‘New South Wales ministers are calling for the sacking of an Australian primary school teacher after anti-police and Black Lives Matter posters, which were created by the students, were found displayed around the classroom.‘ Follow the link and meet the disgusting stuff this teacher is putting into the minds of the students. What kind of society does this teacher want to live in?
‘The Daily Telegraph reported that Year 5 and 6 students at Lindfield Learning Village in Sydney made placards which said “Stop killer cops” and “White lives matter too much.” It also included other slogans such as “We can’t breathe” and “Pigs out of the country.”
New South Wales (NSW) Police Minister David Elliott called for the teacher to be sacked and said the posters were evidence of the political “indoctrinating and brainwashing” of left-wing ideologies in schools.
“We’re supposed to be telling our kids that if you wear a uniform, you’re a hero,” Elliot told 2GB radio. “They have completely let their student body down by indoctrinating and brainwashing them at a time when they should be learning how to read and write.”
Elliot was concerned that the controversial issues from America around police were being imported into Australian society.
The Australian PM is following Biden like a puppy DOG down the road of the CLIMATE SCAM SO Therefore, why is the Police Minister questioning why this is being taught in the schools?
You have to hand it to Xi Jinping. The Chinese “president for life” last September schmoozed the royalty of the United Nations with his unexpected pledge that his country aims “to have CO2 emissions peak before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality (Net Zero) before 2060.”
Xi then urged other nations “to pursue innovative, coordinated, green and open development for all” through rapid deployment of new technologies so as to “achieve a green recovery of the world economy in the post-COVID era and thus create a powerful force driving sustainable development.”
The eloquent sage, confident that the mantle of world leadership was passing from the United States into his hands, concluded his prepared remarks as follows:
“The baton of history has been passed to our generation, and we must make the right choice, a choice worthy of the people’s trust and of our times. Let us join hands to uphold the values of peace, development, equity, justice, democracy, and freedom shared by all of us and build a new type of international relations and a community with a shared future for mankind. Together, we can make the world a better place for everyone.”
And just how is China preparing itself for Net Zero?
The London-based energy and climate research group Ember reports that China generated 53 percent of the world’s total coal-fired power in 2020, a jump of 9 percent from 2015, while adding 38.4 gigawatts (GW) of new coal-fired power installations in 2020 alone. China is also financing billions of dollars’ worth of coal-fired power plants in other “developing” nations.
[It should be noted that in 2020 China also added a record 71.7 GW of wind power and 48.2 GW of solar. And China has set a goal of 70 GW of installed nuclear energy by 2025. But “progress is nowhere near fast enough,” according to Ember power analyst Dave Jones. Jones added that “coal power needs to collapse by 80 percent by 2030 to avoid dangerous levels of warming.” Or so he believes.]
Analysis by the Asia Society Policy Institute and Climate Analytics, as reported in Climate Change News, indicates that to reach the Paris Agreement’s goal of 1.5o C temperature reduction by 2060, China would have to achieve peak CO2 emissions by 2025 and rapidly reduce them thereafter, with a total phaseout of coal-fired power by 2040.
Yet, according to the Renewable Energy Institute, the typical coal-fired power plant has a lifespan of about 40 years. Would China throw away massive investments just to kowtow to the UN? Zhang Shuwei, chief economist for the Draworld Environment Research Center, claims Chinese coal may have to absorb over $300 billion in stranded assets if the nation follows through and undertakes a “cliff fall of coal power generation after 2030.”
But, as the New York Postrecently editorialized, China’s betrayal of its commitment to Hong Kong, together with its duplicity regarding the COVID pandemic and its dissembling on treatment of the Uighurs, signals that the Middle Kingdom cannot be trusted to keep its word. The trampling of Hong Kong’s freedoms, the paper argues, demonstrates that there is no point negotiating with the Chinese Communist Party on long-term issues like climate change.
Agence France-Presse reported in March that China’s latest five-year plan increases investment in coal and omits any cap on total energy consumption. Lauri Myllyvirta, lead analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, compares Xi’s words with China’s deeds, stating that, “The central contradiction between expanding the smokestack economy and promoting green growth appears unresolved.”
Similarly, Japanese journalists also question China’s commitment to the Green economy – in contrast to the “excellent” responses of Japan and its Western allies (despite the fact that new Japanese coal plants in 2020 exceeded retirements and that high-efficiency coal plants are unlikely to disappear soon. [The Japanese in their zeal to single out China ignored the fact that India and many other nations are also beefing up coal mining and power generation.]
Other journalists are equally offended at China’s apparent duplicity. Michael Standaert, a China-based free-lancer, wrote in Yale E360, under the headline, “Despite pledges to cut emissions, China Goes on a Coal Spree.” Standaert argued that there is a “real and figurative haze about how strong [China’s] climate ambitions really are and how quickly the country can wean itself from … coal.” [When Mother Jonesreposted Standaert’s article, the headline read in part, “China Is Bingeing on Coal.”]
Vox correspondent Lili Pike provides a backstory excuse for China’s seemingly odd behavior. She notes that China’s provinces, who gained authority to approve new power plants in 2014, see new coal plants as a way to boost their GDP and provide jobs. The economic slowdowns linked to COVID provided extra incentives for these provincial plants.
Perhaps Vox thinks that, once the provincial economies are rolling along, they will recognize their bad investments and shutter their coal plants almost immediately. Perhaps pigs will fly.
Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who insists “the climate emergency” — the defining crisis of our time — is happening even more quickly than we feared. It “is a race we are losing, but it is a race we can win.”
Guterres made a toothless plea to China last July to stop building new coal plants, but he giddily applauded Xi’s rhetoric in September. Xi has also won praise from mega-billionaire Bill Gates, who in a February 2021 interview with China Daily gushed over China’s “determination” to prioritize the climate and its contributions to carbon reduction.
According to Gates, “It’s great that President Xi is making climate a priority and wants to work with other countries on this…. Without the contributions of China, many of the key ingredients (in fighting climate change) like the batteries and solar power wouldn’t be so affordable.” [We’re on the same team, babee!]
In the real world, not every environmental disaster prediction has come true – actually, hardly any of them have. Paul Ehrlich’s best-seller, The Population Bomb, opened with this frightful bit of “news”:
“The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate.”
Today, we have the wisdom of apparent REM fan Greta Thunberg: “The world is going to end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change…. Around 2030 we will be in a position to set off an irreversible chain reaction beyond human control that will lead to the end of our civilization as we know it.” In criticizing China for detaining a young Chinese “climate striker,” Thunberg added, “Billions of people will die, and children will die while parents lose their jobs!”
Stop it, President Xi! You are making her cry!
But perhaps Xi Jinping knows Greta is dead right. Perhaps he knows it is too late to save the planet. So why not just “binge” on coal, keep the peasants happy, and stay in office until the end. Maybe Xi has read the tea leaves, or the astronomical charts, and rightly foresees the second coming of the killer asteroid.
Psalm 78:45 “He sent divers sorts of flies among them, which devoured them; and frogs, which destroyed them.”
Borneo is home to some strange creatures. We are familiar with the orangutan, widely considered to be the creature that gave rise to the myth of the Wild Man of Borneo. Another very strange animal from Borneo is the Bornean flat-headed frog (Barbourula kalimantanensis). It is not the flat head that makes it unusual, but rather the fact that it has no lungs. Other internal organs occupy the space where the lungs would normally have been in the 2-inch-long creature, and the result is that the frog is flatter than most other frogs. The frog is able to “breathe” by absorbing air through its skin. Most frogs do this anyway, in addition to using lungs.
Evolutionary scientists have suggested that the flat-headed frog has evolved that way in order to adapt to the cold, rapidly flowing streams in which it lives, to avoid being swept away. But there are other frogs that live in cold, rapidly growing streams. Why have these frogs not similarly evolved lunglessness if this is seen as an evolutionary advantage in Borneo?
Here in Australia who knows when normality will again allow us to fly overseas again? As hard as they (whoever ‘they’ are) made it to go through airports before the China virus one wonders how hard it will be after? Are you going to get a China virus Passport? I am not! Well, that’s not really the reason for this article but this is. We belong to United Airlines Mileage Plus program and received the following email today. These corporations, United included, must be led by Earth worshipping pagans who seem to think we humans can save the earth! There is only one Saviour and He came over two thousand years ago and died and rose again to not save the earth but to save sinners!! Whatever, we do in our daily living is NOT going to save the earth! Oh, I also wasn’t aware that these pagans not not only have Earth day but now they have EARTH MONTH! Well, anyway here is the email from United.
‘This Earth Month, we have a lot to celebrate at United. We’ve committed to being 100% green by reducing our carbon emissions 100% by 2050 and have invested in ground-breaking technology to make our goal a reality. But there’s still a long way to go. And today, we’re launching an industry-first effort that has the potential to play a significant role in the global fight against climate change.
The Eco-Skies Alliance program is a new way for companies to join United in our investment in sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), the fastest and most effective way to reduce emissions across our fleet.
We’re already the largest airline purchaser of SAF in the world, and today, big brands like Deloitte, DHL Global Forwarding, HP Inc. and Siemens will join us to purchase the emissions reductions from approximately 3.4 million gallons of SAF this year. That’s enough to fly travelers over 220 million miles. By joining forces, we’re demonstrating what companies can achieve when they come together for the greater good.
At the same time, we know our customers are looking for ways to do their part, so we’re giving you an easy way to participate and take action. Right now, you can make a personal contribution for our purchase of SAF. Since strong federal and state policy leadership are essential to making change happen, you can also get involved by connecting with your elected officials to advocate for policies that could make air travel more sustainable.
This is just the beginning. We expect to add more corporate partners to our Eco-Skies Alliance program this year, and we’re planning to give you even more visibility into the carbon impact of air travel — including easy ways for you to help contribute to real, scalable solutions.
As the Eco-Skies Alliance program continues to grow, we’ll keep connecting the world while ensuring it has a bright, sustainable future.’ (An Email from United)
1John 5:11,12 And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. 12 He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life.
Follow the science say those in authority, but whose science? Wear a mask and then don’t wear a mask! This stuff is scary!
‘Quoting from the results of a study carried out in 1963 by Stanley Milgram, Chuck Colson predicted the kind of C0V1D-19 lockdown authoritarianism that was birthed by Communist Chinese authorities and copycatted all around the world.
The Milgram ‘shock experiment’ was a study into “the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience.”
Milgram’s aim was to see how “easily ordinary people could be influenced into committing atrocities, for example, Germans in WWII.”
He designed the study to answer questions raised by the Nuremberg War Crimes Trials, and the defence’s justification that those on trial “were only following orders.” [i]
“I set up a simple experiment at Yale University to test how much pain an ordinary citizen would inflict on another person simply because he was ordered to by an experimental scientist.
“Stark authority was pitted against the subjects’ [participants’] strongest moral imperatives against hurting others, and, with the subjects’ [participants’] ears ringing with the screams of the victims, authority won more often than not.”
Colson explained that up to 80% of those who participated in Milgram’s experiment were willing to “inflict painful electric shocks on another person if an authority figure told them to do so.” [ii]
In 2007, Santa Clara University’s, Jerry Burger ‘replicated the experiment, and Burger’s results were nearly identical with Milgram.’
This prompted New York Times’ Adam Cohen to conclude that “ordinary Americans are about as willing to blindly follow orders to inflict pain on an innocent stranger as they were four decades ago.”
Colson, not surprised by the results said, “the two experiments are a huge cautionary tale of how people respond to authority.”
The studies, he said, show that “nothing changes about human nature; we really do blindly follow authority, and very few people challenge it.”
Colson wrote, “when there’s social chaos, people will choose order over liberty. It’s the reason why, if you give a prison guard or a government clerk a little power, they become abusive.”
The “only real barrier preventing people from inflicting pain is conscience,” which Colson explains is our God-given “internal moral bearings” (see Romans 2:15) that have to be nurtured into maturity.
The problem and its cause are, as the Milgram/Burger studies infer, a lack of Godly nurturing, which is the consequence of “the breakdown of the family and moral decay in American life.”
The abdication from nurturing our God-given internal moral bearings blinds us to tyranny and binds us to sinful participation in it.
People will obey a lawful authority without question because there’s no acknowledgement of God; no other authority or power higher than Government fiats and stuffy, bloated Bureaucratic rules.
This is God vs. Government-become-god territory.
Where unjust laws are obeyed because, as Colson argued, “people have lost the concept of a law beyond the law.”
Which, says Colson, leads to a rejection of civil liberties, because “given a choice between order and chaos, Americans will always choose order – even if it shuts down some of our freedoms.”
The act of civil disobedience, he said, also becomes a farce, because “in a morally relativistic era, there’s nothing that kicks in and tells us that something is wrong.”
A docile, conditioned polis simply can’t know what they’re protesting, or find reasons to justify why.
It was a dismal prediction. Now a C0V1D-19 reality.
Atheist, secular humanist Governments following their Communist Chinese counterparts turned neighbour against neighbour. The police were weaponised against the people they’re paid to protect, and fighting the virus became about denouncing people perceived to be lockdown “lawbreakers.”
The highest civic duty was the surrender of civil liberties, wearing a mask, not questioning the mandated medical advice from bureaucrats, applauding their disaster porn, and staying glued to the media’s daily “briefings.”
As Milgram, commenting on the outcome of his experiment noted: “The extreme willingness of adults to go to almost any lengths on the command of an authority constitutes the chief finding of the study and the fact most urgently demanding explanation.”
To paraphrase Colson, the only sure-fire way to protect civil liberties, and live out just civil disobedience, is by ‘courageously asserting the law beyond the law’; disobeying unjust laws that are contrary to our internal moral bearings, informed as they are, by the self-revealing God of Grace, and His objective moral law.
Though it may seem like we are being “plunged into the abyss of hell,” Charles Spurgeon once said, “God does not leave us there alone.”
References: [i] McLeod, S. 2017. The Milgram Shock Experiment, Simply Psychology [ii] Colson, C. 2015. My Final Word, Zondervan (pp.58-59) [iii] Spurgeon, C. Not Left to Perish, Faith’s Checkbook March 3rd
Recently one of our Federal Senators from New South Wales (Concetta Flerra Vanti-Wells) sent out a pdf booklet detailing various subjects ranging from China, Free Speech and Climate Change to name a few. She is unique in that she seems to be a realist and not one that follows the herd just to be accepted. The following is from Page 63. ‘Over the past decade there has been much said and written about man’s contribution to the warming of our planet, much of it characterised by emotive and alarmist language by those pushing their respective agendas. When asked whether you believe in climate change the answer is ‘yes’, because there has always been climate change on planet earth. In August 2019, the media build-up of an impending hot, dry summer appears to have set the scene for the unhinged, including those with criminal intent, to act. It defies logic that the number of bushfires in different parts of Australia took hold so quickly and apparently all at once, thereby destroying property, livelihoods and wildlife and, in worst-case scenarios, causing the deaths of 33 people. The history of our sunburnt country suggests that bushfires can start from lightning strikes, downwind spot fires from cinders in high winds, fallen powerlines, carelessness by citizens and, unfortunately, arson attack. An article by Dr Paul Read, an ecological criminologist and sustainability scientist at Monash University published in the Sydney Morning Herald on 18 November 2019 that was titled ‘Arson, mischief and recklessness: 87 per cent of fires are man-made’. His article provides an excellent synopsis of the facts with respect to bushfires in Australia. It states that there are, on average, 62,000 fires in Australia every year and satellite studies have shown that lightning strikes are responsible for only 13% of all fires. He also cites 2015 satellite analysis of 113,000 fires from 1997-2009 which indicates that 40% of fires are deliberately lit and another 47% accidental. Following is the full op-ed piece by Dr Paul Read of 18 November 2019: Carbon dioxide (CO2) has been much maligned by those who fail to acknowledge its importance to the health of our planet. Plants and trees absorb CO2 and release oxygen. Also, phytoplankton in our oceans absorb CO2 and produce up to half of earth’s oxygen supply. We need the process and CO2 for our very existence on earth. To make informed scientific judgement with respect to climate, it is vital to have academic freedom; and, peer review remains integral to academic freedom. The politicisation of climate science has not only stifled debate but credible scientists have been ridiculed and marginalised for daring to pursue scientific methods and the conduct of peer review. The treatment of Dr Peter Ridd from James Cook University is only one case of how universities are trying to stymie or stop academic debate on climate change. They prefer outcomes that accord with the herd mentality against CO2. For the record, CO2 is not a pollutant.’ Page 63 from a PDF sent via email.
John 1:14 “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”
‘New research shows that, when attacked, many plants make chemicals that will give munching insects a bad case of indigestion. They also seem to warn their neighbors about the attack so that they, too, start up their defenses. Some plants even call in air defenses.
Some plants, when attacked by caterpillars, release a scent that scientists simply describe as “green leaf odors.” These odors attract certain female wasps, who home in on the plant. The wasp will sting the caterpillar, leaving him paralyzed. She then lays her eggs in the pest, who remains paralyzed until the hatching young wasps consume it. That “green leaf odor” is a plant’s way of calling in air defenses. It is communication between plant and insect!
Some evolutionary biologists are upset with the intelligence and design in this arrangement. Plants are supposed to be too simple to communicate. As one evolutionist put it, this is “not a defense against anything” … it “just happens.”
Yeah, this is just what we want to save the world! ‘Boosters assert that the hopeless intermittency of wind and solar will soon be remedied by the addition of giant lithium batteries. Well, that’s the marketing pitch tossed up by renewable energy rent seekers, anyway.
Which, given the article below, may be no bad thing.
How do you Extinguish a Lithium Battery Fire? Watts Up With That? Eric Worall 4 March 2021
A few weeks ago I asked a fire fighter friend how they extinguish electric vehicle battery fires.
He said “Oh you mean like a Tesla or something? The answer is you can’t. You cordon off the area, and spray a fine mist of water on the fire to try to keep the temperature down until it finishes burning. Takes a few days until it is safe”.
The problem is, besides being highly flammable, lithium is literally the lightest metal. At atomic number 3, it is the first element in the periodic table which is a solid. The two previous elements, hydrogen and helium, are both gasses.
Lithium is so light, it floats on water (lithium density 0.543, half the density of water). Lithium is entirely happy to blaze away while sitting on the surface of a puddle of water.
So if you try to smother a lithium fire with sand, the sand sinks to the bottom, and the lithium floats on top.
Lithium melts at 180C / 356F, and burns at 2000C / 3632F – almost more than hot enough to melt steel, more than hot enough to destroy most composites and metals like aluminium.
The fumes from a burning lithium fire are highly toxic, capable of causing death or long term dementia like brain injuries – so you need to keep members of the public at a safe distance. Fire fighters need to wear respirators if they approach the flame.
There are chemical extinguishers, but my fire station friend didn’t seem to think much of them, at least not for large lithium fires.
I guess you might be able to smother a large lithium fire by dropping a Chernobyl style sarcophagus made of steel on top of it, or possibly made of some other material which could handle the heat. Then you could fill the sarcophagus with an inert gas like Argon, or just wait for the oxygen to run out. But equipping fire departments with a sarcophagus device large enough to smother an EV fire, and the equipment required to deploy it, would be an expensive exercise.
What does your fire department do when they have to extinguish a large lithium fire? I’d love to know, so I can tell Australian fire departments. Cordon off the area and spray a mist of water at the fire for a few days would be a serious inconvenience or worse, if the burning vehicle was say blocking an important road junction, on the high street, or in someone’s residential or workplace garage or workshop.’https://stopthesethings.com/2021/03/26/bonfire-bonanza-giant-lithium-batteries-literally-ready-to-explode-on-energy-scene/
‘A student who was suspended from his public university’s education program for an Instagram video in which he stated “a man is a man and a woman is a woman” has been reinstated by administrators.
Owen Stevens confirmed Wednesday to The College Fix that SUNY-Geneseo has allowed him to continue his education.
“Universities should be a market place of ideas, not an assembly line for one type of thought,” he told The College Fix via email. “Instead of policing speech on social media platforms, they should be engaging in educating future world leaders.”
SUNY-Geneseo media affairs division did not respond to repeated emails and phone calls Wednesday and Thursday from The College Fix seeking comment.
The crux of the controversy centers on a one-minute November 22, 2020, Instagram video in which Stevens stated in part:
“A man is a man. A woman is a woman. A man is not a woman. And a woman is not a man. A man cannot become a woman and a woman cannot become a man. If I am a man and I think I am a woman, I am still a man. If I am woman who thinks I’m a man, I am still a woman. Regardless of what you feel on the inside is irrelevant to your biological status. It doesn’t change the biology.”’https://www.thecollegefix.com/student-suspended-for-saying-a-man-is-a-man-a-woman-is-a-woman-reinstated-by-university/