Orwell incorporated the concept of Newspeak, as opposed to Oldspeak, for the purpose of destroying the ability of the population to have conversations above the survival level. Eventually erasing the old words would cause the people to lose the ability to even think in the old way. Orwell recognized the importance of totally controlling the population's speech and thoughts. Today's elites covet no less an end result.
so Joel, does B.A. or Argentina seem more like home? It certainly is beautiful and if one wants to continue drinking great red wine including a nice Bonarda or Malbec and EATING DELICIOUS BEEF, what a place to spend a chunk of your remaining life or even one day.
Is Argentina then a good place to bolt to as long as your funds come from outside the country?
What does the group think about Uruguay with its rich soil/farming and the acquirer that is found beneath most of the country?
How about using pleural pronouns, we, they, us, them etc. to represent a single individual. This does not aid but hinders communication.
"Transgender". A made up word which confuses rather than clarifying communication. Having studied genetics, cell biology, embryology, developmental anatomy, anatomy and physiology I can say with a high degree of certainty than transgenderism is a imaginary construct. It is one of choice, not science.
What difference does it make to the voters (Recession) when 90% of the electorate neither knows what GDP stands for or means. The person now working two jobs to sustain life may finally wise up.
What about the word "gay"? Fifty or so years ago, when applied to a human male, it meant someone with a bright, sunny disposition, who was usually happy, funny.and gregarious.
I did some looking into how gay came to mean homosexual. It seems that in the last century or two, young hobos with no skills supported themselves as "gay boys", providing sexual favors to other hobos. (One source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_men)
As stated before,these writings should be mandatory in high school and university,if only for a more balanced view of the world.Thank you for your good work.
Crisis. Today, everything normal is now a crisis, if not an emergency. Science. That’s another redefinition in progress. And progressive, as when describing regressive.
Financial writers disappointed me using Woke and Wokeness in other meanings to cast displeasure on others in their writings. I find those words commonly hi-jacked. Unless I am entirely wrong, and I have been many times. But I do know I do not know everything, which is smarter than those who do not know they do not know everything. I know that unless one has a medical degree or a degree in climate, instead of giving advice in those fields, instead needs to sit down and shut up. They do not know they do not know or are trying to disprove a truth for some goofy reason. Just the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Nuff said. And no getting a doctor that swears smoking is okay either.
A degree in Climate? Interesting - Most of what we see in predictions are based upon computer models. Meteorology is the predicting via some of the most powerful computers in existence the weather in the future based upon the conditions of say today. The unbelievable differences from apparently the same starting data led one Meteorologist to investigate and we ended up with Chaos theory. Explained to the masses as the 'Butterfly Effect'. A butterfly beating its wing in Asia can effect the weather in Europe! Now anyone who tells me that a computer model of the planet can overcome the butterfly effect reliably needs his head examining, Climate Degree or not. That is the first objection to the topic. The second is that in the real hard sciences it was generally accepted that Richard Feynman (a great if ever there was one) was right in most of his assertions. Here are a few.
“Science is the organized scepticism in the reliability of expert opinion.”
Yet the Climatologists don't hold to that Maxim - according to them, 'Scepticism' is 'denial' and instead of recognising and addressing the arguments of the sceptics, they simply ignore them and apply the label 'denier'. That is NOT scientific, in fact suggests to me that they fear they can't reliably do it. All the 'adjustments' of data may prove to be a convenient way of obfuscating issues and so obtaining grants. As Lovelock said when asked why it was only him 'recanting his alarmist views' - "I am an independent scientists, I don't need grants to live."
Another Feynman quote,
"First you guess... if it disagrees with experience the guess is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn't matter how beautiful your guess is or how smart you are or what your name is. If it disagrees with experience it's wrong. That's all there is to it."
Which has happened so many time with 'Global Warming' that they changed its name to "Climate Change" - If you don't believe that is true, go and seek out the previously mentioned Prof James Lovelock (Author of the Gaia Hypothesis) former Doyen of the Greens until he 'recanted his alarmist views' of the warming. Though his support for Nuclear Power has always been problematic for the Greens.
Then there is another former Green - Prof Bjorn Lomborg - his book 'The Skeptical Environmentalist' is as Feynman would recognise, a valid scientific assessment of the Green claims. Reading the book no doubt comes as a big a shock to many Greens as the search for evidence by Prof Lomborg was to him. Particularly when he discovered how the Greens manipulated and twisted data or never set it in context.
The interesting thing is that no one doubts climate changes. Certainly here in the UK anyone who did could simply be asked
"Do you holiday in the Lake District or the Glacier District?"
The English Lakes are a national park, many of the features carved out of the landscape by the last ice age providing the well loved and well visited scenery of the area.
Well, the glaciers have long gone, and so far no woolly mammoth specimen inside of the remains of a 4x4 has been found to confirm that is how the glaciers melted.
Then we have the BBC, a classic mammoth of today, but so Woke and PC I'm amazed the link I'm providing still works. (None of the links I have to the famous LSE - London School of Economics letter to the Queen explaining how all the expert economists missed the impending 2007/08 crisis still work. Probably because all the expert economists put their names to it, and to bring that up again would be very embarrassing) The BBC link below is to a story about when the world was much warmer (7c)
Curiously one of the things that happened was the evolution of mammals - ie the likes of us!
I won't bother listing all the Green Initiatives that have proven to be ecological disasters, but I will mention the fact that in the UK one of our largest power stations, Drax, is a 'wood burner'. In the late 1500's early 1600's in England, there was an ecological crisis over the amount of wood burning, so a King introduced what is arguably the first green conservation law. It banned the use of wood in furnaces or kilns, so England went for coal. Drax now burns wood again, but not UK wood! It burns Latvian or US forests. Forgetting all the other issues around wood burning which make it far from a good idea to burn it on the scale needed, how is transporting 1/3rd of the way round the globe or even from Latvia, etc a good green idea?
Then we move onto the practicalities. Computer models. If you were in the UK the reputation of such models have been seriously damaged during the Covid crisis when a Prof Ferguson from Imperial College predicted half a million dead in the UK if we didn't lock down. Curiously none of the MSM brought up the fact he'd predicted pretty much the same apocalyptic figures for at least two previous epidemics that never made it to pandemics. Even Climate Change computer models are simply a model. I also understand there are some double figures worth of models, AND none agree precisely with each other. Those predicting lower extremes are not the ones the Greens like or often refer to!
I'm with Bjorn Lomborg. It is insanity to risk the global economy (or what is left of it after covid lockdown madness met 2007 QE/Low interest rates) on Net Zero. The loss of life in extreme weather events globally have fallen so dramatically we should do what Lomborg says, AND which humanity is excellent at doing. Solve the problems the warming produces not destroy the economy to stop CO2 production, certainly not in the insane time-scales chosen. We now live in areas of the planet what would have been considered impossible less than a century ago, because we are problem solvers. Lomborg himself provides example of what we could do to mitigate the changes and not risk the massive loss of lives and regression to a more 'stone age' existence if we listened to the Net Zero crowd.
Then there is the fact that in the 1970's there was a claim we were headed for another ice age. Quite simply more people would die if the planet suffered an ice age than will die if it suffers global warming, So we should listen to Lomborg's suggested solutions, not Thunberg's religious style solutions.
Finally a point relating to the BBC article - the issue according to the Greens is the burning of 'Fossil' Fuels. The clue is in the word 'Fossil' - At some point in history that Carbon sequestered as 'fossil' fuels was free in the atmosphere. For it to be sequestered as fossil fuels, life, plant and animal had to exist to fix that carbon. Given the vast quantities of fossil fuels, it strikes me that the Green idea of extinction, in a high CO2 world, of everything is risible.
On our planet life is always changing, the age of the Dinosaurs has passed, one day the age of Human's may pass, but I suspect, like with the Dinosaurs it will be a cataclysmic event. In either case, the Planet will NOT die, nor does it care. The planet will only cease to exist when the sun expands to engulf it, and I doubt even then it will be too bothered.
Over the last few years I have penned a number of missives regarding words that have been bludgeoned into submission. Here are some samples:
Democracy - Most democratic systems in use today have strayed so far from one man/one vote (sorry girls) that they are no longer recognisable.
Investors - People who buy shares are labelled as "investors". When the price and value of shares bear no discernible connection these people are better described as gamblers betting on the "greater fool theory".
Emergency - Our masters are overly fond of describing our current situation as a "Climate Emergency" then almost universally continue to do nothing but kick the rather battered can further down the road.
Robust - As in a "robust" inquiry. Generally when a politician or official describes anything as robust it will be the exact opposite.
Isolation - Here in NZ our muppets in charge decided that if you came home during the "pandemic" you would be compulsorly housed under military guard in a reasonably flash hotel at great personal cost to "isolate" in a form of solitary confinement for 14 days. Trouble was to get exercise you would often be packed on to a bus and taken to an area where you could run around. You can't even social distance on a bus.
GDP - GDP is the absolute some of all the financial movements, both good and bad. So it is possible to be going backwards at a great rate of knots and still have increasing GDP. Witness the USA that we are told has been increasing its GDP whilst increasing its debt by 3 times as much.
Joel, I love milanesa. Used to eat it all the time in Mexico. Maybe I can travel to Buenos Aires one day and enjoy one with you and your family. Buen provecho
As our fabulously disoriented WH occupants, who can't/won't tell the difference between boys and girls these days, would tell us: the tire is NOT flat, it is symmetrically challenged! So, too, is the GDP positive-data challenged! These are the same people who hand out awards for just showing up! Who want you to believe that grading students and rating performance is somehow degrading and negative and ultimately positive-data challenged. Who want you to believe that World Series and Super Bowls are just sports-oriented interruptions surrounding the halftime spectacles and Rock Concerts. That the only real scores there are the dollars spent by the people showing up, not by the teams' competition on the field. Govt controlled Bread and Circuses! Not to worry, govt controlled GDPs, currencies, climates and health care will make all things better. If the data should come in again positive-data challenged, they will just declare it positive because they control the media, too. That is the world that Biden is distortedly building back better! Not unlike Eastwood/Costner's Perfect World: not a positive ending for those who are positive-data challenged! Thus the need for Biden's new Ministry of Truth! And Fentanyl for all!
I dont know if the meaning of the word Marijuana has stayed the same -- it is now always known as "medicinal marijuana" and the political importance of it surely has changed --- if you are a US Federal Government employee and caught with medicinal marijuana you are forced to resign or be fired... But try taking it to Moscow and the mean and nasty Russians are purely evil for prohibiting the stuff. Try that! TRW
Orwell incorporated the concept of Newspeak, as opposed to Oldspeak, for the purpose of destroying the ability of the population to have conversations above the survival level. Eventually erasing the old words would cause the people to lose the ability to even think in the old way. Orwell recognized the importance of totally controlling the population's speech and thoughts. Today's elites covet no less an end result.
so Joel, does B.A. or Argentina seem more like home? It certainly is beautiful and if one wants to continue drinking great red wine including a nice Bonarda or Malbec and EATING DELICIOUS BEEF, what a place to spend a chunk of your remaining life or even one day.
Is Argentina then a good place to bolt to as long as your funds come from outside the country?
What does the group think about Uruguay with its rich soil/farming and the acquirer that is found beneath most of the country?
.
How about using pleural pronouns, we, they, us, them etc. to represent a single individual. This does not aid but hinders communication.
"Transgender". A made up word which confuses rather than clarifying communication. Having studied genetics, cell biology, embryology, developmental anatomy, anatomy and physiology I can say with a high degree of certainty than transgenderism is a imaginary construct. It is one of choice, not science.
Those suffering mental illness are rarely making a choice with regard to their particular delusion...
You are correct. It is delusional thinking. That is how it should be addressed, Not with hormonal manipulation and mutilation.
What difference does it make to the voters (Recession) when 90% of the electorate neither knows what GDP stands for or means. The person now working two jobs to sustain life may finally wise up.
What about the word "gay"? Fifty or so years ago, when applied to a human male, it meant someone with a bright, sunny disposition, who was usually happy, funny.and gregarious.
I did some looking into how gay came to mean homosexual. It seems that in the last century or two, young hobos with no skills supported themselves as "gay boys", providing sexual favors to other hobos. (One source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay_men)
Consider this a definite maybe.
Again,well done ,well written and accurate.
As stated before,these writings should be mandatory in high school and university,if only for a more balanced view of the world.Thank you for your good work.
How about equity, and equality. When did those become interchangable?
Crisis. Today, everything normal is now a crisis, if not an emergency. Science. That’s another redefinition in progress. And progressive, as when describing regressive.
Financial writers disappointed me using Woke and Wokeness in other meanings to cast displeasure on others in their writings. I find those words commonly hi-jacked. Unless I am entirely wrong, and I have been many times. But I do know I do not know everything, which is smarter than those who do not know they do not know everything. I know that unless one has a medical degree or a degree in climate, instead of giving advice in those fields, instead needs to sit down and shut up. They do not know they do not know or are trying to disprove a truth for some goofy reason. Just the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Nuff said. And no getting a doctor that swears smoking is okay either.
A degree in Climate? Interesting - Most of what we see in predictions are based upon computer models. Meteorology is the predicting via some of the most powerful computers in existence the weather in the future based upon the conditions of say today. The unbelievable differences from apparently the same starting data led one Meteorologist to investigate and we ended up with Chaos theory. Explained to the masses as the 'Butterfly Effect'. A butterfly beating its wing in Asia can effect the weather in Europe! Now anyone who tells me that a computer model of the planet can overcome the butterfly effect reliably needs his head examining, Climate Degree or not. That is the first objection to the topic. The second is that in the real hard sciences it was generally accepted that Richard Feynman (a great if ever there was one) was right in most of his assertions. Here are a few.
“Science is the organized scepticism in the reliability of expert opinion.”
Yet the Climatologists don't hold to that Maxim - according to them, 'Scepticism' is 'denial' and instead of recognising and addressing the arguments of the sceptics, they simply ignore them and apply the label 'denier'. That is NOT scientific, in fact suggests to me that they fear they can't reliably do it. All the 'adjustments' of data may prove to be a convenient way of obfuscating issues and so obtaining grants. As Lovelock said when asked why it was only him 'recanting his alarmist views' - "I am an independent scientists, I don't need grants to live."
Another Feynman quote,
"First you guess... if it disagrees with experience the guess is wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn't matter how beautiful your guess is or how smart you are or what your name is. If it disagrees with experience it's wrong. That's all there is to it."
Which has happened so many time with 'Global Warming' that they changed its name to "Climate Change" - If you don't believe that is true, go and seek out the previously mentioned Prof James Lovelock (Author of the Gaia Hypothesis) former Doyen of the Greens until he 'recanted his alarmist views' of the warming. Though his support for Nuclear Power has always been problematic for the Greens.
Then there is another former Green - Prof Bjorn Lomborg - his book 'The Skeptical Environmentalist' is as Feynman would recognise, a valid scientific assessment of the Green claims. Reading the book no doubt comes as a big a shock to many Greens as the search for evidence by Prof Lomborg was to him. Particularly when he discovered how the Greens manipulated and twisted data or never set it in context.
The interesting thing is that no one doubts climate changes. Certainly here in the UK anyone who did could simply be asked
"Do you holiday in the Lake District or the Glacier District?"
The English Lakes are a national park, many of the features carved out of the landscape by the last ice age providing the well loved and well visited scenery of the area.
Well, the glaciers have long gone, and so far no woolly mammoth specimen inside of the remains of a 4x4 has been found to confirm that is how the glaciers melted.
Then we have the BBC, a classic mammoth of today, but so Woke and PC I'm amazed the link I'm providing still works. (None of the links I have to the famous LSE - London School of Economics letter to the Queen explaining how all the expert economists missed the impending 2007/08 crisis still work. Probably because all the expert economists put their names to it, and to bring that up again would be very embarrassing) The BBC link below is to a story about when the world was much warmer (7c)
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/385SHpTG5M25Xr6G3FSMJTG/seven-things-that-happened-when-the-planet-got-really-really-hot
Curiously one of the things that happened was the evolution of mammals - ie the likes of us!
I won't bother listing all the Green Initiatives that have proven to be ecological disasters, but I will mention the fact that in the UK one of our largest power stations, Drax, is a 'wood burner'. In the late 1500's early 1600's in England, there was an ecological crisis over the amount of wood burning, so a King introduced what is arguably the first green conservation law. It banned the use of wood in furnaces or kilns, so England went for coal. Drax now burns wood again, but not UK wood! It burns Latvian or US forests. Forgetting all the other issues around wood burning which make it far from a good idea to burn it on the scale needed, how is transporting 1/3rd of the way round the globe or even from Latvia, etc a good green idea?
Then we move onto the practicalities. Computer models. If you were in the UK the reputation of such models have been seriously damaged during the Covid crisis when a Prof Ferguson from Imperial College predicted half a million dead in the UK if we didn't lock down. Curiously none of the MSM brought up the fact he'd predicted pretty much the same apocalyptic figures for at least two previous epidemics that never made it to pandemics. Even Climate Change computer models are simply a model. I also understand there are some double figures worth of models, AND none agree precisely with each other. Those predicting lower extremes are not the ones the Greens like or often refer to!
I'm with Bjorn Lomborg. It is insanity to risk the global economy (or what is left of it after covid lockdown madness met 2007 QE/Low interest rates) on Net Zero. The loss of life in extreme weather events globally have fallen so dramatically we should do what Lomborg says, AND which humanity is excellent at doing. Solve the problems the warming produces not destroy the economy to stop CO2 production, certainly not in the insane time-scales chosen. We now live in areas of the planet what would have been considered impossible less than a century ago, because we are problem solvers. Lomborg himself provides example of what we could do to mitigate the changes and not risk the massive loss of lives and regression to a more 'stone age' existence if we listened to the Net Zero crowd.
Then there is the fact that in the 1970's there was a claim we were headed for another ice age. Quite simply more people would die if the planet suffered an ice age than will die if it suffers global warming, So we should listen to Lomborg's suggested solutions, not Thunberg's religious style solutions.
Finally a point relating to the BBC article - the issue according to the Greens is the burning of 'Fossil' Fuels. The clue is in the word 'Fossil' - At some point in history that Carbon sequestered as 'fossil' fuels was free in the atmosphere. For it to be sequestered as fossil fuels, life, plant and animal had to exist to fix that carbon. Given the vast quantities of fossil fuels, it strikes me that the Green idea of extinction, in a high CO2 world, of everything is risible.
On our planet life is always changing, the age of the Dinosaurs has passed, one day the age of Human's may pass, but I suspect, like with the Dinosaurs it will be a cataclysmic event. In either case, the Planet will NOT die, nor does it care. The planet will only cease to exist when the sun expands to engulf it, and I doubt even then it will be too bothered.
Working class definition= one fulltime and one part time job and still not paying the bills=recession.
Over the last few years I have penned a number of missives regarding words that have been bludgeoned into submission. Here are some samples:
Democracy - Most democratic systems in use today have strayed so far from one man/one vote (sorry girls) that they are no longer recognisable.
Investors - People who buy shares are labelled as "investors". When the price and value of shares bear no discernible connection these people are better described as gamblers betting on the "greater fool theory".
Emergency - Our masters are overly fond of describing our current situation as a "Climate Emergency" then almost universally continue to do nothing but kick the rather battered can further down the road.
Robust - As in a "robust" inquiry. Generally when a politician or official describes anything as robust it will be the exact opposite.
Isolation - Here in NZ our muppets in charge decided that if you came home during the "pandemic" you would be compulsorly housed under military guard in a reasonably flash hotel at great personal cost to "isolate" in a form of solitary confinement for 14 days. Trouble was to get exercise you would often be packed on to a bus and taken to an area where you could run around. You can't even social distance on a bus.
GDP - GDP is the absolute some of all the financial movements, both good and bad. So it is possible to be going backwards at a great rate of knots and still have increasing GDP. Witness the USA that we are told has been increasing its GDP whilst increasing its debt by 3 times as much.
Word meaning shifts. Simple. Communist propaganda is asserting itself now because it can!
Joel, I love milanesa. Used to eat it all the time in Mexico. Maybe I can travel to Buenos Aires one day and enjoy one with you and your family. Buen provecho
A brilliant take on Shakespeare - I hope you don't mind, but I'm more than likely to borrow that 'Ruse' quote!
As our fabulously disoriented WH occupants, who can't/won't tell the difference between boys and girls these days, would tell us: the tire is NOT flat, it is symmetrically challenged! So, too, is the GDP positive-data challenged! These are the same people who hand out awards for just showing up! Who want you to believe that grading students and rating performance is somehow degrading and negative and ultimately positive-data challenged. Who want you to believe that World Series and Super Bowls are just sports-oriented interruptions surrounding the halftime spectacles and Rock Concerts. That the only real scores there are the dollars spent by the people showing up, not by the teams' competition on the field. Govt controlled Bread and Circuses! Not to worry, govt controlled GDPs, currencies, climates and health care will make all things better. If the data should come in again positive-data challenged, they will just declare it positive because they control the media, too. That is the world that Biden is distortedly building back better! Not unlike Eastwood/Costner's Perfect World: not a positive ending for those who are positive-data challenged! Thus the need for Biden's new Ministry of Truth! And Fentanyl for all!
I dont know if the meaning of the word Marijuana has stayed the same -- it is now always known as "medicinal marijuana" and the political importance of it surely has changed --- if you are a US Federal Government employee and caught with medicinal marijuana you are forced to resign or be fired... But try taking it to Moscow and the mean and nasty Russians are purely evil for prohibiting the stuff. Try that! TRW