Problem viewing this email? Click here for online version.

Tips, Links and Tidbits Newsletter


Twitter Facebook Google
Read or Condemn Yourself to Death by Ignorance

Wednesday 20th May 2015


I hope this finds you fit and well.

Climate change is galactic!

Investment bankers and carbon traders are already gearing up for the UN Paris climate conference scheduled in December. The aim of “securing a legally-binding global climate agreement on curbing carbon emissions” is in reality an attempt for global dictatorship. From Thomas Malthus to Bertrand Russell to green movement founder Prince Philip and his modern acolytes, the British imperial elite, now the London-Wall Street elite, have schemed of ways to forcibly stop nations from using their own energy resources for development, so that colonial—and now financial—powers can control those resources for their own power and profits; London and Wall Street banks reaping billions by speculating on carbon credits that all nations will be forced to trade is the latest extension of this imperial suppression.

The issue was never about climate because in reality climate change is a galactic phenomenon. Carbon dioxide has never been—nor will be—a significant driving force of climate as any honest geologist will attest.

Cosmic rays originating from deep outer space and solar cycles are the drivers of climate change. Planet Earth is cycling through the Milky Way galaxy in two cycles: the 62-million-year-cycle of our solar system’s movement up and down through the plane of our galaxy and the 145-million-year-cycle corresponding to the motion of our solar system around the galaxy and through its spiral arms. The resulting variations in cosmic rays reaching earth are further modulated by the sunspot cycle: the more sunspots there are, the more intense is the solar energy showering the earth, through which less cosmic rays can pass; fewer sunspots means more cosmic rays reach earth.

The galactic forces affecting climate and weather are not just of prehistoric significance. These forces have very real consequences right now. A 2008 study “Role of Variations in Galactic Cosmic Rays in Tropical Cyclogenesis: Evidence of Hurricane Katrina” by Bondur, Pulinets and Kim showed a remarkable relationship between solar activity, galactic cosmic rays, and the infamous hurricane Katrina which devastated New Orleans in 2005.

Scientists who have seriously looked at geological history know that carbon dioxide (CO2) levels today at 400 parts per million are much lower than for most of the history of life on Earth and 450 million years ago the Earth went into an Ice Age when CO2 levels exceeded 4,000 ppm—ten times the current concentration. Earth’s climate has always changed with variations in cosmic energy from our galaxy as it moves through the Milky Way.

The most dramatic climate change in recent human history occurred around 13,000 years ago as the Earth emerged from a 100,000-year-long freezing glacial period. At the Last Glacial Maximum (LGM) approximately 20,000 years ago, sea levels were around 125 metres lower than today. Aboriginal tribes walked from mainland Australia to Tasmania over what is now Bass Strait. For all the hoopla over rising sea levels today measured in millimetres, consider that at the LGM not only was Bass Strait non-existent, the Gulf of Carpentaria and most of the Timor and Arafura Seas were part of the Sahul continent, which also included New Guinea.

Over the last 1.25 million years, Earth has experienced 13 ice ages on a 100,000-year cycle corresponding with our planet’s orbital cycle around the sun. This is known in the scientific community as one of the Milankovitch cycles, specifically the Earth’s eccentricity. The Earth has experienced a cooling trend for several million years and fortunately (for the past 13,000 years) we now live in a warmer interglacial period, but this won’t last for long. Oxygen isotope records indicate that warm interglacial periods have typically lasted 10,000–15,000 years. This means the next cold glacial period will hit us relatively soon, and failing intervention, future generations will need to adapt to icy conditions lasting a likely 90,000 years.

German-American rocket-engineer Krafft Ehricke in the 1970s prepared several documents detailing a plan to place mirrors in space, reflecting extra sunlight on the Earth to targeted locations. Such vision may well serve humanity in averting an otherwise inevitable perilous glacial cooling. Extra light will improve crop yields and prevent frost damage.

The Abbot government’s ludicrous $2.55 billion Emissions Reduction Fund won’t change the climate one bit. And last month’s $660 million carbon auction yielding a $13.95 per tonne carbon price, described by Environment Minister Greg Hunt as “a stunning result” was in reality a complete waste of our hard-earned taxpayer dollars for zero climate outcome.

Instead of being sucked into the swindle of CO2 reduction, funding for climate change should be directed to better understanding the galactic nature of climate to assist with forecasts and allow for weather modification. For example, scientific studies demonstrate that ionisation in the atmosphere from incoming cosmic rays generates rain, by playing an important role in cloud droplet formation and precipitation, thus mediating a cooling and warming effect on Earth. By applying these scientific principles in cloud formation we are able to greatly increase rainfall as several trials worldwide have demonstrated.

Australian Rain Technologies’ ATLANT™ rainfall enhancement ionisation technology has demonstrated in both Australia and Oman that by using an electrical charge to create negative ions, cloud droplet formation occurs at a faster rate. The most recent trials in Oman identify at least an 18 per cent boost in rainfall. The charging stations only require about 500 watts to operate and in 2013, it was estimated this technology generated 53,940 megalitres of water in summer while it was 56,520 megalitres last year. By contrast a water desalination plant would require about 40,000 times more power to produce the same volume of water.

Join the CEC to fight for the rights of nations to develop, and address real climate challenges with real infrastructure solutions.

The future of Community TV hangs in the balance.
Week Of Actio for Cummunity TV

It's time to up the ante. A week of action is coming: June 1 - 5. Get ready to show your support.

The Mission - Gwen Olsen - the Rx Reformer. Ex-Big Pharma Sales Rep: We are Trained to Misinform; The Drugs are Dangerous

This is the story of Gwen Olsen. Once a very successful pharmaceutical sales rep., now her mission is to stop the over-medication of our children. Gwen is the author of Confessions of an Rx Drug Pusher and travels around the United States speaking to groups

Click the Read More button to view the video:

Conventional Medicine Is The Leading Cause Of Death In The US

“The American medical system is the number one killer in the United States.”

“The American medical system is the number one killer in the United States.”

That’s the provocative claim made in this video produced by, the online home of wellness expert and bestselling author Dr. Joseph Mercola.

But the video, titled “The Death of Blind Faith,” backs up its words with some sobering statistics. It lays 8 million deaths in one decade at the feet of conventional medicine — more than the combined American deaths in every war the nation has ever fought.

“Do you have faith in conventional medicine?” the video asks. “How long can you turn a blind eye to the Truth?”

The film points out that 7,000 patients die each year because of sloppy handwriting while 1.5 million are hurt by preventable medication mistakes. There are 7.5 million unnecessary medical and surgical procedures annually, and at least 106,000 deaths from adverse reactions to drugs.

In fact, over half of the people in the United States have been given medical treatment unnecessarily, or 50,000 people per day. Out of all Americans, 42 percent have been affected by a medical mistake, and 84 percent know someone who has been.

When patients do have adverse reactions to drugs, the video claims, only 6 percent are properly identified; instead, doctors blame the patent’s illness by improperly diagnosing new symptoms, and prescribe more unnecessary procedures and medications to combat them. The kicker? The reactions are often known side effects. They are expected to occur in a certain percentage of patients. It’s the price of doing business with the modern medical system. And it’s getting worse. In the last five years, the video states, the mortality rate for people between 45 and 64 who took their drugs correctly rose 90 percent. “Modern medicine is no longer about health,” the video declares. “It is a for-profit disease industry that can only survive if millions of people get sick, and stay that way.”

“It’s an industry that refuses to consider vitally important aspects of health, like how stress lowers the immune system,” it continues, “how processed foods, alcohol, excessive calories and insufficient exercise are recipes for disease; how exposure to the tens of thousands of toxins in our environment, and in our food supply, have direct links to the illnesses you suffer.”

Indeed, Americans spend 90 percent of their food budgets on unhealthy options like processed food and soda, which contributes to a 33 percent diabetes or pre-diabetes rate, a 66 percent overweight rate and a 50 percent obesity rate.

Our solution? Toxic medications that further degrade people’s health and make them reliant on a perpetual financial relationship with pharmaceutical companies. Meanwhile, the industry is getting rich. Pfizer was the most profitable company in the Fortune 500 listing as of 2001, netting a healthy $7.8 billion.

That’s money coming out of our pockets. Health care spending topped $2 trillion in 2006. Despite that massive sum, the performance of our medical system is unarguably sub-par. Yet people return to the doctors and pharmacies over and over again, feeling like they have no other choice but to turn over their hard earned cash for dubious medical interventions.

Although the video was published in 2007, the information continues to be relevant as medical and pharmaceutical profits increase significantly year after year. According to the accounting and financial services company Doloitte, the United States spends more on health care than any other country in the world, with spending per capita being roughly twice that of other developed economies.

As a result, in 2013, an estimated $2.8 trillion was spent on health care, with projections of continued cost increases. Doloitte also suggests in a report titled Dig Deep ? Impacts and Implications of Rising Out?of?Pocket Health Care Costs that this does not include hidden, out-of-pocket costs to consumers, which would make the numbers even higher.

“Are you ready to stand up and take charge of your health?” the Mercola video demands. “Or will you let Big Pharma take you down and cover it up?”

Click the Read More button to view the video:

The End-Game for GMOs?

Are Monsanto’s Worst Fears Coming True?

by JONATHAN LATHAM May 19, 2015

The decision of the Chipotle restaurant chain to make its product lines GMO-free is not most people’s idea of a world-historic event. Especially since Chipotle, by US standards, is not a huge operation. A clear sign that the move is significant, however, is that Chipotle’s decision was met with a tidal-wave of establishment media abuse. Chipotle has been called irresponsible, anti-science, irrational, and much more by the Washington Post, Time Magazine, the Chicago Tribune, the LA Times, and many others. A business deciding to give consumers what they want was surely never so contentious.

The media lynching of Chipotle has an explanation that is important to the future of GMOs. The cause of it is that there has long been an incipient crack in the solid public front that the food industry has presented on the GMO issue. The crack originates from the fact that while agribusiness sees GMOs as central to their business future, the brand-oriented and customer-sensitive ends of the food supply chain do not.

The brands who sell to the public, such as Nestle, Coca-Cola, Kraft, etc., are therefore much less committed to GMOs. They have gone along with their use, probably because they wish to maintain good relations with agribusiness, who are their allies and their suppliers. Possibly also they see a potential for novel products in a GMO future.

However, over the last five years, as the reputation of GMOs has come under increasing pressure in the US, the cost to food brands of ignoring the growing consumer demand for GMO-free products has increased. They might not say so in public, but the sellers of top brands have little incentive to take the flack for selling GMOs.

From this perspective, the significance of the Chipotle move becomes clear. If Chipotle can gain market share and prestige, or charge higher prices, from selling non-GMO products and give (especially young) consumers what they want, it puts traditional vendors of fast and processed food products in an invidious position. Kraft and MacDonalds, and their traditional rivals can hardly be left on the sidelines selling outmoded products to a shrinking market. They will not last long.

MacDonald’s already appears to be in trouble, and it too sees the solution as moving to more up-market and healthier products. For these much bigger players, a race to match Chipotle and get GMOs out of their product lines, is a strong possibility. That may not be so easy, in the short term, but for agribusiness titans who have backed GMOs, like Monsanto, Dupont, Bayer and Syngenta; a race to be GMO-free is the ultimate nightmare scenario.

Until Chipotle’s announcement, such considerations were all behind the scenes. But all of a sudden this split has spilled out into the food media. On May 8th, Hain Celestial told The Food Navigator that:

“We sell organic products…gluten-free products and…natural products. [But] where the big, big demand is, is GMO-free.”

According to the article, unlike Heinz, Kraft, and many others, Hain Celestial is actively seeking to meet this demand. Within the food industry, important decisions, for and against GMOs, are taking place.

Why the pressure to remove GMOs will grow

The other factor in all this turmoil is that the GMO technology wheel has not stopped turning. New GMO products are coming on stream that will likely make crop biotechnology even less popular than it is now. This will further ramp up the pressure on brands and stores to go GMO-free. There are several contributory factors.

The first issue follows from the recent US approvals of GMO crops resistant to the herbicides 2,4-D and Dicamba. These traits are billed as replacements for Roundup-resistant traits whose effectiveness has declined due to the spread of weeds resistant to Roundup (Glyphosate).

The causes of the problem, however, lie in the technology itself. The introduction of Roundup-resistant traits in corn and soybeans led to increasing Roundup use by farmers (Benbrook 2012). Increasing Roundup use led to weed resistance, which led to further Roundup use, as farmers increased applications and dosages. This translated into escalated ecological damage and increasing residue levels in food. Roundup is now found in GMO soybeans intended for food use at levels that even Monsanto used to call “extreme” (Bøhn et al. 2014).

The two new herbicide-resistance traits are set to recapitulate this same story of increasing agrochemical use. But they will also amplify it significantly,

The specifics are worth considering. First, the spraying of 2,4-D and Dicamba on the newer herbicide-resistant crops will not eliminate the need for Roundup, whose use will not decline (see Figure).

Predicted herbicide use to 2025 (Mortensen et al 2012)

That is because, unlike Roundup, neither 2,4-D nor Dicamba are broad-spectrum herbicides. They will have to be sprayed together with Roundup, or with each other (or all of them together) to kill all weeds. This vital fact has not been widely appreciated.

Confirmation comes from the companies themselves. Monsanto is stacking (i.e. combining) Dicamba resistance with Roundup resistance in its Xtend crops and Dow is stacking 2,4-D resistance with Roundup resistance in its Enlist range. (Notably, resistance to other herbicides, such as glufosinate, are being stacked in all these GMO crops too.)

The second issue is that the combined spraying of 2,4-D and Dicamba and Roundup, will only temporarily ease the weed resistance issues faced by farmers. In the medium and longer terms, they will compound the problems. That is because new herbicide-resistant weeds will surely evolve. In fact, Dicamba-resistant and 2,4-D-resistant weeds already exist. Their spread, and the evolution of new ones, can be guaranteed (Mortensen et al 2012). This will bring greater profits for herbicide manufacturers, but it will also bring greater PR problems for GMOs and the food industry. GMO soybeans and corn will likely soon have “extreme levels” of at least three different herbicides, all of them with dubious safety records (Schinasi and Leon 2014).

The first time round, Monsanto and Syngenta’s PR snow-jobs successfully obscured this, not just from the general public, but even within agronomy. But it is unlikely they will be able to do so a second time. 2,4-D and Dicamba-resistant GMOs are thus a PR disaster waiting to happen.

A pipeline full of problems: risk and perception

The longer term problem for GMOs is that, despite extravagant claims, their product pipeline is not bulging with promising ideas. Mostly, it is more of the same: herbicide resistance and insect resistance.

The most revolutionary and innovative part of that pipeline is a technology and not a trait. Many products in the GMO pipeline are made using RNA interference technologies that rely on double-stranded RNAs (dsRNAs). dsRNA is a technology with two problems. One is that products made with it (such as the “Arctic” Apple, the “Innate” Potato, and Monsanto’s “Vistive Gold” Soybeans) are unproven in the field. Like its vanguard, a Brazilian virus-resistant bean, they may never work under actual farming conditions.

But if they do work, there is a clear problem with their safety which is explained in detail here (pdf).

In outline, the problem is this: the long dsRNA molecules needed for RNA interference were rejected long ago as being too hazardous for routine medical use (Anonymous, 1969). The scientific literature even calls them “toxins”, as in this paper title from 1969: Absher M., and Stinebring W. (1969) Toxic properties of a synthetic double-stranded RNA. Nature 223: 715-717. (not online)

As further evidence of this, long dsRNAs are now used in medicine to cause autoimmune disorders in mice, in order to study these disorders (Okada et al 2005).

The Absher and Stinebring paper comes from a body of research built up many years ago, but its essential findings have been confirmed and extended by more modern research. We now know why dsRNAs cause harm. They trigger destructive anti-viral defence pathways in mammals and other vertebrates and there is a field of specialist research devoted to showing precisely how this damages individual cells, whole tissues, and results in auto-immune disease in mice (Karpala et al. 2005).

The conclusion therefore, is that dsRNAs that are apparently indistinguishable from those produced in, for example, the Arctic apple and Monsanto’s Vistive Gold Soybean, have strong negative effects on vertebrate animals (but not plants). These vertebrate effects are found even at low doses. Consumers are vertebrate animals. They may not appreciate the thought that their healthy fats and forever apples also contain proven toxins. And on a business front, consumer brands will not relish defending dsRNA technology once they understand the reality. They may not wish to find themselves defending the indefensible. The bottom line is this. Either dsRNAs will sicken or kill people, or, they will give opponents of biotechnology plenty of ammunition. The scientific evidence, as it currently stands, suggests they will do both. dsRNAs, therefore, are a potentially huge liability.

The last pipeline problem stems from the first two. The agbiotech industry has long held out the prospect of “consumer benefits” from GMOs. Consumer benefits (in the case of food) are most likely to be health benefits (improved nutrition, altered fat composition, etc.). The problem is that the demographic of health-conscious consumers no doubt overlaps significantly with the demographic of those most wary of GMOs. Show a consumer a “healthy GMO” and they are likely to show you an oxymoron. The likely health market in the US for customers willing to pay more for a GMO has probably evaporated in the last few years as GMOs have become a hot public issue.

The end-game for GMOs??

The traditional chemical industry approach to such a problem is a familiar repertoire of intimidation and public relations. Fifty years ago, the chemical industry outwitted and outmanoeuvered environmentalists after the death of Rachel Carson (see the books Toxic Sludge is Good for You and Trust Us We’re Experts). But that was before email, open access scientific publication, and the internet. Monsanto and its allies have steadily lost ground in a world of peer-to-peer communication. GMOs have become a liability, despite their best efforts. The historic situation is this: in any country, public acceptance of GMOs has always been based on lack of awareness of their existence. Once that ignorance evaporates and the scientific and social realities start to be discussed, ignorance cannot be reinstated. From then on the situation moves into a different, and much more difficult phase for the defenders of GMOs.

Nevertheless, in the US, those defenders have not yet given up. Anyone who keeps up with GMOs in the media knows that the public is being subjected to an unrelenting and concerted global blitzkrieg.

Pro-GMO advocates and paid-for journalists, presumably financed by the life-science industry, sometimes fronted by non-profits such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, are being given acres of prominent space to make their case. Liberal media outlets such as the New York Times, the National Geographic, The New Yorker, Grist magazine, the Observer newspaper, and any others who will have them (which is most) have been deployed to spread its memes. Cornell University has meanwhile received a $5.6 million grant by the Gates Foundation to “depolarize” negative GMO publicity.

But so far there is little sign that the growth of anti-GMO sentiment in Monsanto’s home (US) market can be halted. The decision by Chipotle is certainly not an indication of faith that it can.

For Monsanto and GMOs the situation suddenly looks ominous. Chipotle may well represent the beginnings of a market swing of historic proportions. GMOs may be relegated to cattle-feed status, or even oblivion, in the USA. And if GMOs fail in the US, they are likely to fail elsewhere.

GMO roll-outs in other countries have relied on three things: the deep pockets of agribusinesses based in the United States, their political connections, and the notion that GMOs represent “progress”. If those three disappear in the United States, the power to force open foreign markets will disappear too. The GMO era might suddenly be over.

Jonathan Latham edits Independent Science News, where this article originally appeared.

Endnote: The report by Jonathan Latham and Allison Wilson on RNA interference and dsRNAs in GMO crops is downloadable from here. Accompanying Tables are here.


Anonymous (1969) Interferon inducers with side effects. Nature 223: 666-667. Bøhn, T., Cuhra, M., Traavik, T., Sanden, M., Fagan, J. and Primicerio, R. 2014. Compositional differences in soybeans on the market: Glyphosate accumulates in Roundup Ready GM soybeans. Food Chemistry 153: 207-215.

Okada C., Akbar S.M.F., Horiike N., and Onji M. (2005) Early development of primary biliary cirrhosis in female C57BL/6 mice because of poly I:C administration. Liver International 25: 595-603.

Karpala A.J., Doran T.J., and Bean A.G.D. (2005) Immune responses to dsRNA: Implications for gene silencing technologies. Immunology and cell biology 83: 211–216.

Mortensen, David A., J. Franklin Egan, Bruce D. Maxwell, Matthew R. Ryan and Richard G. Smith (2012) Navigating a Critical Juncture for Sustainable Weed Management. BioScience 62: 75-84.

Schinasi L and Maria E. Leon ME (2014) Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and Occupational Exposure to Agricultural Pesticide Chemical Groups and Active Ingredients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 11: 4449-4527.

Skip a Workout?

Some interesting data on how fsat the body goes downhill when you stop exercising.


A former Sergeant in the Marine Corps took a new job as a high school teacher. Just before the school year started, he injured his back. He was required to wear a plaster cast around the upper part of his body.

Fortunately, the cast fit under his shirt and wasn't noticeable.

On the first day of class, he found himself assigned to the toughest students in the school. The smart-aleck punks, having already heard the new teacher was a former Marine, were leery of him and he knew they would be testing his discipline in the classroom. Walking confidently into the rowdy classroom, the new teacher opened the window wide and sat down at his desk. When a strong breeze made his tie flap, he picked up a stapler and stapled the tie to his chest.

Dead silence...

The rest of the year went very smoothly.

The couple on the cover of the "Woodstock" album - are still together today.
Woodstock Album Cover Couple

Malaysian Airlines MH17 – Story Of The Plane The World Forgot Just Got Weirder
Malaysian Airlines MH17

Some interesting questions.


Until next time,
dream big dreams,
plan out how to achieve them,
be continually executing your plans,
enlist people to your causes,
travel and/or read widely, preferably both,
all the while observing what you observe
rather than thinking what you are told to think,
think well of your fellow man,
take time to help your fellow man,
he sorely needs it and it will help you too,
eat food that is good for your body,
exercise your body,
take time to destress,
and do the important things
that make a difference -
they are rarely the urgent ones!



Most of the content herein has been copied from someone else. Especially the images. My goodness some people are talented at creating aesthetics! The small bits that are of my creation are Copyright 2015 © by Tom Grimshaw - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

Back Issues | Feedback | Subscribe | Unsubscribe

Software Development
Festival Management Software
Healthy Snacks
How to Live The Healthiest Life