mathjax

Friday, May 29, 2015

"Almost any subject can look interesting if you only look close enough"

John Hallmen took some impressively detailed images of simple bugs. Like any subject, the complexity is revealed by digging deeper into it. You may not like bugs but you can't argue that they are not complicated. This is a Blue Damselfly.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/10/18/article-1321521-0BA8FA3A000005DC-946_634x714.jpg

You can find a wider picture range here:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1321521/A-bugs-eye-view-The-incredible-close-images-insects.html

Wednesday, May 27, 2015

Religion is arrogant

Religious people just cannot see how arrogant and misinformed about reality they are. It manfests itself in seemingly humble people that say the most strident and arrogant ideas.


The Vatican's secretary of state has called the Irish vote to legalize gay marriage a "defeat for humanity," evidence of the soul-searching going on in Catholic circles after the predominantly Roman Catholic country overwhelmingly rejected traditional church teaching on marriage.
Cardinal Pietro Parolin said he was saddened by the landslide decision, in which more than 62 per cent of Irish voters said "yes," despite church teaching that marriage is only between a man and woman.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/polopoly_fs/1.2393198.1432733270!/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscape_620/image.jpg



 
"I don't think you can speak only about a defeat for Christian principles, but a defeat for humanity," he said.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/world/ireland-s-same-sex-marriage-vote-a-defeat-for-humanity-vatican-no-2-1.2393183

Religious people display quintessential arrogance about their place in the universe.

A defeat for humanity looks like this:


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/02/Artist%27s_view_of_watery_asteroid_in_white_dwarf_star_system_GD_61.jpg

or

http://guardianlv.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Huge-Fireball-Over-Iowa-Likely-Meteor.jpg

Compare and contrast my interpretation of a human defeat versus some strident and arrogant religious fool.

Tuesday, May 26, 2015

Thich Nhat Hanh's The Art of Power and the power of words


People make themselves a target of helplessness by allowing words to have power over themselves.

In Buddhist monk Thich Nhat Hanh's book The Art of Power, he points out that one gives power over oneself to others ONLY if you let them. One way is though words.

If you let people offend you by the words they use to define you, then you are giving them the power over you.




http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/974787.The_Art_of_Power

Just like being angry at another person makes you sick, allowing words to hurt you means you believe those words mean something and they are important. You are placing the meaning into things that are by themselves meaningless.

I don't exist, I am a shadow if what I understand to be me. You don't exist either. You are a shadow of what you believe to be.

If you don't believe me, then read my Riddle of the Chair. Take away as many parts of yourself and you won't find you in them. This is inherent nonexistence.

What we are are temporary placeholders for what we understand, ever in transition, ever hurtling towards destruction.

Nothing has meaning unless we put the meaning into it.

If I don't exist and words have no meaning then how can your words about me have any meaning? Why would I take offence to nonsense?


No one has power over you unless you give them the power. To accept words mean something is to accept the first perpetrators lies seeded in those words. That person was not enlightened. That person was suffering. That person was hitting out at the world to satisfy expectations unfulfilled.

I would heartily recommend you read Hanh's book.


Getting offended at words takes away your power. You are volunteering to be ruled by other people's meaning. 

http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/974787.The_Art_of_Power


People trying to debate meaninglessness will forever be stuck in the loop of unhappiness.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiCEaLHZp24


Sunday, May 24, 2015

Narcissism ruins everything: or how I inadvertently started a twitter war with a narcissist

People might start out with the best of intentions to draw attention to a cause. They might start out intending to make the most of a bad situation.


I read an article about this lady who was treated shabbily by cadets at my alma mater :  http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/royal-military-college-cadets-struggled-with-questions-of-sexual-consent-educator-1.3083831

Now what I noticed was that this lady, whom I've never met and have no impression of except her conduct in light of this news story was unprofessional in the extreme. She was making a point of airing her treatment by the college and staff very openly and really missing the point that was the important lessons about proper conduct for people in a college setting. What she was doing though was making the story about her treatment instead of the important point she was supporting.   I realized why it was she was acting in this way.

My mother is a narcissist.  My ex-wife is a narcissist.  After fighting a 5-year divorce legal battle and seeing every narcissistic trick in the book I can spot a narcissist from a mile away based on behaviour alone. I know when people are appearing to be nice when they really just want the attention, when they are spoiling what they are trying to do by missing the point because their view of reality is not a normal locus of control.  By normal I mean somewhere between "I am the centre of the universe" and "I am an insignificant bug at the far end of the universe". Most people can see both sides of the story; my side, your side, and the truth in the middle.

Unlike a psychologist that sees a patient an hour a week, I lived in constant battle with a female narcissist that used our kids as a weapon, warped their mentality by involving them in the divorce strictly against the judges orders,  abandoned them for 3 weeks and left me to take care of them, stole my paycheck and my credit cards so I couldn't buy milk for her kids, used threats, intimidation, authority figures to pressure me, threatened to come over and take anything from my house, lied to me, manipulated everything, and everyone. Threatened to drop off my 6 and 8 year old kids at my house when I wasn't there because I missunderstood the wrong handover time. While all the time taking on the role of a victim so the assumed attacker was male. All the while making a point to cast me as the abuser and herself as the victim.

I know a lot more than most people about narcissism.

For a narcissist, we are all extensions of their psyche. We only exist because we serve a purpose to them.  I'm not kidding. If we fall out of favour we are cast out and forgotten. Or worse. There is no abuse too excessive for anyone that disagrees with a narcissist.

My mother hasn't spoken to my almost 90-year old grandmother in 4 years. She cut out all her family members and hurt them all.  Why? I tried to explain it all to my grandmother. That this was her personality, when they can't take looking in the mirror and seeing bad things about themselves that are true they are apt to destroy everything and throw out everyone and run away and start a new life. I tried to tell my grandmother it wasn't her fault. My mom can't handle a poor reflection of herself. Everything bad they do is rationalized as someone else's fault. And anything that makes them look bad is attacked in the extreme. Beyond reason. Beyond civility.

Now when I label something, most people assume I'm angry.  In fact, I'm as factual saying "narcissist" as I am saying "tree" or "dog".  It is what it is.

When someone is fighting for the rights of others that is a noble cause. Maybe even a noble (or even a Nobel ) cause. I applaud that in it's entirety.  Now this lady was at my alma mater educating them about date rape and the law, and the male cadets as the story goes did not like what she was saying. Or how she was saying it or both.  I think they should have chosen their words better or their avenue to complain properly. Maybe file a lecture review and complain about how the instructor acted. Challenge the ideas is one thing but attacking the instructor is wrong. Never confront the instructor personally. That would not be acceptable in any case.

What she claims is that she was owed an apology from the school, and the college believe she owed them an apology for how she acted as a professional.  I can't say who's right and that wasn't my point.

The point I thought was most disagreeable is that she was acting as an outragist to garner attention to herself as the victim.  She very well might be the victim of an impolite and unprofessional experience. But when you manufacture a situation for self-aggrandizement you are no longer working for your cause. When I see a narcissist exploiting a good cause and good people to make themselves validated then I sometimes lose my calm because I see what's going on and I'm not one to stay silent any longer. They ruin what other people are fighting for out of a need for personal validation.



Unfortunately, when you are dealing with a narcissist, they can't see the larger point of what is at stake - in this case awareness that consent is important legally and rape is a crime and that college people need to know the law - while a narcissist sees attention and notoriety.  There is no compromise for the greater good. There is no win-win. There is only narcissist win- desenters/detractors lose.

I made a tactical move to tell her what I thought of her behavior to this lady to see what she would do. Well, what I didn't know because I had only sent 8 tweets in my life, is that I was making a public tweet. Ooops. I do apologize for airing in public what I thought was a personal communication. Mea culpa, I do not know how to tweet.

I'm sorry Miss Lalonde for airing in public what I thought was a personal communication.

So this tweet I sent was public.  Do you know what she did? She made sure to rebroadcast it again to all her followers with a fake "I'm polite and offended but I'm acting all nice" response.

Is that the act of a person avoiding personal attention?
She called it a personal attack. Is that the action of a person trying to minimize an insult?

She claimed she was stating facts yet I was attacking her personally. The victim role is very useful to a narcissist because it makes anything they do next seem reasonable. They can now call you Hitler and it's OK because you commented on them first.

What followed was a backlash of angry uninformed emotional people rallying to the defense of a vicitm. Am I insane?  Probably, for taking on a narcissist. But I've taken them on before and I am not going let people with unwise intentions run rampant over everything and everyone for their EGO and nothing else.

Sounds like I am an abuser is what another person implied. I am an abuser for pointing out I find her conduct was unprofessional and she was acting like a narcissist?  And when I did complain she acted EXACTLY like a narcissist would. My facts are demonstrated. QED.

I was not committing an ad hominem attack to my mind, I was pointing out behaviour that was unproductive to the cause. The only way to do that was to provoke the behaviour. Stimulus, reponse. Response fits the pattern. Pattern is likely.

If my facts are wrong, if I don't know what I am talking about then how was I able to predict and provoke the reponse I thought I would get from some random person I have never met? In ONE tweet!?!? A poorly understood and mistakenly public tweet. Again, I am sorry I did think it was a private conversation. But she made sure to publicize it, she made sure to maximize the outrage at my insult. Why?

Do you understand why I decided not to let this go? Because this person will continue to act in this way, and treat everyone the same way and others may not be aware of it.

If this young lady had said instead, "Well I don't agree with you.", and left it at that then I would have apologized for insulting her and the matter would be over. A class act is what I might have thought of her at that point. But the response was what I expected.

My facts were not facts, my opinions are facts I believe to be true based on evidence. Are my facts any less substantial than her own? She complained of abuse based on her opinion of her own treatment at the college.  So HER facts are true because they MUST be TRUE because she believes them.

"
People with narcissistic personality disorder are characterized by exaggerated feelings of self-importance. They have a sense of entitlement and demonstrate grandiosity in their beliefs and behavior. They have a strong need for admiration, but lack feelings of empathy.[5]

DSM-5

Symptoms of this disorder, as defined by the DSM-5, include:[6]
A. Significant impairments in personality functioning manifested by:

1. Impairments in self functioning (a or b):
a. Identity: Excessive reference to others for self-definition and self-esteem regulation; exaggerated self-appraisal may be inflated or deflated, or vacillate between extremes; emotional regulation mirrors fluctuations in self-esteem.

b. Self-direction: Goal-setting is based on gaining approval from others; personal standards are unreasonably high in order to see oneself as exceptional, or too low based on a sense of entitlement; often unaware of own motivations.

AND

2. Impairments in interpersonal functioning (a or b):
a. Empathy: Impaired ability to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others; excessively attuned to reactions of others, but only if perceived as relevant to self; over- or underestimate of own effect on others.

b. Intimacy: Relationships largely superficial and exist to serve self-esteem regulation; mutuality constrained by little genuine interest in others' experiences and predominance of a need for personal gain
B. Pathological personality traits in the following domain:

  1. Antagonism, characterized by:

a. Grandiosity: Feelings of entitlement, either overt or covert; self-centeredness; firmly holding to the belief that one is better than others; condescending toward others.

b. Attention seeking: Excessive attempts to attract and be the focus of the attention of others; admiration seeking.
C. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual's personality trait expression are relatively stable across time and consistent across situations.
D. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual's personality trait expression are not better understood as normative for the individual's developmental stage or socio-cultural environment.
E. The impairments in personality functioning and the individual's personality trait expression are not solely due to the direct physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, medication) or a general medical condition (e.g., severe head trauma).

DSM-IV-TR

Symptoms of this disorder, as defined by the DSM-IV-TR, include:[1]

  • Expects to be recognized as superior and special, without superior accomplishments
  • Expects constant attention, admiration and positive reinforcement from others
  • Envies others and believes others envy him/her
  • Is preoccupied with thoughts and fantasies of great success, enormous attractiveness, power, intelligence
  • Lacks the ability to empathize with the feelings or desires of others
  • Is arrogant in attitudes and behavior
  • Has expectations of special treatment that are unrealistic
"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissistic_personality_disorder

But since I dared to complain they were a personal attack so I am an abuser?

Did I agree with rapists? Was I a rapist? Did I have no empathy for vicitms?  Funny, I don't recall actually providing an opinion on that subject at all because that was never my point.  Funny how quickly other people got to imply the hell out of my complaint to insinuate anything they pleased? Should I complain about my treatment and be a victim too?

Do you see how narcissists blunt the main objective and ruin the cause they are "working" for?  Everything becomes about them all the time. People should not let narcissists run the cause.

In the end, the backlash misses the point. And how are real victims getting the attention they deserve? How is that cause going? It's not because if you criticise a narcissist well here comes hellfire and evil words for your impertinence. In the end it was all valuable computer time wasted on indignation and not on promoting the real cause.  All to satisfy someone's EGO.


What she failed to see and will probably fail to see is that her actions were tarnishing an enormous amount of innocent and probably unaware people by insinuating that all the cadets were acting badly when perhaps a few people were.  Does she plan to contain her complaint to the few that deserve it?

Woe unto those of us that dare to challenge a narcissist. People that aren't narcissists should be very aware of those that act that way. Be careful how quickly you jump up to defend one because sooner or later you will displease that same person and find yourself in the crosshairs. No good deed goes unpunished with a narcissist. I know it personally in more than a twitter comment, I live with the aftermath of narcissists everyday.

Think of it this way, a narcissist would rather put a gun against everyone else's head to get their way than make a small diplomatic retreat to protect the reputation of the important work they are doing or the people that they are supposedly advocating for.  They would rather ten people suffer than one person make an apology. Especially if the apology had to come from a narcissist.

Narcissism ruins everything. It neutralizes the real cause because it makes the story about them personally instead of the cause. The cause is the conduit to more attention. Narcissists are just as likely to implode the cause they and others are working so hard to improve if it makes them seem poorly. Be careful who you take your marching orders from.


This is how someone can address a story about a rape story without making themselves the centre of attention. Jon Stewart is a classy person that uses his platform and humour to promote attention to a cause without making it all about Jon Stewart.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76AZuGxBFQ4


Saturday, May 23, 2015

Money is owned by society not corporations



What gets lost in the debate of how much money an hour of labour is set at is the fact that corporations don't own money. 

Corporations might possess a lot of a nation's money. They might be rich in money in their accounts.  But they don't own money in general.  The nation owns its money, and by extension the people of a free democratic nation own ALL the money. Money is a possession.

Money like labour is free to move around but it's still the people's property.

So if a nation wants to peg an hour of labour to a dollar value: a minimum wage, then that is the right of the citizens. Not the corporations.

If business leaves or stays based on the new economics that's entirely up to the business. Corporations want to scare people that they can't control their own money but that's an illusion. A self-interested illusion.


Wednesday, May 20, 2015

A Hollow Moral Authority

Remember this moral authority? Cardinal George Pell of Australia is accused of attempted bribery of a sex crime victim regarding a pedophile priest.

He is quoted as saying

I want to know what it will take to keep you quiet.

That is a corruption charge, that is conspiracy to commit an offence against the law. Where does he get his authority from? His doings are acceptable because the lord's work is done?

Now here he is giving his experienced opinion on the Jews, on Jesus Christ, on Egyptians, on moral authority.  Can you take anything this man says seriously? Ever?  Did Richard Dawkins ever do anything so heinous?  And yet theists call Dawkins strident.   What is more strident than corruption?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Xv0vykU5pA


Neil DeGrasse Tyson: Be prepared for science to collapse the god bubble.




Many religious people are concerned about the waning effects of the church on society.  Well, Dr. Neil Degrasse Tyson has an even bigger warning for you: prepare for the eventuality that religion is neutralized by discovery for all time.

As knowledge expands, ignorance recedes...





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRHefbIgKxk


Tuesday, May 19, 2015

Shame on you, biker gangs!





Texas bikers fighting over drugs and turf doesn't make a good impression on the rest of society. If Texas bikers want to show how tough they are and how much they love America, then they should join the Kurds in Erbil and take on ISIS, not shoot it out over a fist fight in Texas.



Dutch bikers are fighting ISIS.

http://wpmedia.o.canada.com/2014/10/amsterdam-08.jpg?w=660

How about this, Texas biker gangs agree to join up and fight for 6 months in Erbil for the Kurds.  Survivors get the territory back in Texas. Win win.

Thursday, May 14, 2015

George Bush was facile, but Islam has always been at war with itself.



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Bushduck.PNG/220px-Bushduck.PNG

George Bush may not have realized the quagmire he was heading the American military into in Iraq, but it is also facile to say that tensions would not have erupted between the Shia and Sunni. They hated America before America invaded.  But they also hate each other and kill more of their kind than America did. George Bush is not the initiator of the Islamic violence. He might have been the catalyst.

Iranian gunboats attacked ships leaving the United Arab Emirates. Yemeni rebels are fighting pro-Saudi forces while also yelling "Death to America.". Syrians and Iraqis are fighting each other along sectarian lines.

Islam the so-called "religion of peace" is itself the architect for ongoing generational war.

Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Creatives survive the best, workers struggle the most, and sociopaths make everyone else suffer.

Today is my 43rd birthday.

I don't know why or how I got this far. I'm lucky to be alive.  I was in 4 serious vehicle accidents in Bosnia and I walked around in minefields for 14 months. I'm sure I've done more stupid things but you get my point.

I would like to share my opinion not on what makes someone successful but how to be successful.

The success of any group of people (group by how they work - race and sex are irrelevant in my eyes) depends more on how they deliver their work than whatever trade they take up.  For example, musicians that only know how to play and sing can make more money than the best lawyers or doctors.  It's not what they do so much as they are creative; they create the content that is the work and the product.

Depending on how you deliver your work will change your success and failure.

Creative people have an easier time surviving than people that work for someone. By making something on their own, creative people can charge what they think is fair for the work. Creatives can write books and go on speaking tours and so on. They can start their own companies. They can teach.

People that rely on someone to work for have the hardest time because they give away the work at the end of the day. Workers are always at the mercy of the managers. They have traded away the thing of value which is the product of their work.  Workers will continue to struggle because at the end of a paycheck they don't have much extra.

If we want to solve homelessness and poor people we need not to change the hourly rate but attack the way that workers and companies interact. 

The last realization in this triumvirate is that sociopaths, with power, are the managers that cause the most problems. They are the people that ruin companies and the delicate balance between profit and loss; between work and workers. Not satisfied with the money and prestige of controlling things, they are the few that make society hard for the most.

If you want your kids to do well, teach them to be creative or sociopaths.









Monday, May 11, 2015

Star Talk Neil DeGrasse Tyson: Don't feed Trolls.

Don't feed online trolls by giving them attention was today's key takeaway from journalism and society. 



They talked a lot about the changing nature of online media and information.

http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/startalk/


But the key point was a simple edict to ignore online trollery so they don't get the attention they want. 

The answer is 42

On the eve of my 43rd birthday: I would just like to say the answer is 42.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aboZctrHfK8

My message to religious people



Here's my message to you: Your brain is a biological computer programmed by your DNA evolved over 110,000 years through competition, adaptation, and mutation.  It was built to survive and procreate to live on into the future.  In that 110,000 years it was a valuable trait to join with other members to form society. It was better for the gene pool to have men willing to believe a common view and fight and die to protect the herd.

This is known in science as one form of the computational theory of mind.

It was a genetic trait that became the norm in the gene pool. That's why it's easy for you to believe silly nonsense your parents indoctrinated you with.

We know all this now, science has discovered the truth, so don't be afraid and don't fear thinking for yourself.

Bill Maher: The Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations



Bill Maher stabbed Liberal people metaphorically for the cloudiness in their views on freedom and respect. Bill Maher plays no favorites and is willing to take on any flawed position.  Islam. Religion. Bigots. Fox News.

Despite what Fox News claims, he is not so much left wing as pro-reason and anti-emotion.

The liberal defenders of Islam claim that people that are able to pick up a gun and shoot people, like the two wanna be jihadis that drove from Phoenix to Garland Texas to shoot a hall full of people,  must be defended against word attack because they might get offended. To suggest you can't make fun of silly ideas is itself laughable.

Maher calls it the soft bigotry of low expectations. He is calling out the Ben Affleck's of the world that treat Muslims like useless people that can't defend themselves or take a joke.  Anyone that can strap on a suicide vest needs no defense in any circumstance in any situation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=9pntZQN-rLw



The point of freedom is not to stop anyone from offending others, no matter what threat of violence might ensue. The point of freedom is that we all understand that we live in a fair and civil society that let's people have offensive opinions WITHOUT the threat of violence for it.



Friday, May 8, 2015

Who says religion isn't harmful?

 Randy Janzen is alleged to have killed his family to put them beyond pain and suffering.


"Now my family is pain free and in heaven."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/randy-janzen-facebook-post-appears-to-confess-to-killing-wife-daughter-sister-in-rosedale-b-c-1.3066803

So who can claim religion does no harm? There are three dead people and one going to jail that demonstrates otherwise.

Wednesday, May 6, 2015

Downfall of a political sociopath





Here's a politician that rode a 44 year political dynasty - his party was in power for 12 elections, a huge fund-raising machine, an array of high priced powerful people advising what the right moves were. He was up against 3 parties that were in disarray, underfunded, and written off by the media as unlikely to win.

UPDATE: How do I know Prentice was a sociopath? Once he lost he resigned from both leadership and his seat. He's now a private citizen. He won't even take the job he spent $14 million dollars on. That's selfish arrogance.

He had all the advantages one would hope for. But still, if you act like a sociopath - insult the people and their intelligence, act selfishly, lie to people about how well you're government's doing, and trivialize the people's concerns you will find out how unmerciful those same people will be.


Sounds like anyone else you know?








http://i.cbc.ca/1.3006341.1427150136!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/16x9_620/jim-prentice-progressive-conservative-party-leader.jpg

Tuesday, May 5, 2015

Hey Prentice: Look in the Mirror!

Hey Prentice: you insulted the province's intelligence, played every dirty trick in the book, and lied to us about how badly the conservatives have been losing money to corporations. 


How's that mirror looking now?

Information breach by PM Harper's staff.

The Conservative government has exposed the faces of special forces soldiers in "promotional" videos posted to show the Prime Minister overseas with people that risk their life for the nation. Except they revealed their faces that makes them at risk in the mission and on the streets of any Middle Eastern country where they might have relaxed.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/pmo-apologizes-for-showing-elite-soldiers-faces-in-promotional-videos-1.2358990

PM Harper or his staff have committed an offense under the Security of Information Act, an offense that can be proven, by revealing the identities of secret soldiers and that for any other civil servant would result in a prosecution and punishment. This is not a joke nor a minor error. They have been in power long enough that ignorance is not an excuse. Someone needs to be punished for this. They desverve a fine and and up to 14 years in jail.



Extracts from  http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/O-5/


Wrongful communication, etc., of information
  •  (1) Every person is guilty of an offence under this Act who, having in his possession or control any secret official code word, password, sketch, plan, model, article, note, document or information that relates to or is used in a prohibited place or anything in a prohibited place, or that has been made or obtained in contravention of this Act, or that has been entrusted in confidence to him by any person holding office under Her Majesty, or that he has obtained or to which he has had access while subject to the Code of Service Discipline within the meaning of the National Defence Act or owing to his position as a person who holds or has held office under Her Majesty, or as a person who holds or has held a contract made on behalf of Her Majesty, or a contract the performance of which in whole or in part is carried out in a prohibited place, or as a person who is or has been employed under a person who holds or has held such an office or contract,


“special operational information” means information that the Government of Canada is taking measures to safeguard that reveals, or from which may be inferred,

(b) the nature or content of plans of the Government of Canada for military operations in respect of a potential, imminent or present armed conflict;


Punishment
 Unless this Act provides otherwise, a person who commits an offence under this Act is guilty of
  • (a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 14 years; or
  • (b) an offence punishable on summary conviction and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 12 months or to a fine of not more than $2,000, or to both.

Never trust a businessman explaining his business



http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1a/Wealth_of_Nations.jpg

Adam Smith wrote a fundamental rule about businessmen: never trust them when they explain their business. Because he has a vested interest in the answer, they can't be completely trusted to explain his business objectively.

No business wants to pay more for labour, give more in dividends, have restrictions placed on their trade. So one cannot take their words as gospel.

Monday, May 4, 2015

This is why normal rational people are afraid of Muslims




It isn't Islamophobia. It isn't racism.  It isn't your grammar, your diction, or your upbringing.

It's the fact a Muslim might turn around and attack people at gunpoint or knifepoint and that's allowed by Islam towards normal rational people without provocation that is more than concerning. I pointed it out in this post here.

It's that they can live a normal life, and lie to us all, and unleash evil that is justification to make any rational person concerned.

This is no different than being concerned about people in any other group that advocated violence - like a Montana militia, or a radical Christian sect, or a Mexican cartel or whatever. For any stereotype there is a kernel truth underlining the assumptions towards a group.

Friday, May 1, 2015

You think the oilsands is dirty? Do you know what the oilsands policies and practices are?

These are the Canadian oilsands operations everyone talks about but does not know:

I flew over it on my way back from Frankfurt. Bottom is town of Fort McMurray and the larger clear cut areas farther up are some oilsands projects.

I was looking around my government environment website for a number to complain about an asphalt operation near my home when I stumbled upon this website:

http://esrd.alberta.ca/focus/alberta-and-climate-change/default.aspx

What is the stated position on climate change for Alberta?  Climate change is real and Alberta contributes to it.

What have they done to reduce carbon emissions?  One example:
Under Alberta’s Specified Gas Emissions Regulation approximately 51 Mt of emissions have been reduced from business-as-usual levels. That’s like taking more than 10 million cars (basically, the population of the Czech Republic) off the road for one year.

How much money have they raised to invest in technology?
 
  • Through the \$15/tonne price on carbon, \$503 million has been collected for the Climate Change and Emissions Management Fund - \$249 million has been invested into 100 innovative and clean energy projects.
  • Government of Alberta has invested \$1.3 billion in two carbon capture and storage projects, which will be operational in 2016/2017 (reducing about 2.76 Mt a year).
That's almost \$2billion invested on cleaner technology.

So for all those armchair environmentalists that like to poke the oilsands as dirty; the same people that turn off lights for one hour on Earth day but still drive through fast food joints: what exactly does YOUR state/province claim about climate change and how much money has YOUR state/province invested in emissions reduction?

Remember, your cars are polluting that oil locally. Not in Alberta.

Alberta Premier spending $14 million on election while people laid off...






This is how sociopathic our premier in Alberta is: at a time when thousands of Albertans lost their jobs in the oil & gas sector he's willing to spend \$14 million dollars to hold an election instead of use that money on out of work families.



Last spring election cost \$13.8 million in 2012. Guaranteed with inflation it will be more this time. http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Record+setting+spring+election+cost+Alberta+taxpayers+million/7636664/story.html

That's the cost of a school or road project, or health care for a small community.

So if you want to stop wasting money on pointless elections, kick out the government!