Education

Sir Elton is on to something big here folks

Sir Elton is on to something. He vigorously defended the use of his private jet by Prince Harry and Meghan by saying he’d offset the emissions via Carbon Footprint (CF) so the flights were carbon neutral.

CM decided to input the figures of what a return trip to Ibiza followed by a return trip to Nice would cost the lovely couple to offset their evil ways using CF’s calculator. Turns out there is no “private jet” setting on the CF website leaving CM to use first class as a default.

The return trip from the UK to Ibiza would only require £2.00 each. The UK-Nice run would also run £2.00 return. So for the grand total of £8.00, their carbon emissions could technically be paid for on CF. CM notes that if the flights were combined then the cost drops to £3.71 each, a saving of 58p!

To splurge, Sir Elton could select the ‘UK tree plant’ for £12.90 (incl 20% VAT) each for a grand total of £51.60. Kenyan reforestation options are £9.50.

We don’t know how much Sir Elton paid for his offsets. One would hope his billions did a bit more than £8.00 or worse, £7.42 on a package offset.

Perhaps the $100s of billions of tax dollars spent (wasted) on renewables every year could be abolished and easily replaced by the generosity of pop stars paying to plant trees in Kenya! Who knew?

Violence against men – the facts

The ghost returns. What a surprise that former PM Malcolm Turnbull has decided to comment on the Alan Jones/Jacinda Ardern saga. Does Turnbull honestly believe that Jones telling the NZ PM to mind her own business on climate change really part of “where all violence against women begins“? “Violent abuse“? Seriously?

By that logic, have all of the men that Jones has shredded on his radio program enabled violence against men? Where were you then Mr Turnbull?

Let’s explore the research. According to a UK study,

“Male victims  (39%) are over three times as likely than women (12%) not to tell anyone about the partner abuse they are suffering from. Only 10% of male victims will tell the police (26% women), only 23% will tell a person in an official position (43% women) and only 11% (23% women) will tell a health professional.

The number of women convicted of perpetrating domestic abuse has increased sevenfold since 2004/05. From 806 in 2004/05 to 5,641 in 2015/16…In 2015, 119,000 men reported to English and Welsh police forces stating they were a victim of domestic abuse. 22% of all victims who report to the police are male. In 2012, 73,524 men did…

Men don’t leave abusive relationships for various reasons – the top reasons being: concern about the children (89%), marriage for life (81%), love (71%), the fear of never seeing their children again (68%), a belief she will change (56%), not enough money(53%), nowhere to go (52%), embarrassment (52%), not wanting to take kids away from their mother (46%), threats that she will kill herself (28%) and fears she will kill him (24%). 

Of those that suffered from partner abuse in 2012/13, 29% of men and 23% of women suffered a physical injury, a higher proportion of men suffering severe bruising or bleeding (6%) and internal injuries or broken bones/teeth (2%) than women (4% and 1% respectively). 30% of men who suffer from partner abuse have emotional and mental problems (47% women). Only 27% of men sought medical advice whilst 73% of women did.

The percentage of gay or bi-sexual men (6.2%) who suffered partner abuse in 2008/09 is nearly double the number for heterosexual men (3.3%). Lesbian women (12.4%) as a percentage also suffered far more partner abuse compared to heterosexual women (4.3%).

The US National Intimate Partner Sexual Violence Survey (NIPSVS) conducted in 2010 showed that 25 million men had claimed they were victims of some form of sexual violence by an intimate partner or acquaintance. Heather Jo Flores wrote in The Independent with respect to disrespecting women, 

Men, it’s not our job to keep reminding you. Remind each other, and stop abusing. It’s as simple as that. Until men speak out against men who abuse, this will never stop. How about y’all post “I ignored it and I won’t anymore” instead? Because #hearyou doesn’t cut it. Just hearing us doesn’t cut it. Taking action, speaking out, and showing zero tolerance for abuse is the only way through. Silence enables. Be the change..So why do men need to have multiple victims come forward before anybody says a damn thing”

Flores went on to say, “Yes, I know men get abused too. Once in a lifetime, maybe a handful of times, in extreme situations. And they get abused by men, mostly. Just like us…I write this to ask: why are we still demanding that women out themselves as survivors, again and again and again, rather than demanding that men out themselves as abusers? Violence against women is a daily reality,.”

In the 12 month period conducted in the NIPSVS survey, 6.46mn women and 6.1mn men were victims of sexual violence by their partner, an acquaintance or stranger. 4.74mn women were victims of physical violence by men and 5.365mn men were victims of physical violence by women. Hardly a handful of times, nor at the hands of men.

1.555mn men claimed their intimate female partner hit them with fists or a hard object vs 1.289m women claiming the reverse. 3.13mn men were slapped by their women vs 1.85mn in the reverse. Awful stats on any measure. Still, it puts paid the notion that men are generally victims of other men once a blue moon. When it came to psychological intimidation around 20.5mn men were victims of it vs 16.5mn women.

The NIPSVS survey was conducted again in 2011 and revealed much the same trends.

By the logic, if men must out other men as abusers, perhaps female abusers should do likewise and male survivors should speak out just as women do. #believeallmen?

Perhaps Mr Turnbull might reflect on this research and work out that making such irrelevant remarks do absolutely nothing for anyone other than highlight yet again why his own party turfed him.

Heaven forbid toxic masculinity took out a knife-wielding murderer in the Sydney CBD. Wouldn’t it be convenient if the perpetrator had said he had been motivated by listening to the Alan Jones Morning Show on 2GB?

Most people get that violence against anyone shouldn’t be tolerated but trying to sound “woke” on Twitter hasn’t fooled anyone.

No Greta, Trump doesn’t have time for you

Image result for thunberg trump

As 16yo Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg sets sail for America she claimed she doesn’t want to waste her time talking to President Trump. CM is pretty sure that Trump wouldn’t waste his time making time in his calendar to see the teenager. There is absolutely no way in the world that the lefty activists that guide her would pass up an opportunity to pillory Trump in person as she challenged him on the need to panic. The mainstream media would be gushing in its derangement on how the headlines would describe how she “owned him”.

Despite looking forward to pooping in a bucket on a carbon made boat that emits no carbon (hoping they don’t need to fire up the emergency fossil fuel engines), she was forced to admit that “people can’t just take a sailboat across the Atlantic Ocean.” Spot on, Greta. However, she should take more comfort to know that the 280 million commercial airline flights every year contribute only 1.47% of human-made CO2 according to some of her biggest supporters – the EU. So on a global basis, airlines make up a mind-bogglingly frightening 0.00001825% of global CO2 emissions. Time to panic? If we increase our air travel 50% we’ll only match Germany for emissions…

Extinction Rebellion prepares for the communist catwalk

That’s it folks. Forget fashion. Ditch your Manolo Blahniks. Shred your DVF dresses. Burn your designer Armani jeans in a pyre. Even better write a placard and protest outside Gucci or Louis Vuitton. It’s for the planet you know.

Extinction Rebellion (XR) has said London fashion week is unsustainable. Ladies, prepare to wear drab grey gender neutral pant suits from now on. Men will be allowed to wear a skirt presumably so as to foster transgenderism. This will be year round. We’ll be allowed one set only.

The Guardian journalist, Lucy Siegle, wrote,

“the environmental group Extinction Rebellion has seized the initiative, writing to the British Fashion Council (BFC), conveners of London fashion week, demanding it is scrapped in favour of “a people’s assembly of industry professionals and designers as a platform to declare a climate and ecological emergency”

So let’s get this straight, these XR hippiecrits use the very materials and dyes to make a fashion statement to push their agenda.

Tell you what XR, given that China is the largest producer of textiles, please take your protest to Beijing. While you’re at it you can protest China’s 29.3% (and growing) impact on CO2 emissions. Two for the price of one. President Xi would warmly welcome your presence in one of his jails. Afterall you encourage peaceful arrest although you might want to update your legal assistance page for those who do end up being arrested in Tiananmen Square.

You’ll never guess how we can Save the Planet

Here is a credit card business model bound to fail. Johan Pihl, one of the founders of Doconomy, is launching a new credit card in collaboration with the UN Climate Change Secretariat and Mastercard. It cuts your ability to spend when you’ve hit your “carbon” limit, not your financial one. Now we will be able to stop our rampant plastic use with, you guessed it, plastic!  Although Doconomy claims the card will be made from bio-sourced material. Sadly the silicon chip will require high energy intensity to make. At least air pollution is good for something as it will be the main source of the ink.

Pihl said, “we realized that putting a limit that blocks your ability to complete the transaction is radical…but it’s the clearest way to illustrate the severity of the situation we’re in...Imagine if the consumer would pick up our app and actually look at their footprint and that’s the basis for whether they buy something or not,”

Perhaps we should ask all UN staffers to use it as their business credit card. If Doconomy lived up to its promises, most would have their carbon limit triggered when paying for flights to the next COP summit halfway around the globe. That would be a plus!

It uses the Åland Index to identify the CO2 of every transaction. CM encourages everyone to have a play with the carbon calculator.

For instance, if one spends 100 euro in a supermarket, the carbon footprint is almost the same as spending 100 euro in a department store. So regardless of whether one buys 100 euro of fruit or 100 euro of plastic-packaged flash-fried instant noodles, the impact of 4,902g of CO2 footprint is the same. Buy a 100 euro bottle of perfume or 100 euro of cuff links at a department store, the impact is still 4,293g. What you probably didn’t know is that smoking has a lower carbon footprint than buying groceries on a euro for euro basis. If smokers ever wanted an excuse to repeal these oppressively high taxes on tobacco, surely we should be getting Extinction Rebellion to add it to the list of demands because of the lower carbon footprint that can be achieved.

Whatever you do, don’t buy your loved one flowers! 100 euros of flowers has a 4,696g impact. That 200 euro Valentine’s dinner will add 15,928g. However, will the app calculate the 200 euro bottle of wine to celebrate an anniversary at 2x the 100 euro bottle? Yes it will.

If you do online gambling, 100 euro will cost 38,066g. You guessed it, if you spent 1,000 euro (exactly the same transaction time and keystrokes) it will cost 380,660g. Just shows how woefully inaccurate these carbon calculators are. To save the planet, instead of fuelling a gambling addiction,  you can cut your impact on the social fabric of society and save 90% by filling your car (118,600g of CO2) with 100 euro of fuel and enjoy a spiritual country drive to avoid regular attendance at Gamblers Anonymous.

Hotels – same thing. 100 euro on a hotel has 1/4 the emissions of a 400 euro hotel. Presumably if one is a master of Trivago or Hotels Combined website one can cut the emissions on exactly the same hotel room by the level of the discount. Who knew being environmental was so simple?

Doconomy states,

With DO, you get actual refunds from connected DO stores, based on the carbon impact of your purchase. We call it DO credits…The refunds can be used to compensate for the carbon footprint of your purchase. You can direct it to UN-certified carbon offset projects, or invest in sustainable funds. If you choose to invest in a fund, you must add the same amount as the value of your DO credit. You choose.”

Damn. How much will one have to spend to get enough DO credits to make an impact on a sustainable investment fund?

What a joke. As soon as the UN is involved in any such project we can absolutely guarantee the outcome will be a farce.

109 minutes NSW politicians should spend before voting on abortion

As the NSW Gov’t seeks to rush through amendments to legislation on abortion today, this is a movie that people who hold strong opinions (on either side) and parliamentarians would do well to spare 109 minutes for.

It depicts Abby Johnson, the main character and director of an abortion clinic, Planned Parenthood. It shows how she came full circle when she actually got to witness an abortion live from the procedural end. Despite having two abortions that she admitted were sacrificed  “on the altar of convenience,” this event caused her to quit. 

A rather damning insight into the ‘industry’. It is really well worth watching and perhaps better education and support might be an amendment Berijiklian considers. Why not enforce child support to ensure potential deadbeat father’s to be can’t escape responsibility? Why should the state be forced to pick up the whole tab for single mothers? Maybe couples should be made to watch this movie to better educate themselves on the procedure.

Making it safe is one thing. Making people aware of the pros and cons is another. The latter seems to be woefully catered for.

Remember the stats folks. 56 million abortions every year worldwide. 50 million died in the 6 years of WWII. 20% of fetuses in Europe never make it out of the womb. To think the population crisis it faces?

Pro-Choice will argue access to proper medical facilities is paramount. There is a good point to be made to avoid dangerous backyard abortions. Perhaps better legislation will mandate that education sessions on options for pregnant women that may dissuade abortion is no bad thing. At the moment, little seems to be done in that regard. Make people better aware before making such a literally ‘life-changing‘ decision.

Mental Illness = Gun Violence?

As ever, the mainstream media are sensationalizing “mental health” and the connection to gun massacres. Let’s not forget that mental health can be categorized in a broad variety of ways – from mild anxiety, ADHD to PTSD and full blown bi-polar or schizophrenia. The mainstream media would have us believe that Trump wants the keys to the gun cabinet handed over to certified crackpots to go on white supremacist fueled mass rampages. It is easy to say that those who commit these atrocities must be mad. How easy is it to fall for that assumption? Yet the stats say otherwise.

First, what is this bill that has been repealed by Trump? Why is the media making such clickbait hyperventilating news of something that was already enacted c.2 years ago?

The previous Obama bill allowed gun retailers to get access to “mental health” related social security benefits paid to potential buyers. There are nine categories of mental disorders covered in the Social Security Blue Book. These include:

Affective disorders

Anxiety Disorders

Autism and related disorders

Mental retardation

Organic Mental Disorders

Personality disorders

Schizophrenia, paranoia, and psychotic disorders

Somatoform disorders

Substance addiction

The idea is that if one had claustrophobia or similar mild anxiety, it would be unlikely to be a factor in causing someone to shoot up a Walmart. In order to get mental health disability checks, the applicant must prove compliance to prescribed medication and that they seek regular treatment from professionals. Why do we automatically assume that mental health status is a direct trigger to mass murder? Simply because it is easy to categorize these events to unhinged crazies and presume that there was ‘illness’ involved.

A study conducted by the National Institute of Health (NIH) in America showed,

Thirty-four subjects, acting alone or in pairs, committed 27 mass murders between 1958 and 1999. The sample consisted of males with a median age of 17. 70% were described as a loner. 61.5% had problems with substance abuse. 48% had preoccupations with weapons. 43.5% had been victims of bullying. Although 23% had a documented psychiatric history, only 6% were judged to have been psychotic at the time of the mass murder. Depressive symptoms and historical antisocial behaviors were predominant. There was a precipitating event in most cases–usually a perceived failure in love or school–and most subjects made threatening statements regarding the mass murder to third parties. The majority of the sample clustered into three types: the family annihilator, the classroom avenger, and the criminal opportunist.”

Recall Cuban Parkland, Florida student Emma Gonzalez admitted she’d bullied the shooter Nikolas Cruz. It doesn’t excuse his actions. Nor hers.

Take cyber bullying stats from the Association of Psychological Science in the US. In 2015 more than 16,000 young people were absent from school daily because of bullying. 83% of young people say cyber bullying has a negative impact on their self-esteem. 30% of young people have gone on to self-harm as a result of cyberbullying. 10% of young people have attempted to commit suicide as a result of cyberbullying.

So the stats tell us in 3 out of 4 cases, mental illness was not the culprit in mass shootings. A violent/bullying, substance abuse based environment was.

As mentioned in the previous post, how is it we can find out about the history of shooters within hours of the terror? Surely the powers at the FBI, NSA etc can monitor the traffic of hate – death lists, death threats etc and use that as the basis of background checks rather than rely on whether someone received mental health related disability cheques? Perhaps someone who is fully healed from a mental illness as a child poses no threat if wanting to hunt or fire at a supervised gun range. Perhaps that individual wants to be a security guard?

Dr Jeffrey Swanson, a professor in psychiatry and behavioral science at the Duke University School of Medicine believes that in the event of unlawful use of a firearm by those with mental illness, 95% likely to turn the weapon on themselves than commit homicide.

He also believes that those who are violent or been charged with assault make far better predictors of homicidal behavior than the outcome of a mental health diagnosis.

In Connecticut, almost 23,300 people were diagnosed with a history of serious mental illness. 7% were disqualified from owning a gun because of that mental record. 35% were banned based on a disqualifying criminal record that wasn’t necessarily linked to the mental illness.

Dr. Swanson closed with,

We need to think of violence itself as a communicable disease. We have kids growing up exposed to terrible trauma. We did a study some years ago, looking at [violence risk] among people with serious mental illness. The three risk factors we found were most important: first, a history of violent victimization early in life, second, substance abuse, and the third is exposure to violence in the environment around you. People who had none of those risk factors ― even with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia ― had very low rates of violent behavior…Abuse, violence in the environment around you ― those are the kinds of things you’re not going to solve by having someone take a mood stabilizer.”

Sadly such is the state of lazy journalism that ‘respected media outlets’ simply infer that those that commit mass murder are simply head cases and giving them access to guns will somehow create a bigger problem. That’s how the mainstream media is portraying a 2-yr old bill to whip up more misunderstanding.