The Climate Change Con

It was the recent headline on Whaleoil regurgitating JAG’s statement: “Climate change is our generation’s WW2 moment” that absolutely flabbergasted me.

Climate change is not our WW2 moment, climate change is a con job.

Our current climate and climate changes are all normal and well within the historical pattern of change: certainly over the last 10,000 years.

Unfortunately, despite efforts by logical critical thinkers, including those climate scientists who make the correct information available, the world believes otherwise. Sadly they have achieved little or no change in understanding, attitude, or most importantly, policy on the world stage. 

Everywhere we travelled in Europe and the UK over the last two months, most politicians, the media and people’s conversations espoused the predetermined definition, that climate change is accepted as a major risk and that it is mankind’s responsibility to remedy the situation. This deception is now what people accept, although they don’t necessarily believe or really understand it. But because of the indoctrination, it is now the underlying motive for all energy and environment policies that are the mainstay of most western and business-world views.

Read more »

The Farce of Reusable Bags

We all know that a fair swag of the Pacific Ocean’s floating plastic waste emanates from Asia including China and India. Their waste plastic is growing unchecked at our expense, as the ramifications of their pollution are being used by politicians to inflict ‘Green’ policies that include banning supermarket plastic bags.

Our virtue signalling government’s ‘group think’ is that by banning single-use plastic bags it will ultimately result in people using reusable bags. Their argument is that this reduction in plastic used will have a positive impact on the environment.

However, a February 2018 report from Denmark’s Ministry of Environment Environmental Protection Agency entitled “Life Cycle Assessment of grocery carrier bags – Project Number 1985” challenges this ‘conventional wisdom’ which compares the total impact of plastic bags to their reusable counterparts.

Question. Which is the carrier bag providing the lowest environmental impacts?

Answer. In general, with regards to production and disposal, LDPE carrier bags, which are the bags that are always available for purchase in Danish supermarkets, are the carriers providing the overall lowest environmental impacts for most environmental indicators (Table III).

In particular, LDPE carrier bags with rigid handle provided in general the lowest environmental impacts in the majority of the impact categories included in this LCA study.

Carrier bags alternatives that can provide a similar performance are unbleached paper and biopolymer bags, but for a lower number of environmental indicators. Heavier carrier bags, such as PP, PET, polyester, bleached paper and textile bags need to be reused multiple times in order to lower their environmental production cost.

Between the same bag types, woven PP carrier bags provided lower impacts than non-woven PP bags, unbleached paper resulted more preferable than bleached paper, and conventional cotton over organic cotton.

Life Cycle Assessment of grocery carrier bags Environmental Project no. 1985 February 2018 page 17.

Not surprisingly, the Danes found that alternatives to plastic bags came with significant negative environmental impacts; for example,

Read more »

We see through the lies

Dear New Zealand Mainstream media

Please think about what you’re doing and stop giving a free pass to politicians and their enablers.

Politicians have always told lies, either to defend their party and prevent collateral damage or more often, to protect themselves and their public image. It is a journalist’s responsibility to expose the lies and report the truth. This is particularly important when the individuals involved are deceiving the public by using taxpayers’ funds to fulfil their own perception of public interest. 

It is not the MSM’s place to act as the publicity wing for one political party or belief.  Regardless of who you vote for, it is your job to provide balanced reporting of the facts (not opinions) to the public.  It is up to the public to make up their own minds.  This is what creates a strong democracy.  (Do you believe in democracy?)

Read more »

‘Cultural Christians’ should defend Judeo-Christian values: Part 2

Christianity percentage of population in each country

Christians world-wide are under attack. They are being maimed and killed. The political elite class and the mainstream media both internationally and locally, mostly ignore this as part of their strategy to dismantle our Western democracy.

In part one of ‘Cultural Christians’, even though I am agnostic, I stated that I uphold the structure and foundation of Judeo-Christian values as being the foundation stone of Western democracy, whilst not believing in the ‘supernatural stuff’. A cultural Christian believes in self-will, critical thinking, equality for all and, of course, freedom.

Our rights are slowly and constantly being diminished by Marxists who have been planted among our elected and non-elected parliamentary officials. They have been indoctrinated by Marxist academics and educational unions at schools and universities with the connivance of the propagandists in the biased MSM.
In the comments made about part one, two commenters stood out. Both acknowledged the idea of promoting ‘Cultural Christianity’.

Read more »

Trump leads from the front

Positive governmental results for the people are earned by more than hollow words, slogans, tweets and photoshoots of a government leader.

While Trump’s rhetoric drives the Marxists and the MSM to utter distraction, his strategic leadership matters to his country, and due to America’s predominant fiscal, diplomatic and military might, those decisions are felt around the world.

The Trump administration has reversed many years of international ‘disengagement’ by previous Democrat and Republican Administrations. By international negotiation that favours the USA, and by increasing border protection, Trump has simultaneously reversed unemployment, increased local manufacturing, uplifted the economy, reduced crime and has a plan to ensure the future and security of the people. For Trump, the betterment of the people carries his highest priority.

Read more »

Cultural Christians should defend Judeo-Christian values

Published in April 2015, an article related to Pew Research forecast that there will be more Muslims than Christians in the world within 60 years. New Zealand is one of eight countries that will lose their Christian majority during that time with the proportion of Christians slumping from 57 percent of the population at present to 44.7 percent.

The number of countries with a Christian majority is expected to decline from 159 to 151 by 2050. At that point, according to the study’s projections, the largest religious category in New Zealand will be “unaffiliated” at 45.1 percent.

The Pew Research Centre says that by 2070, Christianity and Islam will each have about 32 percent of the world population.

Our successful Western Culture has legal and political systems that are based on Judeo-Christian values of justice and morality along with the proclivity to seek peace within a troubled world. This is a reality the left-leaning MSM and academia like to dispute.

Read more »

The more things change, the more they stay the same


I enjoy gaining knowledge from the study of history. Unfortunately, too many of us ? youth, but also mature adults who haven’t got that excuse ? display little understanding of ancient history or even of events that transpired in the twentieth century.

Aristotle died approximately 322 BC, but even today his influence on Western philosophy is profound. Reading any of his books is enlightening for people interested in philosophy, government, business and ethical studies.

A pr?cis of Aristotle?s politics ? with parallels to today’s New Zealand ?follows.

?The most serious cause of revolution in democratic states is the unprincipled activities of ?popular? politicians. They will make spurious legal claims on the property of the wealthy citizens, who naturally unite in opposition, because shared fear encourages sworn enemies to close ranks.?

Observe what happened with the CGT! Labour and the Greens were intent on pushing this horrible tax through but, despite anything Winston Peters might say after the fact, the people voiced their opposition to the capital gains tax adamantly and overwhelmingly.

Read more »

You are more likely to be open-minded if you are curious

Prior to the 2016 US election, in a general conversation, a visiting friend from the UK stated that he believed that Trump would win the election. Another guest reacted negatively and emotionally with her opinion of Trump. In reply my UK mate asked, ?So are you closed minded about Trump?? An answer was not forthcoming. However, this circumstance got me thinking, and consequently some questions and the following observations began to germinate.

When attempting to debate issues based on emotion (particularly those associated with people?s own ?identities?), do people necessarily apply thinking in an even-handed way to appraise the evidence at hand? Or instead, do they simply use it to rationalise their existing viewpoint and disregard any arguments that contradict those views?

Perhaps the more intelligent or academically knowledgeable people become, the easier it may be to build elaborate arguments that always support their point of view? The ?brilliant brain? may become a tool for propaganda rather than truth-seeking.

Read more »

CoL be careful what you wish for…

The ?woke? supporters of hate speech legislation reckon that the primary reason for the legislation against ?hate speech? is ?to send a strong message of tolerance and equality to all of society?. They also want to virtue-signal to the UN.

They want a strong message sent, particularly to liberal-conservative and reasoned debaters like Jordan Peterson. Their message is that, by eliminating and punishing open debate, they will ‘shut down’ perceived prejudice on the basis of identity, race, religion and sexuality.

Today, the controversy regarding the effectiveness of hate speech laws is being debated within our homes and with our friends as we question whether this type of legislation benefits society.

However, hate speech laws will actually accomplish the opposite effect of tolerance and equality because they will encourage citizens to create or view ?objectionable material?, not as members of our society, but as members of a group driven underground, divided from society and with the potential for anarchy.

The enactment of hate speech legislation, at the federal and local council level, will lead to unintended consequences and unfair practices.

It is unacceptable that the new head of the Human Rights Commission has recently written to the public through an MSM owned ?neighbourhood website? asking the recipients to dob in neighbours and people in general who spout what they deem as ?hateful speech?. This is not welcome; 1984 is almost upon us.

Combined with the impending intended hate speech laws we have the knee jerk reaction to the Christchurch tragedy and the firearms restriction legislation which has passed the first legislative phase and appears to have support on both sides of the house.

I am not a firearms expert but, as with any legislation, depending on how it is written, it may be incrementally expanded in the future, to further restrict firearms.

Socialists have an agenda; they wish to enact their ideology while ignoring future consequences. If Marxists really understood economics and acknowledged the benefits of capitalism and freedom of speech, they would not be Socialists.

As Shakespeare noted in Hamlet, ?there?s the rub?. New Zealanders will eventually get tired of the Nanny State inflicting their version of 1984 upon us. Hypothetically, a right-wing lead coalition government could be elected which could use the very same anti-free speech legislation against the Marxists; perhaps by enabling a version of ?McCarthyism.?

McCarthyism was a vociferous campaign against alleged communists in the US government and other institutions by Senator Joseph McCarthy in the early 1950s. Many of the accused were blacklisted or lost their jobs, though most of them did not in fact belong to the Communist Party.

Our prime minister is making ‘Captains Calls’ to virtue signal. She has enacted immediate legislation without due diligence; not taking legitimate advice thereby apparently showing disregard of the consequences for New Zealand. What do we call such leadership?
No one I talk to wants any legislation that restricts our freedoms. My advice to the Coalition of Losers is to leave our freedoms alone!

However, the past tells us that our PM does not ‘take advice’ but ?ideologically? she knows exactly what she is doing. Ultimately though, the Socialists should be very careful what they wish for.

Democratic socialism is an oxymoron

All the socialist writers and commentators I read have a propensity to push the idea that socialism is a democratic system; that’s because socialists herald themselves as ?Democratic Socialists?.

The differences between democracy and socialism are undeniable:

Democracy is government by the people for the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.

Socialism is an ideology of social organisation that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production, distribution of capital, land, etc., exulted to be in the community as a whole but actually all controlled by the State Elite.

To me, democracy means “rule by the people”. In practice, it must be the governance of the citizens by parliamentary representatives who must be held accountable to the voters. The implementation of democracy, which includes the republican type, also requires a clear delineation between ?citizen? and ?non-citizen? when it comes to the legal eligibility to vote.

Read more »