Please share this where you can.
“Children are dying”” An impassioned plea from a German doctor
We have become such an arrogant species, thinking that we are God. The reality is we are like ants and so insignificant we will be forgotten, individually as well as collectively.
Shakespeare had it right
All the world's a stage...
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first, the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms.
Then the whining schoolboy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress' eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon's mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slippered pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side;
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank, and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.
I do not have the time to do this justice right now. But, in brief, it seems to confirm what we already know from observations.
Scientific paper discusses
extensive release of methane
from the East Siberian Arctic
This article is from a South African publication
The destruction of permafrost in the Laptev Sea provokes methane emissions
I have lots to say about this but no time to say it.
Lockdowns or the planet gets
it? Guardian ‘accidentally’
suggests Covid-like shutdowns
every 2 years to meet Paris
4 March, 2021
Helen Buyniski is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23
If carbon dioxide emissions don’t drop by the equivalent of a worldwide lockdown “roughly every two years” for the next decade, the earth will heat to apocalyptic levels, a team of researchers at the University of East Anglia warned in a Nature article published Wednesday.
This apparently so excited a certain strain of climate fanatic on the Guardian staff, that they originally posted the piece under the title “Global lockdown every two years needed to meet Paris CO2 goals – study.” After being dragged mercilessly for such fear porn, the headline was changed to “Equivalent of Covid emissions drop needed every two years – study” with an explainer that “experts say” that “equivalent falls in emissions over a decade” would be “required to keep safe limits of global heating.”
Despite calling for “completely different methods” to achieve and lock in the emissions drop from the pandemic, lead researcher Corinne Le Quéré nevertheless insisted that climate change couldn’t be a “side issue. It can’t be about one law or policy, it has to be put at the heart of all policy.”
Every strategy and every plan from every government must be consistent with tackling climate change.
While Le Quéré didn’t come out and suggest people be arbitrarily deprived of their liberties every two years in order to please a climate model, the other “strategic actions” she mentioned to keep some of the gains of the pandemic were already being implemented – and in many cases had been implemented for years. From city planning to incentivize “active transport” (walking and cycling) and growing public transportation, to promoting remote work where possible, her suggestions were not exactly new – and unlikely to convince anyone they were sufficient enough.
“There is a real contradiction between what governments are saying they are doing to do [to generate a green recovery], and what they are doing,” Le Quéré told the Guardian, calling the phenomenon “very worrisome.”
Her co-researcher Glen Peters was more explicit in what latitude countries should have to move away from fossil fuels on their own time, calling for “structural changes” to move economies toward renewable energy.
Some on social media, seeing the “quiet part” said out loud on the first edition of the Guardian article, had an “I told you so” moment. The threat of ‘climate lockdowns’ has been alternately presented and “debunked” by mainstream media for months.
…others at first assumed it had to be satire, because no one would post something that on-the-nose –
…except maybe for the World Economic Forum, which actually posted in praise of what lockdowns had done to cities – presumably turned them into uninhabitable hives of snitches where one can’t even take in a Broadway show anymore – earlier this week, before removing its tweet under public pressure.
The WEF had posted a video praising the “silence” and clearer air – and lack of humans, though they didn’t say that part out loud.
Longer lockdowns, $30b wage subsidy, and food rationing in Covid worst-case scenario
4 March, 2021
Longer lockdowns, a $30 billion six-month wage subsidy, rationing food, closing supermarkets and pharmacies, and forcing companies to stop exporting goods overseas were all considered as part of the Government’s “worst-case scenario” Covid response, released to Stuff under the Official Information Act and revealed here for the first time.
On April 7, 2020, New Zealand reached a milestone. With 54 new cases and 65 recoveries, the number of recovered cases exceeded the number of new cases for the first time since lockdown began
Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said the result suggested the lockdown was working. We now know she was right.
But behind the scenes, the Government was laying out the groundwork for a strategy that would kick into action if Ardern was wrong and Covid was of control.
That paper landed on ministers’ (virtual) desks on the same day, April 7.
Called the “All-of-Government paper on Managed Economy”, it laid out what it called the “worst-case scenario”.
It foresaw lockdowns of various rigour and length (a separate paper considered six months of level 4 restrictions and another six at level 3), and had the Government picking up a greater and greater share of the economy as the private sector slowly atrophied.
This worst-case scenario envisaged disruption to supply chains, meaning essential businesses wouldn’t have enough goods to sell.
“New Zealand’s inclusion in international shipping routes may be reduced if our imports of non-essential goods are limited and our exports are significantly reduced,” the paper warned.
Despite the climbing unemployment rate then envisaged, the Government also foresaw workforce shortages for essential businesses, in some cases because of “people refusing to work due to concerns about health risks”.
Worse still, the Government feared “level 4 proving insufficient”, and that this could require the use of “a more extreme form of lockdown, for example a narrower definition of ‘essential’, stronger restrictions on movement, and deliveries only permitted for essential supplies”.
With international trade routes deteriorating, the Government was worried that New Zealand would be “unlikely to be able to source the normal range of food, beverage and other products, and temporary shortages will become more likely”.
The Government looked at rationing the amount of essential goods New Zealanders could access, and blocking the export of some essential products.
“In some critical areas, New Zealand may want or need to (rapidly) become more self-sufficient, to the extent practicable,” the paper said.
The Government proposed underwriting manufacturers as they sought to repurpose factories to make things such as PPE, and expediting the consents of new plants that would manufacture things onshore.
Rationing could be brought in to ensure that the limited resources left in the country were doled out fairly, although people would still have to pay for goods.
“A worst-case scenario might require the Government to consider some combination of rationing and price control to ensure as much as possible that everyone in New Zealand has access to sufficient essential goods and services,” the paper said, although it said the probability of rationing was “low”.
Another reason for rationing could be because a more extreme form of lockdown shut supermarkets, forcing some sort of delivery system to be set up. To prevent price gouging, these deliveries would be made at prices dictated by the Government.
“Formal food rationing could be considered in the future because of sustained shortage of staples or because of a more extreme form of lockdown, most likely at a sub-regional level.
“This could be based on a rapid scaling-up of existing arrangements, for example online ordering, physical delivery and administered prices.
“Alternative arrangements would have to be found for those not online. Consumers would pay for their rations, with existing income support mechanisms helping those otherwise unable to meet the cost,” the paper said.
Officials were also concerned that there might not be enough people to staff the public health response. Some staff would be sick, while others would have to take time off for their families.
But the Government was also concerned that fears around the pandemic would be so great that some people would refuse to go to work. At the time, its modelling feared tens of thousands of New Zealanders would die from causes related to Covid-19.
The Government came up with a few ideas to ensure the health response was staffed. One was targeted “incentives” to work in critical roles, probably involving increased pay.
Officials considered “targeted additional incentives to work in critical public sector roles, if necessary and feasible (which would depend on prospects for eliciting increased supply rather than driving up cost)”.
Another option was “relaxing occupational regulation to enable less qualified people to perform essential tasks (and accepting the associated risks)”.
This could mean people without appropriate registration performing essential tasks.
Officials also considered banning the export of some essentials and redirecting them to New Zealanders.
“There is potential for conflict between business interest and the public good if, for example, a New Zealand-based business decides to export medical products or primary produce that also are in demand locally,” the paper said.
There were concerns that this would risk retaliation from other countries, so it was decided against.
“Selectively banning export of ‘essentials’ would be difficult to do and would risk retaliatory action by trading partners,” officials said.
Very strong M7.2 earthquake hits off the east coast of North Island, New Zealand
8.0 Aftershock Rocks New
Zealand's Kermadec Islands;
"Tsunami Watch" For Hawaii