Primitive. Actions. Ecology. Pendulums.

Fossil data, historical records, and underwater survey data have been used to reconstruct the abundance of staghorn and elkhorn corals over the past 125,000 years. Researchers show that these corals first began declining in the 1950s and 1960s, earlier than previously thought. (1) Even the most primitive actions of people alter the planet. Even the most essential functions of the planet alter humans. Trying to keep balance is difficult. For it entails actions which destroy it.

Look at the clock.

Time has stopped now.

A primitive hand.

Touching a flower.

A light wind.

Bringing a seed.

Look at the clock.

It is moving now…

Don’t you see?

A pendulum’s balance is that it has no balance…

Against ecology: How eco-friendly behavior can be harmful!

A new theory suggests that we think of our relationship with the environment like a social exchange, leading to the belief that ‘environmentally friendly’ behavior can compensate for ‘harmful’ behavior. And research reveals that thinking like this could have harmful effects on the environment after all.

This is because we may believe that ecological behavior cancels-out non-ecological behavior, while this is obviously not the case. In reality, all consumption causes permanent environmental harm, and green options are at best less harmful rather than restorative. And unfortunately studies show that when so-called ‘eco-friendly’ items are added to a set of ‘conventional’ items, people believe the environmental impact of the whole set is unchanged, or even reduced.

“For instance, some groups have found that people intuitively think the environmental burden of a hamburger and an organic apple in combination is lower than the environmental burden of the hamburger alone, or that the total emissions of a car pool remain the same when hybrid cars are added to the pool,” highlights Sörqvist, one of the researchers.

This leads us to pursue all sorts of misguided quick fixes to assuage our eco-guilt.

“People might purchase some extra groceries because they are ‘eco-labeled’; think that they can justify jetting abroad for vacation because they have been cycling to work; or take longer showers because they’ve reduced the water temperature. And companies – nations, even – claim to balance greenhouse gas emissions by planting trees or by paying for carbon offsets through the European Union Emission Trading Scheme.

“Meanwhile, the best thing for the environment would of course be for us to consume less overall,” stresses Sörqvist. (1)

A research stating nothing more than the obvious.

The solution to a problem is not a solution to the problem.

But the nullification of the problem itself.

There is no need to be eco-friendly.

Because there is no cosmos be friendly to.

You are that cosmos!

You are not part of anything.

You ARE everything!

Try to do good.

And you will end up doing something wrong.

Because the only way to be good is not through doing something.

But through doing nothing.

And letting the universe tell you what is good.

Stand by.

And let that sparrow die.

It will be the best thing you did for it…

The last white rhino…

Rhino embryos made in lab to save nearly extinct subspecies. The development is an early step toward the much more distant goal of resurrecting the northern white rhinoceros, whose last male died this year. (1)

Being the last of your kind.

A sad moment. A lonely moment.

Those eyes. Full of lust for life.

In the face of death, longing for some more moments of existence. (Humans want to resurrect them now) And yet, they fail to see that they were never more alive. In that last gaze… (Humans will eventually die. And let the rhinos be)

ScienceAlert, censorship, climate hysteria, scientific “consensus”…

Today the science news web site ScienceAlert issued an impressive announcement in its Facebook page: It urged its followers not to engage with “climate deniers” which it called “trolls”. Instead, it told them to report those “trolls” so that they will be banned from the page if they utter any argument against climate change! (1)

So there you are.

A scientific matter is now part of censorship.

When was the last time something like that happened?

Even Enlightenment proponents, called for the tolerance to different opinion!

But today’s era if far from enlightened. Today we live in the era of scientism, shallowness and the triumph of ignorant majorities. Majorities which could never find the right answer to any of the great philosophical or scientific problems, but which now feel obliged to support a specific opinion because… science! and because… facts!

So scientific that it needs 16-year-olds to defend it.

So factual that it needs censorship to be imposed.

Think.

When was the last time someone used such techniques to argue that 1+1 = 2?

Welcome to the era of Enlightenment!

So… enlightened that we will tag you and we will block you if you disagree! Yes, this is a progressed world! And if you believe otherwise, we will shut you up! Because we enjoy our echo chamber! It is delightful!

Delightful…

Delightful…

Delightful…

ghtful…

ful…

ful…

GRETA AND CHILD EXPLOITATION! (says a crying adult)

To all of you who see Greta and rejoice for how she speaks so strongly in favor of the “cause”: Do you know what the legal meaning of child exploitation is?

Here is a short summary: It is exactly what is happening with Greta right now!

Do you understand how this kid has been put on the forefront for a race that has a specific agenda? No child should be exploited. A 16-year-old kid has to play, enjoy life, learn. Not to make hysterical speeches in front of an assembly of diplomats to “teach” us what the right thing is. Don’t you understand that Greta just repeats what she’s been told to repeat?

And one more thing: The mere use of Greta (because this is what it is: they are just using her) – of a child I must repeat – in such a situation shows the low level at which the debate has fallen. We are no longer talking with arguments. We talk to the emotions of others and we try to build guilt syndromes. And what can be better than a crying little kid?

If your house is on fire, will you listen to a little kid saying it to you or to an adult? Or worse: Will you hear the little kid more than the adult who warns you about the fire? Sorry but if that is the case, then you are stupid. (Maybe if I put a little kid to say this while crying it will sound much more impressive)

Let the kids out of this and out of any other discussion (I refer to cases where people bring their children to the gay parade etc).

Unconditionally and without reservations!

PS. I have written other articles (see “The hypocrisy of Ecology” for example) about climate and what is happening that few people sit down to read. This article is specifically for Greta and a call to end child exploitation. Not to discuss climate!

Exit mobile version
%%footer%%