Evidence of Cover-up… literally
By: James Burge
July 19th, 2010
Problem solved, well almost… now look away!!
By: James Burge
July 19th, 2010
I just came across a video, and it’s not the only one, showing that although the oil leak has been capped, and slightly abated, they have only succeeded in moving the leak from the ocean floor, to a location that would lay hundreds, maybe even thousands of feet below the ground. What has happened is that by capping the oil leak, they have increased the pressure in the well, such that it now has a greater pressure with which to flow from cracks deep down the well so it is now seeping from fissures in the bottom of the ocean floor. Probably the strangest part of this story is that this is what should be expected to happen given that the line is thought to be damaged due to the explosion that started this whole mess. This is why most experts were saying that capping the well wouldn’t help and it could make it worse, forcing oil through cracks, deep in the earth, making them bigger, thereby allowing more oil to seep into the gulf, which could never be stopped using methods BP is currently employing. Which raises the question, if they know that this method won’t work, why are they trying it? Or is it just that only experts not affiliated with BP think this isn’t going to work, and BP has gotten bad advice. All we know at this point is that the idea that they couldn’t have known this would be the possible result of a cap is ludicrous possibly criminal. Pollute away BP…
The upside, flow has been reduced from a maximum some experts are estimating at around 100,000 bbl/day. The problem is that even if BP are reporting a small flow currently, an accurate estimate of the flow may never be truly determined as I don’t think the flow through the seabed can be accurately determined. For now, a video, showing the slow seepage of oil through the ocean floor.
Old Spill, finaly some truth…
By: James Burge
June 25th, 2010
What will future generations think?
By: James Burge
May 10th, 2010
After watching the short video below I am struck with a question. What will future generations think? About our lack of care for the environment, about our exploitation of developing nations, or about our apparent inaction when faced with evidence of Corporate Looting of both the Environment and the Economy. I have to say that ours is a generation that will be measured by our failure to properly place the environment and its effects on the livelihood of millions, ahead of the profits available to those corporations in the third world, where environmental regulations don’t exist. Why is it that American corporations working abroad aren’t subject to the same regulations as they are domestically? And Why haven’t they been taken to task regarding the blatant damage done? How can we expect our world to survive us when we continue to dump toxic chemicals into the water? How can we expect humans to survive in these toxic conditions? Have we already doomed humanity to extinction? Only time will tell.
CO2 helps plants grow… interesting
By: James Burge
April 27th, 2010
This video is for anyone still worried about CO2 levels on plants and photosynthesis. Turns out, like most things in nature, natural buffers exist, that would increase the amount of CO2 plants can process given an increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration.
Looks like we should all feel guilty and allow governments the ability to further tax us in order to relieve our guilt, instead of trying to change our habits. Oh wait, strike that reverse it. Globalists everywhere are taking advantage of people’s good nature and attempting through various means, to implement carbon taxes on us all. So what does that mean exactly? Well no one is really sure, cuz most politicians keep info on carbon taxes fairly close, but it seems that whatever they could get away with is alright with them. It seems the framework for carbon taxes would be on a usage basis, punishing anyone who uses fossil fuels, like the majority of the North American Population, as opposed to rewards, or tax breaks for those who choose to participate in green activities. This is the simple difference between positive and negative reinforcement, a lesson governments seem unwilling to learn (see US greatest population incarcerated). They don’t seem interested in the fact that water is the most abundant greenhouse gas, or that warming periods are not new to earth, just new to us. They also seem to forget that the developing world is much worse when it comes to emissions due to low technology coal plants and offers the greatest opportunity for CO2 level reduction by helping developed nations develop clean energy, there is no money in that. There is also the fact that carbon taxes on industry will only make produces such as gasoline more expensive as they trickle down to the consumer. The other thing they don’t tend to reveal, is what the money generated by carbon taxes would be used for. If governments are not forced to use this money on environmental issues then why pose it in such a matter as to punish those seen as gluttonous. Why not be honest, governments are broke (especially the US, wonder why?) and they need a new source of revenue. Canada just gave up 2% of its GST, how long do you think the government will go before finding newer more creative ways to punish, I mean tax the population. In a time when most people are trying their best to live within their means, globalists are trying to reduce those means as much as they can in any way they can and the carbon tax seems to fit the bill. So when does my bill come? Soon enough.
The video below outlines something else they don’t really want you to know, but it’s got me thinking of how I could get away with doing this to my garden.
Lord Monckton on Climate Change
By: James Burge
February 5th, 2010
Very interesting…
Some good news…
By: James Burge
February 25th, 2009
I was just emailed this article and thought it was worth the read, so I’m gonna post it.
Worthwhile Canadian Initiative
Canadian banks are typically leveraged at 18 to 1–compared with U.S. banks at 26 to 1.
NEWSWEEK
From the magazine issue dated Feb 16, 2009
The legendary editor of The New Republic, Michael Kinsley, once held a “Boring Headline Contest” and decided that the winner was “Worthwhile Canadian Initiative.” Twenty-two years later, the magazine was rescued from its economic troubles by a Canadian media company, which should have taught us Americans to be a bit more humble. Now there is even more striking evidence of Canada’s virtues. Guess which country, alone in the industrialized world, has not faced a single bank failure, calls for bailouts or government intervention in the financial or mortgage sectors. Yup, it’s Canada. In 2008, the World Economic Forum ranked Canada’s banking system the healthiest in the world. America’s ranked 40th, Britain’s 44th.
Canada has done more than survive this financial crisis. The country is positively thriving in it. Canadian banks are well capitalized and poised to take advantage of opportunities that American and European banks cannot seize. The Toronto Dominion Bank, for example, was the 15th-largest bank in North America one year ago. Now it is the fifth-largest. It hasn’t grown in size; the others have all shrunk.
So what accounts for the genius of the Canadians? Common sense. Over the past 15 years, as the United States and Europe loosened regulations on their financial industries, the Canadians refused to follow suit, seeing the old rules as useful shock absorbers. Canadian banks are typically leveraged at 18 to 1—compared with U.S. banks at 26 to 1 and European banks at a frightening 61 to 1. Partly this reflects Canada’s more risk-averse business culture, but it is also a product of old-fashioned rules on banking.
Canada has also been shielded from the worst aspects of this crisis because its housing prices have not fluctuated as wildly as those in the United States. Home prices are down 25 percent in the United States, but only half as much in Canada. Why? Well, the Canadian tax code does not provide the massive incentive for overconsumption that the U.S. code does: interest on your mortgage isn’t deductible up north. In addition, home loans in the United States are “non-recourse,” which basically means that if you go belly up on a bad mortgage, it’s mostly the bank’s problem. In Canada, it’s yours. Ah, but you’ve heard American politicians wax eloquent on the need for these expensive programs—interest deductibility alone costs the federal government $100 billion a year—because they allow the average Joe to fulfill the American Dream of owning a home. Sixty-eight percent of Americans own their own homes. And the rate of Canadian homeownership? It’s 68.4 percent.
Canada has been remarkably responsible over the past decade or so. It has had 12 years of budget surpluses, and can now spend money to fuel a recovery from a strong position. The government has restructured the national pension system, placing it on a firm fiscal footing, unlike our own insolvent Social Security. Its health-care system is cheaper than America’s by far (accounting for 9.7 percent of GDP, versus 15.2 percent here), and yet does better on all major indexes. Life expectancy in Canada is 81 years, versus 78 in the United States; “healthy life expectancy” is 72 years, versus 69. American car companies have moved so many jobs to Canada to take advantage of lower health-care costs that since 2004, Ontario and not Michigan has been North America’s largest car-producing region.
I could go on. The U.S. currently has a brain-dead immigration system. We issue a small number of work visas and green cards, turning away from our shores thousands of talented students who want to stay and work here. Canada, by contrast, has no limit on the number of skilled migrants who can move to the country. They can apply on their own for a Canadian Skilled Worker Visa, which allows them to become perfectly legal “permanent residents” in Canada—no need for a sponsoring employer, or even a job. Visas are awarded based on education level, work experience, age and language abilities. If a prospective immigrant earns 67 points out of 100 total (holding a Ph.D. is worth 25 points, for instance), he or she can become a full-time, legal resident of Canada.
Companies are noticing. In 2007 Microsoft, frustrated by its inability to hire foreign graduate students in the United States, decided to open a research center in Vancouver. The company’s announcement noted that it would staff the center with “highly skilled people affected by immigration issues in the U.S.” So the brightest Chinese and Indian software engineers are attracted to the United States, trained by American universities, then thrown out of the country and picked up by Canada—where most of them will work, innovate and pay taxes for the rest of their lives.
If President Obama is looking for smart government, there is much he, and all of us, could learn from our quiet—OK, sometimes boring—neighbor to the north. Meanwhile, in the councils of the financial world, Canada is pushing for new rules for financial institutions that would reflect its approach. This strikes me as, well, a worthwhile Canadian initiative.
More Ron Paul
By: James Burge
February 11th, 2009
$550 Billion Run on the Bank
By: James Burge
February 11th, 2009
Laughably Useless
By: James Burge
December 18th, 2008
In a move similar to recent Melamine contamination news, the US FDA has decided that “mercury in fish,[…] no longer poses any health threat to children, pregnant women, nursing mothers and infants.” (as if toxins somehow degrade with time…as opposed to accumulate in the food chain)
Last week, the FDA declared trace levels of melamine to be safe in infant formula. A few weeks earlier, it said the plastics chemical Bisphenol-A was safe for infants to drink. Now it says children can eat mercury, too. Is there any toxic substance in the food that the FDA thinks might be dangerous? (Aspartame, MSG, sodium nitrite and now mercury…)
Source: FDA Stuns Scientists, Declares Mercury in Fish to be Safe for Infants, Children, Expectant Mothers!
In a move that can only be seen as highly political the USA FDA has caved in to pressure regarding Mercury in Dental Amalgam and Thimerosal in vaccines and flu shots and decided that all mercury is safe, even for pregnant women and infants. This is in direct opposition to YEARS of science that labels mercury as one of the most neurotoxic substances known to man.
A recent University of Calgary study found that mercury causes significant neurodegredation in snails. However, even Health Canada released a statement saying these findings don’t provide evidence of any risk. Most claim that mercury levels from dental amalgam aren’t significant enough, or as some claim, non-existent, so no health effects are expected.
It just seems to me that, as with most industry watch dogs, that unless a significant risk exists its business as usual. Which means that the claim mercury no longer poses ANY health effects is false it just isn’t significant enough for them to care. If you do by chance suffer from mercury poisoning (or acute mercury toxicity) you likely wont be able to trace it back to dental fillings, flu shots/vaccines, or fish consumption. Also, when you consider how many people have mercury in their mouth due to dental fillings, if it was deemed unsafe, where would the dental industry begin in attempting to rectify the situation?
When agencies such as Health Canada and the FDA play these sorts of games it does nothing more than reduce people’s trust thereby rendering these agencies useless. What good is a health agency that is more worried about multinational cooperation’s bottom line than the people they are supposed to be protecting? And at what levels can a known toxin be considered safe? Oh wait I forgot, Mercury isn’t toxic, not anymore, what a relief?
But if you don’t believe me, below is the video from the University of Calgary presenting the results of their study, decide for your self.
How Mercury Produces Brain Damage – Click here for funny video clips
