A Thin Line Between Love and Hate.On Bail Outs Brexit and Exorbitant Privilege. Eschatology, when the shit hits the fan?

The main points, in my mind:
*Population is critical and must decline to about one billion by the end of the century

Don, you are suggesting that some sort of genocide is required. I think you are A little overexcited and should consider other sides to this question.
The quality of debate on this forum has declined markedly as the in-group has asserted itself, You have made ad hominem attacks on me for making alternative and perfectly reasoned arguments based upon data from um impeachable sources.

The World does not have a resource problem it has a distribution management problem. The source of the problem is the Financialised nature of the highly centralised monetary system.
The Problems are not related to “Fossil Fuels” and any of their by-products per se, all of those questions are manageable, Think Un – Leaded Petrol:

Access to Resources is endorsed by the monetary hegemony of the PetroDollar, “It’s our currency but your problem”, John Connally. Shenanigans in Syria, Ukraine, Mynamar, Iran presently and previously in Libya, Iraq, Egypt, Turkey.
are all part of this Access to and not supply of petrochemical feedstocks.

What Seeds analysis provides is a metric for distribution decisions and investment planning it does not portend to some sort of Doomsday eschatological green messiah prophecy replete with plagues of Locusts and Deluges.

The human Family has all the tools it needs what it lacks is the cooperative models of Bi-Lateral Government diplomacy to facilitate the efficient un coerced operation of trade and exchange. Hegemonic geopolitical intrigue is the problem we face and not resource restraints or indeed basic failings in human nature.

Essentially it boils down the question of World view and the balance of Love or Hate. Mars or Venus, Good and Evil. Free will or Determinism.

Love Roger.


Submitted by Dan Popesceau via GoldBroker.com,

There is no better way to describe the international monetary system today than through the statement made in 1971 by U.S. Treasury Secretary, John Connally. He said to his counterparts during a Rome G-10 meeting in November 1971, shortly after the Nixon administration ended the dollar’s convertibility into gold and shifted the international monetary system into a global floating exchange rate regime that, “The dollar is our currency, but your problem.” This remains the U.S. policy towards the international community even today. On several occasions both the past and present chairpersons of the Fed, Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen, have indicated it still is the U.S. policy as it concerns the dollar.

Is China saying to the world, but more particularly to the U.S., “The yuan is our currency but your problem”? China’s move to weaken the Yuan against the US dollar is in fact a huge response to America’s resistance to reforming the international monetary framework. It’s telling American policy makers that the longer they delay acting on reforming the international monetary system, the harder and longer they are going to make it for the U.S. to climb out of their trade deficit and depreciate their currency to where they need it to be.

China has been preparing for this moment for several years by accumulating gold through its central bank but also by using banks/corporations and individuals. It has in recent years signed several international agreements to bypass the US dollar in international trade and use preferably the Yuan. It has created an alternative World Bank (Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank) and a gold fund to invest in gold mining for more than 60 countries. The project is being overseen by the Shanghai Gold Exchange (SGE) and it is likely that the newly mined gold will be either traded on the SGE or be sold directly to the PBoC and other central banks. It has also bought a large amount of gold and kept the exact amount as secret as possible.

The international monetary system is in crisis and ready to collapse.




Author: rogerglewis

https://about.me/rogerlewis Looking for a Job either in Sweden or UK. Freelance, startups, will turń my hand to anything.

6 thoughts on “A Thin Line Between Love and Hate.On Bail Outs Brexit and Exorbitant Privilege. Eschatology, when the shit hits the fan?

  1. Don Stewart on September 27, 2019 at 2:18 pm said:
    @Roger Lewis
    About the ‘war on carbon’. I didn’t read it all, but I imagine I am in agreement on at least some of what the article says. Bates’ book on biochar and carbon cascades is built on the notion that carbon is an extremely useful atom. All carbon farming techniques are based on the value of carbon. What is problematic is when we burn carbon in a ‘one and done’ method generating maximum entropy very quickly. What is also problematic is any scientific evidence (such as the Science paper) which indicates that our current OECD society can no longer profitably get to our most used sources of carbon…the fossil fuels. And when we use destructive methods of agriculture which take carbon out of the soil and put it in the air and water, it is problematic in a multitude of ways.

    So what are you accusing me of?
    Don Stewart

    Reply ↓

    on September 27, 2019 at 6:25 pm said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Don Both you and Xavier have a lot to say, at length and thats fine I read it and the links, That is not anywhere near the full picture and your COnclusions are in my opinion unsupported by evidence but are supported by a lot of emotional writings.
    Seeds is an empirical metric and the economy is an energy transformation machine. My own research and reading on these matters point to a future that can be wholly pleasant and fulfilling. Your own position as you set it out is that we have all been very naughty and are riding for a fall. There is evidence t support mans ability to do very stupid things and your worse fears may come to pass, the final blow will be nuclear and war based should it come by our own hand, should the solar system cast the first stone then of course we may go the way it is theorised that did for the dinosaurs.
    Meanwhile, I recommend Vaclavs smils paper on the carrying capacity of Mother earth which considers various positions.
    Renewables without the hot air by the late and greatly missed Prof. Sir , David MacKay is also very much worth reading./ Watching.

  2. rogerglewis on July 22, 2019 at 9:39 am said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    This is an excellent Paper on the Mathematics of Climate Change and Climate Change Alarmism, Climatology as opposed to Climate Politics,


    “The impact on the entire field of scientific research is particularly clear and especially
    pernicious. No project can be launched, on any subject whatsoever, unless it makes direct
    reference to global warming. You want to look at the geology of the Garonne Basin? It is,
    after all, an entirely normal and socially useful subject in every respect. Well, your research
    will be funded, approved and published only if it mentions the potential for geological
    storage of CO2. It is appalling.”

    1. This simple calculation clearly demonstrates that there are not enough stations to model
    the surface temperature of the globe, and satellites cannot replace surface stations. The
    reduction in the number of sensors being used is fundamentally unsound: temperature
    varies from one place to another, from one hour to the next, and this natural variability can
    be tracked only by a very dense network of sensors. p.16

    2. Determining an average temperature for a system as complex as the Earth has no physical
    meaning. Unfortunately, this question, fundamental though it is, has never been tackled by
    organizations involved in meteorology. For them, the answer is simple: you take all the
    sensors and calculate the average! p.23

    3. According to the British Met Office, ‗The global average temperature is
    the arithmetic mean of the northern hemisphere average and the southern hemisphere
    This type of reasoning is being used by all the international bodies, and one might
    legitimately question its validity. The thermodynamic mean, for its part, is too complicated
    to apply and requires the use of models (with all their limitations and uncertainties).
    We might, however, wonder why the arithmetic mean is also being used in areas that are
    less well provided with sensors or have very high or very low temperatures. If we content
    ourselves with an unweighted arithmetic mean, then areas with the highest density of
    sensors are going to be over-represented!
    Our conclusion here is very clear:

    SCM SA White paper “Global Warming”, 2015/09
    – to calculate the arithmetic mean for the entire planet makes no sense and can only
    lead to errors;
    – you can calculate the arithmetic mean for areas well provided with sensors (Europe
    and the US), and compare the values from one year to another. This might provide
    information on local climate variation. p.26/27

    4. On CO2 Measurement and concentration,
    Our conclusion is very clear: the entire methodology used to observe CO2 has to be
    overhauled before we can even think about the results that have been obtained by these
    observations. The first step is to correctly document the natural variability of CO2
    concentrations (what affects them, and how do they manifest?). We must not forget that the
    aim here is to make a global assessment of CO2 concentrations in the entire atmosphere.
    Let us use a simple comparison to explain this. Let us imagine that we want to document
    incidents of sins committed by human beings. Before concluding that ‗we can restrict our
    investigations to the areas around cathedrals‘, which would at least have the merit of
    simplicity, we would have to find out about the ‗natural‘ variability of sin. Perhaps, in fact,
    more sins are committed far away from cathedrals? p.57

    5. Cyclones.
    3. Critical analysis
    In this case, we have been able to obtain raw data and conduct our own analysis, which
    clearly demonstrates, contrary to what we are all reading all the time, that there has been
    no increase in the number of cyclones over the past 40 years. We have found a slight
    increase in the number of Category 4 and 5 cyclones (the strongest), but the numbers are
    very small each year, and the increase might simply be due to changes in ‗accounting
    A common deception is as follows: you begin by looking at cyclones that reach the US
    mainland (the ones that affect people and insurance companies) and you count them. Then
    you change the perimeter and include all cyclones in the North Atlantic, including ones that
    disperse at sea. Of course, the second group is bigger!
    As we said earlier, the statistics presented here cover all cyclones in the North Atlantic. p.67

    6. Sea Level Rises.

    a. Two kinds of instruments are used:
    • Marigraphs, which have been around for 200 years;
    • Altimetry satellites, which measure the height of the satellite above the ocean; they
    have been around for 20 years, namely Topex/Poseidon (1992), Jason 1 (2001), Jason
    2 (2008).
    The water level varies naturally:
    • Due to the tides (lunar attraction)
    • Due to wind and storms
    • Due to sea currents
    This being so, the estimates provided by marigraphs and satellites can be no more than
    averages, if possible over one year or several years, as phenomena such as El Niño affect
    the sea level for a year or more. p.68
    b. E. Be careful! On Models. ( https://www.bitchute.com/video/dv8avoovsHqr/)
    As this issue has taken on a major political dimension, all kinds of statements are made by
    absolutely anyone at all. Great care is therefore called for when accepting information.
    1. Models
    Conclusions based on any kind of model should be disregarded. As the SCM specializes in
    building mathematical models, we should also be recognized as competent to criticize them.
    Models are useful when attempting to review our knowledge, but they should not be used as
    SCM SA White paper “Global Warming”, 2015/09

    Critical analysis
    The rising sea level is a basic thesis for journalists, to support the doctrine of global
    warming. They say, ―Look, the sea is rising, and so we are in danger‖.
    It is perfectly true that the sea level is rising, but essentially this is due to the cooling down
    of the core of the terrestrial globe which has been taking place gradually for five billion
    years. As a result of this contraction, the lighter areas (the oceans) tend to rise up in
    relation to the heavier areas (the mountains). This is simply a consequence of buoyancy,
    and human beings have nothing to do with it. p.77

    That’s Chapter 1 summarised and is sufficient for responding to the Pariah Status proffered upon me by Ron.

    I would close only by Pointing interested and critical thinkers at the work of Clive Spash and his Paper The Brave New World of Carbon Trading.




    on July 23, 2019 at 8:26 am said:
    test, post not appearing

  3. rogerglewis
    on September 29, 2019 at 12:24 pm said:
    I do not try to convince anyone of anything.
    I do not say anyone is wrong in the totality of any claims which they make including yourself.
    What I do ask for is the evidence and the reasoned arguments posited with the aid of those arguments and that data.
    These are very complex systems and the binary and proscriptive tone adopted by many who attach themselves to the tribal polarities generates more heat than light.
    The insistence that arguments have been carried by evidence when patently that is not the case are rather tedious. The CO2 arguments detract particularly from the environmental arguments and the arguments related to resource depletion and exhaustion of other organic systems.
    The criticisms I have of the intellectual dishonesty regularly displayed now in these discussions at Tims excellent blog here remain.
    Have a great Sunday.

    Steven B Kurtz
    on September 29, 2019 at 3:29 pm said:

    Wilber, despite being brilliant in some areas, has for decades assumed that non-physical/energetic things exist. He is far from alone, as theologians and some philosophers have done so for millennia. As appealing as those positions are to Homo superstitious (estimated 80+%), there is zero shareable evidence for such stuff. The attempted ‘proofs’ I’ve seen are either circular or tautological. https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/66/Circular-Reasoning.

    Similar techniques have been used by those claiming disembodied mind and panpsychism. An Australian author, Reg Morrison, has written about mysticism as an evolved trait which has outgrown its usefulness now that we’ve become too successful. (overshoot) See:

    on September 29, 2019 at 4:17 pm said:
    We do know of one non-physical, non-energetic thing that does exist – thought.

    Moreover, the idea that mysticism (or anything beyond the tangible) has been rendered obsolete by advances in our knowledge seems to put a lot of faith in the concept of ‘advance’.

    I’m not a subscriber to any established religion, but I certainly don’t dismiss the concept that there might be ‘something beyond us’. Perhaps the most rigorous philosophical investigation of this topic, carried out many years ago by a retired judge, concluded (a) that there probably is a driving intelligence behind the universe, but (b) that this is likely to bear no resemblance at all to the Deity postulated by religion. For one thing, this intelligence is likely to be subjective (akin to our subconscious minds), not objective (like our conscious minds). It might thus be likened to a “highest law of science”.

    Steven B Kurtz
    on September 29, 2019 at 4:29 pm said:

    Energy is physical. If anyone can evidence non-caloric thought, a Nobel likely awaits!


    on September 30, 2019 at 5:06 am said:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    Hello Stephen,
    Ken Wilber is an interesting Philosopher and Psychologist I find his ideas interesting. Rupert Sheldrake’s theory of Morphic Resonance is very interesting as well, and one which I believe has much to recommend it.
    Regarding Philosophy of Mind, it is a huge subject and my own interests tend towards the work of Wittgenstein and Linguistics. Ultimately I am though most persuaded by the Father of American Pragmatism CS Pierce.
    Here is a link to my Essay, why are we here which I wrote in reaction to David Malones Documentary series of the same title,

    In all matters epistemological and philosophical I demure ultimately to C S Pierce and this made up quote from ´We Pragmatists ´

    CHARLES SANDERS PEIRCE: ´´In order to reason well …. it is absolutely necessary to possess … such virtues as intellectual honesty and sincerity and a real love of truth (2.82). The cause [of the success of scientificinquirers] has been that the motive which has carried them to the laboratory and the field has been a craving to know how things really were … (1-34).[Genuine inquiry consists I in diligent inquiry into truth for truth’s sake(1.44), … in actually drawing the bow upon truth with intentness in the eye, with energy in the arm (1.235). [When] it is no longer the reasoning which determines what the conclusion shall be, but … the conclusion which determines what the reasoning shall be … this is sham reasoning…. The effect of this shamming is that men come to look upon reasoning as mainly decorative…´´. http://web.ncf.ca/ag659/308/Peirce-Rorty-Haack.pdfPierces seminal essay How to make our ideas clear is also a great starting off point for embracing such truth as we might be fortunate enough to encounter in our allotted time on this blue marble suspended in eternity.http://www.peirce.org/writings/p119.html

    Davids Documentary is available on Curiosity stream. David and I are good friends and you may be familiar with some of his other Documentary Work for BBC Horizon ( Icon Earth) or Independently (Dangerous Knowledge) or of his Father Adrian Malone, Cosmos with Carl Sagan and The Age of Uncertainty with GK Galbraith.

    Here is a link to My trilogy of Poems which informs my Novel Conquest fo dough which I have also made a web site for also linked.



    Getting back to Wilber the Paper by the late great Bernard Lietaer Integral money
    is hugely en-riching and AQAL analysis of monetary perspectives bears much fruit
    Jain Many Sidedness and Maimonides souces of Contradiction are equally helpful templates for Making our ideas clear.


Leave a Reply