Coping: The PC Walk Among Us

Comes the time of the year when saying “Merry Christmas” is a dangerous thing; such are the concerns about being ‘politically correct”.  Went to the Post Office in town to mail a package on Thursday and lo and behold, there were green (fireproof) hangings on the walls adorned with simple (unlabeled, nondenominational) shiny red glass balls.  While I was waiting in line, I held a 5-minute internal screaming match in my head over whether the green was symbolizing where Christianity got Christmas from (co-opting the mid-Winter pagan festival which celebrated rebirth/things being made new again) to integrate Christian practices into formerly pagan traditions.

 

I wasn’t going to mention the “The Marketing History of Christmas” which would make a dandy book, or a subset of a much larger work “Marketing Practices of the World’s Religions” which would be a much larger task, but I was reminded of is this morning when a reader sent a nice email which ended with:

“Take care and have a fantastic holiday of your choice.”

I’m pleased that political correctness is still alive; and I need to apologize for using the term “Stewardess” in yesterday’s report.  When I visualize things in my head (like the economy being similar to a plane in a furious dive toward a mountain, so as the name of the pilot doesn’t matter, but you don’t want to change him out at that exact moment) my imagery in this case was of a DC-3 of the sort flown over the mountains in one of the Indiana Jones Flicks (Temple of Doom, I think).

 

Shame on me!  I should have used the term “Flight Attendant”.

 

Except I give myself the excuse that I’m not in charge of Sales, In-flight, and Communications for an airline anymore so as a writer, I reserve my right to pen conforming to the imagery in my head, not bounded by secular political correctness.  I’m sure that in a lawyer-driven world of political correctness police, I’ll be carried off to the re-education camps at some point, but such are the risks of writing.

 

In an effort to set things straight, I think there’s a global need to come up with a cross-denominational single word that encompasses Chanukah, Christmas, Islamic New Year, Kwanza, Laba Festival for the Chinese, and all the rest.

 

However, in modern marketing practice, we need to keep the number of letters to a maximum of eight, since the layout department graphic artists want something short.  Then we have to find something that’s cross-culturally correct and doesn’t translate from English into Arabic, Turkish, or Chinese into something like ‘steaming lumps’ or worse.

 

Not that it’s an urgent matter; however since there seems to be a frenzy to install global governance, may I proposed to the PowersThatBe that in my “The Marketing Practices of the World’s Religions” the need to institute global holidays as a support system for global governance is clearly outlined!  Already, the GPTB (global powers that be) blew it on Earth Day (April 22) which is outside of traditional Western Marketing windows.

 

If the PTB are going to really get anywhere in their drive for global governance what we need is a commercial holiday that will be:

• Commercial in the sense that it will be as big a shot-in-the-arm as Christmas gifting.

• Would encourage local agriculture with something more tasty than locally grown bitter herbs, although that and free range chicken is a good starting point.

• Would be locally made from readily available materials.

• Would  repurpose consumption in support of the globalist ruler’s paradigm.

 

Seems like it should be easy enough to come up with; Earth Day established a kind of baseline for the new  religion of environmentalism, but if the movement is to really get traction, it needs more holidays, especially those of a commercial sort.

 

As I looked at the SWOT analysis of the problem, I came to a critical insight about the strategic growth problem facing the PowersThatBe.  This is one you might want to spend some time pondering:

“If the PTB were successful in some kind of ‘global governance’ and the whole world “got local’ and became highly self-sufficient, we wouldn’t need ‘global government’ would we?”

Truly a problem akin to the snake swallowing its own tail; successful global governance on environmental grounds would be self-liquidating.

 

Can’t have that, now, can we?  From whence would the ruling class then draw authority?

 

Good Feedback on Global Warming

Got a very thoughtful letter on the question of climate change/global warming which I’d like to share with you and then some comments:

“Dear George,

I am a subscriber to UrbanSurvival and I generally enjoy you commentary and find it useful in helping me address the future in my investing and living. It is clear that you do not believe in man induced Global warming and are totally fixed on the sun spots as the climate driver. And that is OK, it certainly opens my mind to looking and watching for evidence that supports you concepts.

On the other hand, I think you are irresponsible in promoting an article like: “The Smoking Gun at Darwin Zero” without checking it out:   If you had taken the time to look into it you would find that the author was caught lying. Check this out:

Link to article: “Willis Eschenbach caught lying about temperature trends“

also

Link to: “Perplexed by Smoking Gun: Santa never made it to Yamba?“

The Australian Bureau of Meteorology is likely the best source for the homogeneity adjustments necessary to Australian data:  Here’s their annual mean temperature anomaly for Darwin Airport, site 014015

:

Trying to keep up with the Climate skeptics in their disinformation campaign is exhausting. In researching Watts Up With That web site (the site organizer is a climate change skeptic) and the author of the article, Willis Eschenbach, I came across this posting by Amory Lovins (link to post, scroll down to 3 Dec posts)

“What I get from the stolen-emails controversy so far is: – Some opponents of climate protection not only lie and cheat but also steal. – A well-funded and -planned campaign of climate disinformation continues both to distort and deny climate science and to try to discredit the scientific process.

- Many reporters and editors remain ill-informed about climate-science fundamentals and about how science works.

- Robust discussions are a vital tool for sorting truth from error.

- Peer review is not an infallible error-detector, but beats none.

- Some people, including some scientists, can be untactful and indiscreet, especially in communications they think are private. These human traits are unrelated to the merits of their views.

- Ambiguities can easily be taken out of context and out of proportion to reverse their intended meaning. A skilled effort devoted to this deception now threatens scientific and policy leaders with political harm for frank expression. They may learn greater care and discretion in their choice of words, but their public duty demands not less but even more clarity, candor, and transparency. Efforts to intimidate through falsehood, like the current media circus over the stolen e-mails, continue to merit exposure and contempt.

None of this is new. In time it will pass, and climate science may well be the stronger for it. As we learn more about who stole and published the emails at this sensitive time, how, and why, climate protection too may benefit from greater insight into the manufactured-doubt industry. What seems to be missing from this conversation, though, is an appreciation of why this flap doesn’t matter: not only because climate science rests on such numerous, diverse, and independent lines of evidence and inference that its findings remain highly robust, but also because whether you believe climate change is real and threatening or not, we should do the same things anyway just to save money and help address “Peak Oil” (because saving fuel is cheaper than buying fuel, and productive forests are worth more than dead logs) and to improve our security. “

In other words, what you do about energy shouldn’t depend on your opinion about climate science, nor about whether you most care about prosperity, security, or environment. If the public debate about climate focuses on outcomes, not motives, it can reach broad consensus. And if in Copenhagen we start to correct a pernicious sign error—assuming from economic theory that climate protection is costly, rather than learning from business experience that it’s profitable (see: More Profit Less Carbon)—then we can shift the conversation from cost, burden, and sacrifice to profits, jobs, and competitive advantage. This sweetens the politics enough to melt any remaining resistance faster than the glaciers.

I hope more climatologists will add this concept to their normal remarks about climate science. The science was and remains clear, but for other compelling reasons, we should do the same things even if it were not. But if you are right and it is all over for most of the people in the World by the end of 2012, it really doesn’t make much difference what we do; however, just in case it might be good to slow down on our use of fossil fuels, especially coal.

Regards,

name withheld, Logan, Utah

PS: I am not a Climate Scientist, but am an Engineer and a Scientist. I

A very well thought out note. Just a couple of personal comment, however.

 

I am not a man-caused global warming denier!  There is no doubt that jet travel, automobiles, burning Amazonia, and a host of other financial driven climate-changers are real.  I don’t think I’ve ever said that.  However, given that there are temperature changes going on on places untouched by Man, and given that the greatest driver of all is likely solar output (based on periods of global cooling – the Maunder Minimum, the ‘little ice age’ in Europe long before industrialization, etc.) a more balanced viewpoint seems in order.

 

For example, in many of the climate studies, data seem based on ‘heat island’ effects, where reporting stations have been surrounded with different heat absorptive/refractive surfaces and these skew data over time; just as an example. 

 

Thus, I’m perfectly willing to accept that there is global warming, but my personal sense of the science would be to use temperature data from those stations & area where there has been the least encroachment by man into the data via construction/city-building, and what have you.

 

The whole issue of homogeneity of data smacks of the same data jiggering that I’ve noted in many government figures – like unemployment rates that don’t count people who have fallen off the unemployment rolls and thus, must not be serious about job-finding; that kind of logic is dangerously misleading.

 

A sensible climate change analysis model – seems to me – would start at the top and work its way down:

• Starting with the highest level of data, temperature change on other planets would be measured – the missing polar caps on Mars correction – and some solar-system wide correction factor on that above all others.

• Secondly, calculation of heat island/encroachment effects and use of remote climate stations as a baseline for urban stations.

• Thirdly, as a double-check on #2, sea surface anomaly analysis.  Again, the effort would be to quantify heat islanding/encroachment as a data distortion.

• Fourth would be data correcting at the local level.

 

My problem – and it’s just me, I suppose – is that I haven’t seen a ‘soup-to-nuts’ climate study following this approach.  To do otherwise seems the height of folly – unless, of course, there is a global government agenda in play and setting up a system of carbon trading/carbon credits turns into little more than a power/financing tool to break down national barriers and install a new kind of governance which is several layers removed from direct representation.

 

Moreover, when I see evidence that direct representation is getting further and further away (as evidenced by yesterday’s report on the Rand study which discusses setting up a “Stability Police Force” in the United States, coupled with DoD directives enabling use of civilian contractors in whatever roles seem to feel appropriate – Go read DoD Directive 1404.10 of 23 Jan 09 to see how this works) I wonder if the Constitution isn’t already toast.

 

Given that it is, a top-down approach to climate as I’ve outlined makes little sense, since the conclusions are preordained, aren’t they?

 

Beating Las Vegas

This email is highly interesting – if you follow the notion that humans are co-creators of their lives with a Greater Somethingorother:

“George,

I read with interest your Urban Survival every day. It keeps me tiedin to what is going on out there in the “real” WuJo world.

As I was reading it this morning, Thursday, I kept thinking, gee, maybe I need to go to a casino. Then I read these paragraphs:

The aware human’s task (if you’re serious about foreknowledge) is to extract a design pattern from all this and figure out how it works so that it can be done more on less at will.

If I ever get it sorted out, I figure a good place to test it would be…a casino maybe? But even pure science has ‘blow-back’ associated with it, as the development of nuclear weapons demonstrates and this would be in many ways far more powerful…

You might want to check out this guy’s website:

http://www.synccreation.com/prod/las-vegas-adventure 

Joe has worked with the Monroe Institute for many years and has been putting on these Vegas workshops for 10 years. It’s very interesting stuff, this psychokinesis.

I did his workshop in Vegas a few years back and am now doing his home-study course. I have many issues with money that I need to deal with, and feel this is one of the most powerful ways to do it. I remember a teacher of mine said that in the future the casinos will be the ATMs for the lightworkers. I am going to scream if I have to do one more day in 9-5 land and am determined to create a better reality for myself and in turn help others.

I love what you write, you are my morning inspiration. The hard-core numbers and policies make my head spin and my eyes roll into the back of my head at times, and I get totally lost when you talk about ham radio and hertz and all that, but I do get the gist of what you are saying.

This sets off two conflicting notions colliding in my head:  one suggests that co-creating for gain is somehow an abuse of powers and may have karmic burdens associated with it, while the other says “Who says?”  One of these days, I may go with a small amount of dough to a casino up the road a short piece (Shreveport, LA area) and take a $100 bill and see what happens to it if I run it through the system on behalf of a local food bank.  Hmmm…

 

Meantime, Back at the WuJo

Yes, the dojo where science meets woo-woo is getting backed up with projects.  The most topical being the disinfo about how the mystery lights in Norway is being hinted by the PTB as being some kind of failed rocket test in the White Sea area.  Not hardly, IMHO since I looked at this:

“Little to see, in Norwegian

 

Earlier version of “Norwegian Spiral” took place in November.  (from 1/11/2009!-G)

 

Hmmm .. kinda shoots down the Russian Rocket Theory..”

All kinds of possible explanations are on the table, but when you mix up this latest with a double-scoop of ‘holes in clouds’ which have been showing up in daylight hours off and on, the truly tin-foiled among us are asking is this something to be, uh, conCERNed about?

 

The Writing Coach

…sends in this:

1)      In view of the latest TSOTTC, the coming decade might well be labeled the “Terrible Teens”

2)      In highlighting the activities of various miscreants, as the occasion dictates, you may want those reports to fall under the category of “Half-assed humans”.

I would but it overstates human progress by several orders of magnitude, I’m afraid.  Zeus the cat reminds me (with something of a sneer, I might add) that “I don’t pay taxes and you call yourself an advanced species?”

 

Coming Up

Friday is the last report of the week for non-subscribers.  If you want more (would that make you a sadist or masochist?) directions on to subscribe to Peoplenomics are here.

 

Next scheduled report here will be posted Monday morning, unless world-changing events creep up on us, although we don’t show anything scheduled till the context changing starts on the 19th, but that won’t be a single event most likely.

 

This weekend, Peoplenomics features the latest chapter of 13 Acres and Independence, a short discussion of goat ranching economics and the perpetual issue of getting a small farm to pay for itself.

 

For your Christmas shopping this weekend, be sure and take my gift parameters – and just for the fun of it, see how many you can properly reference – answers Monday:

• Gold

• silver

• black

• 80 proof or above

• California

• Arabica, not over-roasted

• Jamaica gold

• Buttoned down

• 3.3 liter turbo

• Icom 7800

• Craftsman

• Weller

• Tektronix

• LMR-400

• Three 3-500Z’s @3 KV or better

• Kubota

• Central Machinery

• Peace & quiet

• Bahamas

• 30-pounds

• BP cuff or pulse oximeter

• Adjacent acreage

 

Shouldn’t be too hard to figure, should it?  I am, after all, a simple man with simple desires.

–-

Send your comments to george@ure.net

---

The UrbanSurvival Mall:

---

“Live on $10,000″ A Year

With another round of layoffs due to start later this month…a round which will start to axe many of the middle managers who have managed to avoid the HR grenades…might I suggest a preemptive tactical move?  Voluntarily dropping your lifestyle back a bit, since we’re all being marched down that road by either circumstances or some out-of-control-PTB types who write checks to Washington lobby and to anti-reformers in California!  A good starting point, at least if you’ve still got $10-bucks is my e-book “How to Live on #10,000 a Year…or less!”

 

 

 

It’s an automatic download.  It’s written in an information dense style: The whole thing runs about 65 pages, but it gives you a vision of how to not only live on the cheap, but also how to migrate up the economic foodchain if you have a little hustle left…  Click here for the index and details.

 

MyGroPonics

My commodity broker JB Slear and I have written a simple book to get you started on high density hydroponics.  It’s an example of how someone with a little creativity, access to a few ‘dollar stores’ and willing to try out some new farming techniques can grow an amazing amount of produce sin a very small space – like even an apartment balcony (if it gets some sunlight).  Sound interesting?  It’s just $10 bucks here…

 

       

 

Pass It On

The business model of this website is base Simply click here and send a link to this site to everyone on your distro list…Nothing more dangerous than sharp, clear-thinking upstarts who ask a lot of questions, eh?  Unless you believe WTC-7 fell over on its own, of course….

—-

 Last week’s report is here.    For back issues of this site, click here.  (Goes back to 1997!)