets bigger and bigger with the negative gravity around it forcing it denser and denser till the blocks just collapse on themselves due to pressure- this would wipe out a significant amount of volume which could cause a huge explosion- Big Bang or
2. More than one positive Universe forms of course and they are atttracted together.
These are HUGE things [about the mass of the Universe ] and when they finally met they would be going at relatively HUGE velocities. Its the sort of thing you dont want to be near when they hit - Would create a HUGE Bang.
When whichever happened - its interesting to note that at the centre of the explosion over time would become a rather large lump of negative energy/mass
Anyway if true ,Einstein would be vindicated.
If true the following predictions would apply.
1.There is absolutely no point in trying to measure the mass of the Universe because its changing - although trying to measure it for other purposes......
2. There is more than one Universe - just statistics.
3. The centre of the Univese is a white hole.
4. The Universe can not end up as pre- big bang lump.
5. Anti gravity exists
6. Quarks are not the smallest entity.
7. Using these negative particles could create some WEIRD+ futuristic industries
8. The speed of light might not be a limit [using 7]
9. To start with anyway the rate of expansion of the Universe could be accelerating - due to the accelerating force from the white hole. We could aslo be getting pulled towards another Univese of course.......
You can comment/email of you want :)
One thing the papers seem to have latched onto [a tad anyway] is his idea that big bang couldnt have occurred- sort of showing him not to be as bright as he was.
Anyway in deference to my hero- here's my twopennorth- an Einstein vindication...........
Hawking says that time stops when a black hole exists and in his book says that before Big Bang there was nothing. He then goes to show properties of existing black holes in the Universe. Ergo time can exist before Big Bang.
If we use Occams razor and assume certain laws of thermodynamics exist then we can examine prior to that time intellectually.
Lets start with 1. 'matter/energy ' cannot be created or destroyed --- fairly controversial and also because it makes life easier but is not strictly necessary----- 2. The Universe started.
Item 2 is not reall needed but does make it soooo much nicer.
From 2 - the energy level of the Universe must be zero , ie before it started the energy must have been zero.
From NOT 2 - Occams razor..... a zero energy level is so much easier to go back infinitely in time than a positive [or negative ] one .
So far so easy , but thiss flows from the above [ no maths so read on]
Thus the energy of the Universe is Zero at this present time.
Thereby negative energy must exist
matter exists which is a complicated form of energy [ note we know matter is made up from protons/quarks /+ ? hence statement is true]
Matter must have been formed in the past ...... and must be being created now.
Anti matter must have been formed in the past .... and must be created now.
The fact that the Universe is nearly empty implies its not a too common event.
If a lump of space suddenly gets 2 particles, 1 positive the other negative with negative gravity between them, most gets zapped instantly. This would create a maelstrom in the Universe a huge storm doing absolutely NOTHING. However if a certain confirguration occurred in this creation/destruction where the force separating them were so strong that they flew apart quicker than they could be destroyed, we have a method of creating matter.
Thus all matter can be thought of being made of only 2 building blocks each the negative of the other - its simple to think of. Different particles could have different numbers of negative particles . It would probably create some weird properties very close to a block when the negatives may start to pull their weight [as it were].
Anyway, we can now start to build the Universes - they must be pairs [at least virtually- although the one being compressed into the centre may impede the outer one forming].
Without doing maths its difficult to know what happens next- one of 2 things :
1. Then centre block gets bigger and bigger with the negative gravity around it forcing it denser and denser till the blocks just collapse on themselves due to pressure- this would wipe out a significant amount of volume which could cause a huge explosion- Big Bang or
2. More than one positive Universe forms of course and they are atttracted together.
These are HUGE things [about the mass of the Universe ] and when they finally met they would be going at relatively HUGE velocities. Its the sort of thing you dont want to be near when they hit - Would create a HUGE Bang.
When whichever happened - its interesting to note that at the centre of the explosion over time would become a rather large lump of negative energy/mass
Anyway if true ,Einstein would be vindicated.
If true the following predictions would apply.
1.There is absolutely no point in trying to measure the mass of the Universe because its changing - although trying to measure it for other purposes......
2. There is more than one Universe - just statistics.
3. The centre of the Univese is a white hole.
4. The Universe can not end up as pre- big bang lump.
5. Anti gravity exists
6. Quarks are not the smallest entity.
7. Using these negative particles could create some WEIRD+ futuristic industries
8. The speed of light might not be a limit [using 7]
9. To start with anyway the rate of expansion of the Universe could be accelerating - due to the accelerating force from the white hole. We could aslo be getting pulled towards another Univese of course.......
You can comment/email of you want :)
Monday, January 17, 2005
gordon brown's Miracle
I dont know how he does it, but he pulls the wool over journalists' eyes so easily.
He's managed to do this one for years and I keep reading about his Golden Rule and whether he is gonna keep to it that its really laughable.
I apologise for not drawing a graph to illustrate this joke, but it is quite easy to see without going into heavy maths.
He states that over a 6 year period [ish - its meant to be vague so he can fudge -- but that's another story] that he'll only nick enough of our money to pay for investment and will not nick our money to get the government into more debt.
That said he has a minor fudge cos he says that he wont borrow more than 40% of our GDP - ie the rule is worthless on that front .......
Anyway what did he do ?
At the start of his 'ship he stuck to the Tories spending plans , this kept borrowing down for about 5 years ? and enabled him to pay back debts.
Thus hes quids in at this point........
Then he decided to stick to his promise , ie to spend up to his limit. Fair enough and everyone knows about this - and is the cause of all the discussion.
As he has been accelerating his spending up to now---- assume he is gonna hit his 'golden rule'----- he is going to start the next with spending as at present by definition--- but his rate of spending is increased by his curmudgeonly act at the start , thus its well out of control before he starts .
[ It is awkward to know what he'll do with this problem. My guess is he'll borrow up to 40% of GDP, but also borrow loads more from business 'off the books'
In case you don't know what that means - its another wrinkle he uses a lot- a company pays you to build/run a facility - say a hospital- say £100M to build it. Then they charge the government say £25M/year for 25 years as it's share of the cost. Result ? the government saves £100M of course in borrowings. End result ? one more term of office for Labour . Bless :)
]
No journalist/media guy has looked at the next cycle and what it means cos Brown has managed to keep the debate about this year's spending only.
How does he do it ? The man's a flipping genius in subterfuge ! and he doesnt care neither about the consequences
IT IS VERY WORRYING .....
He's managed to do this one for years and I keep reading about his Golden Rule and whether he is gonna keep to it that its really laughable.
I apologise for not drawing a graph to illustrate this joke, but it is quite easy to see without going into heavy maths.
He states that over a 6 year period [ish - its meant to be vague so he can fudge -- but that's another story] that he'll only nick enough of our money to pay for investment and will not nick our money to get the government into more debt.
That said he has a minor fudge cos he says that he wont borrow more than 40% of our GDP - ie the rule is worthless on that front .......
Anyway what did he do ?
At the start of his 'ship he stuck to the Tories spending plans , this kept borrowing down for about 5 years ? and enabled him to pay back debts.
Thus hes quids in at this point........
Then he decided to stick to his promise , ie to spend up to his limit. Fair enough and everyone knows about this - and is the cause of all the discussion.
As he has been accelerating his spending up to now---- assume he is gonna hit his 'golden rule'----- he is going to start the next with spending as at present by definition--- but his rate of spending is increased by his curmudgeonly act at the start , thus its well out of control before he starts .
[ It is awkward to know what he'll do with this problem. My guess is he'll borrow up to 40% of GDP, but also borrow loads more from business 'off the books'
In case you don't know what that means - its another wrinkle he uses a lot- a company pays you to build/run a facility - say a hospital- say £100M to build it. Then they charge the government say £25M/year for 25 years as it's share of the cost. Result ? the government saves £100M of course in borrowings. End result ? one more term of office for Labour . Bless :)
]
No journalist/media guy has looked at the next cycle and what it means cos Brown has managed to keep the debate about this year's spending only.
How does he do it ? The man's a flipping genius in subterfuge ! and he doesnt care neither about the consequences
IT IS VERY WORRYING .....
Thursday, January 13, 2005
microwaves + phones again?
http://www.emfacts.com/papers/russia.html
The above article syas bundles about microwave [and other EMF] radiation- its noot exactly new , but has been around for 60 years- showing that some parts of the spectrum causes death.
Russia has limits far below those of the West as it found that low levels addles the brain [ see latest health topic scare re mobile phones......
I feel that enough has been said on this topic and that the governments should get together and ban EMF usuage in the water heating part of the spectrum say 30- 300,000 MHz- with a special exemption for certain military uses .
Come on idiots- [aka journalists] please take up the shock horror probe banner and get this problem noticed before the world goes pottier than it is already.
http://www.emfacts.com/wlans.html also gives more info if you are interested...
The above article syas bundles about microwave [and other EMF] radiation- its noot exactly new , but has been around for 60 years- showing that some parts of the spectrum causes death.
Russia has limits far below those of the West as it found that low levels addles the brain [ see latest health topic scare re mobile phones......
I feel that enough has been said on this topic and that the governments should get together and ban EMF usuage in the water heating part of the spectrum say 30- 300,000 MHz- with a special exemption for certain military uses .
Come on idiots- [aka journalists] please take up the shock horror probe banner and get this problem noticed before the world goes pottier than it is already.
http://www.emfacts.com/wlans.html also gives more info if you are interested...
Friday, January 07, 2005
Aids in S africa needs aid
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/4152595.stm
This isnt quite the news story I was looking for but its near enough IMO[read it yesterday but cant find it now].
Apart from the obvious- someone died and dad says it is natural....
People say that death was fromTB or pneumonia [ I know the article only says TB- but they cite as cause of death the actual reason usually and pneumonia is a major factor - remember AIDS doesnt *actually* kill ]. Then it goes on to say that the wife died of pneumonia last year ....
Also and most alarmingly was the little throwaway statistic of 5,0000,000 people out of 45,000,000 have the disease - over 10% of the population ! --- and the guy in charge still refuses to believe it exists ??????????
This isnt quite the news story I was looking for but its near enough IMO[read it yesterday but cant find it now].
Apart from the obvious- someone died and dad says it is natural....
People say that death was fromTB or pneumonia [ I know the article only says TB- but they cite as cause of death the actual reason usually and pneumonia is a major factor - remember AIDS doesnt *actually* kill ]. Then it goes on to say that the wife died of pneumonia last year ....
Also and most alarmingly was the little throwaway statistic of 5,0000,000 people out of 45,000,000 have the disease - over 10% of the population ! --- and the guy in charge still refuses to believe it exists ??????????
Saturday, January 01, 2005
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)