A theory full of doom, only ever from one side.

So often, people and ideas getting criticised and slammed are often unable to present their opinion, lest they subject them-selves to further backlash, suppression and vilified criticism. Today's generation has a soppy Politically Correct media which whinges about anybody who says something even slightly against mainstream ideology, before finding various ways to degrade them. On an international scale, an even more frightening following has picked up. Its followers publicly proclaim the validity of this idea, unwilling to hear the other side of the argument. Global Warming, for all the rather fantastic claims it makes still remains a mere theory among the scientific community. How ironic that the main public promoters of Global Warming are largely con artists using scare tactics to extort vast amounts of money through regulation and taxation. Large organisations such as the European Union and United Nations seeking to further extend their power and control. And do not forget the ("alleged") climate scientist's garrulous proclamations of doom and disaster if we do not act immediately. One can't go any further without saying "I smell a rat." Global warming is not man made.


The post "Climate Change's founding Fathers" gives an overview about how Al Gore, Maurice Strong and Dr. Benjamin Santer's influence on creating Global Warming today, with all its frills, scare tactics and hair-brained solutions. Deviating ever so slightly from mainstream thought and it does not take long to realise that governments, businessmen and communities are latching on purely out of their own financial interests. Case in point number one, the Emissions Trading Scheme. Many New Zealanders (and Australians in July) have yet to see any benefit apart from extra taxation this rather bogus revenue spinner has brought about in reducing the allegedly "sky high" carbon emissions produced by New Zealand. Quite a rational argument can be made that removing the Emissions trading scheme will have no impact whatsoever on C02 levels among western countries. Many citizens of developed nations are very sensitive indeed to the environment; many are opposed to vast degradation of the Amazon Rainforest, many prefer walking whenever they possibly can, and support the improvements in public transport. Do not for a moment think the ETS tax will be removed. Carbon credit trading is unlikely to be changed either, and vice versa with these phony businesses helping companies trade with them. Money makes the warmists world go round. So long as they are able to extract small fortunes out of you, nothing else matters. Just ask Maurice Strong,the mastermind behind the climate change scare tactic, now specialising in selling high polluting Chinese cars to the United States.

Suppression and ridicule are frequently used by Green groups in response to objections from the "skeptics." Many climate change skeptics who comment on the potential falseness of it are shunned. William M. Gray, famous for pioneering methods, tools and measurements used to predict hurricanes has had vast amounts of government funding suppressed. The reason for this funding cut? Speaking out against global warming. Reducing Mr. Gray's funding is not merely an attack on Global Warming, it's an attack on free speech as well, from the politically correct brigade. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003040068_warming05.html. Bjorn Lomborg, author of the Skeptical Environmentalist received a huge level of criticism, simply for giving an account from a skeptical viewpoint, reaching conclusions which differed from (the waste of taxpayer money), the International Panel on Climate Change." Journalist Mark Lynas cream pied Lombord in the face in 2001. Since then, he has withdrawn many of his idealistic views on the green craze saying "I once even threw a pie in the face of a Danish scientist who dared to question the orthodox environmental line. So what changed? Through research, I found that much of what I believed about environmental issues had little, if any, basis in science. Put simply, though my concerns were right, my solutions were wrong." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010981/You-mustnt-believe-lies-Green-zealots-And-I-know--I-one.html#ixzz1wPoXOJJS Lynas has now created many new enemies who used to be his allies in rallying for "mass taxation, giant suppression, and insane adjustments to daily life."

Many inconvenient truths arise, so in order to dispel this myth, good evidence needs to be brought forth. A half baked effort to disprove it due to its wiliness isn't sufficient. Recent studies, as reported in The Telegraph newspaper indicate that "today's temperatures are neither the warmest over the past millennium, nor are they producing the most extreme weather - in stark contrast to the claims of the environmentalists." Green fanatics have worked hard to explain the reasons behind this, from "the world being warmer in some places was cancelled out by other places where it was cooler," to "we can't trust this as evidence ." Among further evidences, the supposed mass melting across Antarctica as a whole, recent reports suggest otherwise. While the western section is still melting (which is happening faster as a result of the natural warming occurring), for the argument to hold firm, the entire continent must be suffering similar repercussions as a result of man's reckless polluting addiction. According to Glaciology Program head Scientist Dr. Ian Allison "Sea ice conditions have remained stable in Antarctica generally." There again, the quote from the rather ill informed blogger comes to mind: "the world being warmer in some places was cancelled out by other places where it was cooler." Warmer in some areas, cooler in others is a flat statement. One must also remember that records only began in the late 19th century, right about the time coal factories were being replaced by more modern forms of energy. It remains uncertain whether or not one can assert that Britain is producing more C02 emissions now than when King William IV and Queen Victoria were in charge, but going by information from books and paintings, there were vast amounts of pollution billowing out into the air from huge coal powered factories.

Fireplaces, were the primary sources of heat for households, spewing even more icky mess into the air. Despite the significantly lower population, there reason to suggest and believe the coal powered factories had more detrimental effects and higher C02 emissions than the modern sources of energy and internal heating methods.

Do not be afraid. Island nations are not sinking, the world will not be uninhabitable in 100 years, and we will not be planet-less. Take some time to assess the case for Global Warming, analyse it with a high degree of skepticism. If some alleged climate scientist simply says "I know," don't believe it. Whether or not you want to believe in it is your choice, but do not become a herded sheep. Open your eyes and seek the truth. So far, the truth about Global Warming is that there's no scientific consensus yet that man made emissions are contributing to the earth getting warmer.

The voice which pelf silences

Throughout the last several years, there have been some truly horrific enviromental disasters. Oil tycoons British Petroleum (better known as BP), carelessly allowed vast amounts of oil to spew out around the Gulf of Mexico, destroying ecosystems, wildlife, and numerous industries. Out of sheer arrogance, BP tried (and failed) to plug the wall as cheaply as possible, in full awareness these methods carried only the tiniest chances of succeeding. On July 15th, 2010, when BP finally managed to stop all the leakage, BP did what any slimy Multi National Enterprise does in times of ethical trouble. Sneakily pulling out the check book and promising compensation for everyone, senior managers hastily retreated or resigned from their positions. Not a single prison sentence was handed out. New Zealand's largest maritime disaster with the cargo ship Rena, (which is still being attended to to prevent further environmental damage) today saw the navigation officer and Captain sentenced. Both men will be free before the year ends. The pain of seeing the most beautiful beach land areas in the world destroyed, without any proper justice is shameful.

Surprisingly, the Green Parties worldwide seem to have no vested interest whatsoever towards fixing these issues. They are quite happy to go about with their idealistic agenda quite happily, so long as they can cash in on these disasters in any way possible, often by promising to do more about helping the environment and keeping their seats in Parliament and Congress (for Americans), rather than alertly seeking ways to respond to these disasters. Nobody should ever take them seriously until they seriously begin endorsing proper justice for anyone responsible for these environmental tragedies.

The Minister of Education is lost in Lala land

Whatever chortled waffle that is slipping out of Hekia Parata's mouth is pure balderdash. New Zealand most certainly does not have enough teachers; go and ask any teacher who's already suffering from overcrowded classrooms. Why should students have the chance to review a teacher's performance? Many students who will be affected barely know just how incredibly hard teachers work to prepare lessons each week, let alone be in charge of deciding on what makes a good teach. Mrs. Parata's knowledge starts and finishes rather quickly.

To begin Mrs. Parata says that "We've made a trade-off around quality and quantity." Where exactly that trade off is, how it was determined and the reason for arriving at this conclusion is not explained. No such reason can be given. Kids from years 2-10 will all now have to put up with a "ratio of one teacher to 23 pupils up to one to 27.5." Whilst the teaching quality and content may remain constant, irrespective of class size, the one to one time spent with the teacher (where students are proven to learn more effectively) is further diminished. If Mrs. Parata affirms this being true, she's going against her own budget; should she continue to deny it, maybe decreased academic performance might sway her thoughts. http://www.stuff.co.nz/southland-times/news/6935881/Parata-signals-bigger-school-classes


Savings of $43 million will occur as a result of reducing teacher numbers. An odd cost saving tactic you may think? Not even close. "An extra $60 million invested over four years for boosting teacher recruitment and training" will be where a majority of these savings will head, dispelling any plaudits from the education sector. http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/6930141/Class-size-controversy-erupts

Mrs. Parata verifies that this "is investing in better teaching," much to the criticism of the New Zealand Educational Institute's Ian Leckie. He states "What parent is going to be happy with the prospect of their 6-year-old going into a large class at the very time they need good-quality time with teachers?" Very few, if that will want to see their child's learning experience ruined by lack of interaction with the teacher, less resources made available, less time to be taught properly. Do not be surprised if private schools receive more application forms than ever. Long before Mrs. Parata was allowed to ruin public education, Pinehurst placed a billboard up which read "Small class size + Proven Curriculum = Guaranteed Results." Everyone learns something new everyday. Sometimes, even billboards are right.

Public support for the amendments has been scant. Professor Dugald Scott "said there was strong evidence that the quality of teaching was more important than class sizes." Professor Scott speaks from a University perspective more than a secondary school one. Tertiary lectures and papers sometimes swell up beyond 400 people per paper; many students not only pass, but pass very well (not in the least to avoid adding to their enormous student loans). Try as he may, Mr. Scott isn't fooling, even himself. Smaller class sizes enable a teacher to determine straight away which students need more help and one to one help and which ones assuredly work consistently hard and achieve high. Teaching should be an attractive career, not one dogged with 60 hour plus weeks dealing with noisier, bigger class sizes and overloading the plate with more marking.


Do not be fooled by what Mrs. Parata says about Education reforms. She's as unschooled on the matter as the students who will be affected by her policies. One day, her grand return back to Earth will be complete, with a simple question. Why didn't this idea work? To which the audience will reply "Because you forgot to proof read it silly."

The lost generation of readers

"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times." "There is no confusion like the confusion of a simple mind." "To be or not to be, that is the question." Three quotes many people have heard some time in their life. A magical quality exists within quotes from books. Penetrating the thoughts and feelings faster than any blade, holding a challenge for thought, they shine through as memorable and become ingrained within our minds for vast periods of time. In recent times, books containing such wonderful quotes and allegories are being neglected by children, teenagers, as well as middle aged adults. Technology has advanced rapidly since the 1970's, when periods spend reading slowly crept down. Today in the United States, "Only 47 percent of American adults read "literature" (poems, plays, narrative fiction) in 2002, a drop of 7 points from a decade earlier. Those reading any book at all in 2002 fell to 57 percent, down from 61 percent." http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-201_162-628194.html. Society in the 21st century has become a lost generation of readers. Armed with an ability to read, they prefer neglecting this precious gift (remember 1 billion adults worldwide are illiterate) rather than benefiting themselves in almost every possible way. The greatest minds and intellectuals of all time possessed knowledge beyond measure and it came down to their appreciation of books and literature to guide their thinking.

Dr. Suess, one of the finest children's authors of all time said "the more you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you will go." Today's generation prefer gawking in front of the TV, staring aimlessly at a computer screen or forever fizzle about playing with modern technology, almost oblivious to the vast amounts of knowledge, which sit readily on the bookshelf. Former controversial journalist Christopher Hitchens, had a knack for being incredibly well read, always lively and engaging, never boring. With the views he held, Hitchens always stood firm with his views, never afraid of quote essays, books or articles from memory towards his opponents. It comes as no surprise that he was described as someone who was "sharp, witty and never boring," not only due to his quick thinking but also through his vast foray into numerous fields of reading. Incredible that so many of today's generation look towards books scornfully, as if they are toxic elixirs. Their imaginations are vanishing, everything is being done for them now. No point in reading the book when you can watch the movie right? Why flip through a huge book trying to learn about ancient history when you can watch a documentary...right?" Books, far from removing the enjoyment of learning and entertainment, add to it. It brings to life imagination and wander, allowing youth and adults alike to think outside the box, allowing them to take control of how the situation should take place. Walt Disney famously stated "There is more treasure in books than in all the pirate's loot on Treasure Island," so why don't we let our imaginations run wild!

"I cannot explain myself I'm afraid sir, because I'm not myself you see." During her journey into Wonderland Alice is asked by the caterpillar to explain who she was but found it difficult after changing size and shape so frequently since her entrance into this new world. Ask someone these days why they don't read, you'll likely get one of three replies; "I don't like reading, I don't have time, or I don't have any books to read." As pathetic and unconvincing as these excuses may be, reading is currently in a obsolescent state. Readers go into times, places, worlds and galaxies many of us could never fully comprehend. These settings transcend any rational explanation. Yet we're there. An engaged reader feels as if they really are completely entrenched within these fantastic environments, from navigating through battles with Napoleon on horseback, to walking through the desolate American roads with Jack Reacher; a connection is established. An author's gift to the world is their writing and in the developed world, there is such an abundant blessing and surplus of wonderful literature. A lot of it has gone unnoticed. It comes as no surprise that people are beginning to feel lonelier now more than ever before. Real life friends can only carry you so far, do so much with you, only provide so much solace. Characters in books take you beyond normality, plunge you into dangerous situations, readily welcoming you to come along for the journey, if only you turn the page. For a while, the reality of life can be left behind: for today you become someone new with every new page. If your friends scorn at you for taking an avid kinship with literary characters, smile "for you are not yourself."

How can this lost generation of readers gravitate back towards reading? Don't expect the government initiatives to work. They've implemented (in blind faith) many hollow bridge schemes. The true answer lies in the magic. Kids follow their parents example. Kids enjoy attention. If parents take an interest in the books their children read, walking through Hogwarts or exploring Treasure Island with them, chances are good the kid will continue exploring different books. For young adults, the benefit of reading books is knowledge each text carries. As a generation thirsty for knowledge, books inform and develop one's viewpoints, sharpen finer points of information and fine tune the humor. After all "We don't want anyone sounding like George Orwell on a bad day." In any adult who has repudiated themselves from reading books, think back on the times when you journeyed away from your own life. Just for that short period of time, remember how special it felt to be a part of that journey you took. The grandeur in books has always existed and will always exist. The lost generation of readers are not irremediable. A fire and brimstone passion for reading can set alight an enjoyment for reading.

All they need is a little spark to get it all going

Please will you unfold your arms!

Many people possess a habit which often is annoying to other people. Wives can be nagging so consistently, the husbands tune in and out at what they are saying. Teenage boys have a desire to impress their female counterparts by habitually doing ridiculous stunts and acts. Nose picking, ear pulling, tongue clicking, and pen tapping are further examples of some rather exasperating habits. Worst of all is one which has failed to be mentioned. It is not often the first to be listed as an annoying habit, yet remains atop of job interview no no's. Folded arms are alas the most childishly rude, fantastically unattractive, incredibly annoying form of body language anyone can display to you. Often used to create a wall between you and the people you're speaking with, defensiveness and insecurity are the main reasons for holding this pose. How long will it be before people begin to notice just how antisocial this form of body language is?

Whenever one prepare's for a job interview, folding your arms at any time during the interview indicates defensiveness, reluctance, an insecurity, a lack of belief in one's ability to persuade and answer the questions. It should be no different in everyday social interactions. Folding one's arms has become so alarmingly frequent, subconsciously your arms move up and over the chest, remaining there for whoever knows how long. The person who does this is telling you "I'm uncomfortable." Uncomfortable about what? What's being said? Who the person is? A fear of being embarrassed? The social setting they're in? Not only does that person exude an uncomfortable persona, the other person in conversation (arms crossed or not) cannot help but feel as if they're letting this "uncomfortable" person down by not creating an social setting where this person is comfortable to speak openly and freely. They leave asking "What did I do wrong?" Do not take accountability for someone else feeling uncomfortable. Unfold your arms and show these people you're not uncomfortable being around them. Sooner or later, they'll do the same.

The worst element of someone folding their arms is the anti-social element it conveys. Considering a large proportion of communication is done via body language, folded arms can be seen as a big gesture. "I am uncomfortable around" is the defensive mechanism of folded arms. The memory mentor website has conducted research and affirms folded arms has been linked to anti social behaviour. http://www.memorymentor.com/what_does_folded_arms_mean.htm Whenever someone folds their arms in the company of someone else, the omen is never a good one, as the crossed arms individual is "paying less attention" to what the other person is saying. These people are retracting from the conversation and are frankly more comfortable wandering off in their own mind, with less regard for the person they are talking to. Not only anti-social but disrespectful as well.

The next time you are in a social context and they fold their arms, ask them if they're cold. If they don't pick up, ask them why they've folded their arms. You might learn something about the person. And you might get them to drop this hideous non-verbal communication.

Justice for Longley

*Warning The following article contains profanity*

Is justice really so difficult to get these days? How long will it take to convict a psychopathic stalker who murdered his girlfriend in cold blood? In today's world, the politically correct hope to portray Elliot Turner as an innocent victim, driven to rage by his girlfriend's careless actions. The reality paints a bleaker mosaic. With credible witnesses coming forth, high shelves of mounting evidence and the Turner family's feeble attempt to deny all charges, it may be months before any punishment is given. Taking so long to convict a blatant murderer is an injustice to Emily's spirit, her family, friends, communities, countries, everyone.

From the day the trial began, Elliot Turner's infatuation for Emily shone through. "Elliot was obsessed with Emily. He spoke about her a lot and rang her a lot too. I do not feel she cared about him as much as he did about her," Emily's closest friend Carla Simons says. It's an elaboration on Mr. Turner's unhealthy obsessive, lustful desire for attention. Placing anyone on a pedestal is a dangerous game. In Francis Scott Fitzgerald's brilliant novel "The Great Gatsby," Jay Gatsby suffered from his idealism of Daisy Buchannan with his life. Mr. Turner's idealism has left an effluvium of innocent blood on his hands. More witnesses have come forth to testify; Luke Ashford, a friend of Elliot's also stood before the jury. "Turner had sent him a text on the night before Longley's lifeless body was found that read 'hello darling, meet mrs mallet'." http://tvnz.co.nz/world-news/emily-longley-trial-murder-accused-s-mate-slept-teen-4854260. He further mentions, on the night she was murdered, Mr. Turner, engulfed with rage said ( in a haughty manner) "that bitch is going down tonight." http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/emily-longley-murder-model-had-809733. Is anyone really going to be audacious enough to express that all of this is one great misunderstanding? His incessant threats to murder were just for a 'larf.' The unwonted texts sent out were just a great misunderstood joke. Well Mr. Turner, here's some news with more news for you. Everyone forgot to laugh. You missed the mark.

Elliot Turner's rather lame attempt at defending himself has opened up many onerous occasions, from just before his arrest, remarking "It is weird. God works in mysterious ways," to a more feeble in depth account in Court. "I wouldn't say it was very hard but it was quite hard. She was kneeling on my bed and from that position I pushed her down on to the bed and she went backwards. She was flat on her back and I then pressed down on her neck. All together I held her neck for about five or six seconds at most." http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2142199/Emily-Longley-trial-Elliot-Turner-held-girlfriends-neck-5-6-seconds-died.html#ixzz1uVlGS4tq. Before continuing further, here is what Mr. Turner really means. "With considerable force, I pushed her onto the bed. I then proceeded to strangle her, until she stopped breathing." Withing today's shamble of a justice system in the United Kingdom, anyone on trial for a major crime is able to present an argument that its not their fault for their own actions, and escape punishment. Journalist Peter Hitchens discusses the imperative need for a "code, you can expect that people who rob, kill , cheat rape or destroy will be deterred by stern laws, and caught and punished if deterrence fails. Also that people who break the law will get no advantage out of it." http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2008/06/why-weak-justic.html
Presented with such a great opportunity to digress away from the shambolic justice system which has surfaced in recent time, it's time Mr. Turner is sentenced accordingly. He is not the victim here and a fabricated story of Emily lashing out at him in a crazed fit of hysteria is not an adequate reason for taking her life. Grabbing someone to "calm them down" without thinking about hurting or killing them is not thoughtfully considerate; they are malign. http://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/208886/longley-murder-accused-expressed-no-sadness

It's a damning wall of cold hard facts vs a gushy whiff of slipstream sentimentalism. Against every piece of evidence-- friends, family, police recordings, retrieved documents information, forensic analysis-- against Elliot Turner and (in the wider circumstance) his parents, Leigh and Anita, there is nothing but denial. Explicitly asked if he in any way is responsible for Emily's murder, Elliot says "No, I don't believe so." The Turner family is either trying to seek small pittances of sympathy from the public or have just topped themselves up with arrogance for $4.95.

Leigh Turner told Anita "He fucking strangled her." Seized computers at the household indicate Elliot was searching methods for "death by strangulation" and "how to murder someone and get away with it." Elliot's mother, Anita worked with Leigh to remove vital evidence from the room Emily's lifeless body was in and prolonged calling paramedics to hide or destroy any evidence which could link their beloved "victimised" son to the trial. If the Turner's want to continue denying their involvement in any type of wrong doing, they can do so. Making such a bold claim though is precarious and absurd in the face of mounting evidence against them. Had they believed their names could get cleared, without any convictions for murder or perverting the course of justice, no effort would be made the cleanse the bedroom, no criminal es searches will have been made and more than anything, Emily Longley's dead body would not be in the bedroom, with Elliot Turner's DNA underneath her skin or bearing classic signs of asphyxiation.

Time has run out for Elliot Turner and his parents. A prison cell must be prepared for them now. His parents are guilty of destroying vital evidence and perverting the course of justice. Elliot is guilty of murdering an innocent young woman. Ominous warning signs were shown early on by Mr. Turner in front of friends and likely around family too. A life sentence for murder is not harsh. Its due punishment for taking someone's life. Every action of his, leading up to and including the murder had a malicious, psychopathic intent; a young man, idealistic and over paranoid about his girlfriend cheating on him (despite being a promiscuous womanizer himself). Bring Justice for Emily Longley. It'll bring rest to an agonising period in her friends and family's lives and make society a little more delectable, with a murderer and his accomplices behind bars.

John Key's Gambling addiction

There is no question as to whether or not John Key backs the addition of pokies at Skycity Casino. He's smiled in front of them and no doubt tried his luck on a few of them too. Why the Prime Minister had to stoop so low for a solution to fix the Gambling debt present in the current budget is beyond most people. Mr. Key has made his position known now, and he better well stay in favor of it, rather than retreating back into the centre room politics the Nim-wit Nationals thrive on.

Author Peter Adams puts it straight, saying "Mr Key has clearly joined a long line of politicians who have approached gambling as a quick-fix for expensive social and economic development issues." http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/comment/6812881/Who-exactly-is-it-who-wants-more-pokies The incoming flux of poker machines reeks of cheap opportunism, taking advantage of helpless souls addicted to the bright lights and loud noises of these ridiculous machines. What's that Mr. Key? "SkyCity will probably get a few more pokie machines, a few more at the margins, but with this sinking lid policy what will happen is over time there will be less." http://tvnz.co.nz/politics-news/pm-dismisses-skycity-pokie-deal-concerns-4845770. Rather than admit that this idea of attracting people to the convention centre is a sensationalist move by both parties, Mr. Key would rather waffle on about how National is outperforming Labour in reducing gambling problems. Don't buy into the balderdash more pokies in one place will reduce gambling. If anything, it will attract masses of addicts, intent on a win all or lose all policy.


It's clear that Mr. Key has a love of gambling. He loves borrowing massive amounts of money to fund the middle ground agenda his party rather uselessly upholds, breaking election promises and happily waving it off as "recessionary spillovers," unwilling to admit its his party's economic mismanagement giving the budget a red return. Nobody must forget the position he has taken, nor allow him any wriggle space to escape from encouraging people with 1/1000 of his wealth to waste their lives away. How incredible is it these days that the person who is meant to speak for the people is in fact speaking on his own behalf, and Skycity Casino's behalf.

Gambling is rooted deep within Mr. Key;

and don't expect that to change anytime soon.