CLIMATE CHANGE PSYCHOSIS
This is more about the climate of your mind rather than the climate of our planet.
This “climate change” psychosis has reached epic and epidemic proportions. Does anyone with 2 brain cells even stop to think that all this doomsday hysteria is about the alleged elevation of average global temperature of only 0.74 degree Celsius over the last 100 years (https://globalclimate.ucr.edu/resources.html)? Just pause for 2 seconds. Remember that this is global AVERAGE temperature, not a real temperature anywhere on Earth. So, since we are talking about averages, it means, on average, generally, the Earth is warmer by 0.0074 degree Celsius per year. But why look at only the last 100 years? Why don’t we look at the last thousand years, million years or billion years? Over such a long timescale, “average” global temperature would have zigzagged wildly.
People with political agendas will use data selectively to con the unthinking masses.
Wednesday, 12 June 2019
Wednesday, 5 June 2019
HOW TO WIN THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTION IN SINGAPORE FROM SCRATCH
According to a report by the Today Newspaper on 15 April 2019, nearly 2.6 million Singaporeans (2,594,740 in exact numbers) are eligible to vote in the next General Election which must be held by early 2021.
https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/nearly-26-million-singaporeans-eligible-vote-next-general-election
This article is to instruct anyone who is interested in winning the next General Election how he or she could achieve that in 3 easy steps:
(1) Set up a new political party called the Pure and Free Party.
(2) Recruit by whatever legal and ethical method at least 1.3 million members with a token membership fee of $1 per annum.
(3) Issue a simple 3-point manifesto:
(a) The Pure and Free Party is not founded on any particular ideology, philosophy, political, economic, social, cultural, racial or religious belief; but on the principles of having a purity of purpose towards the maximal well-being of all Singaporeans in every aspect of life on our island-state and of the freedom of all members to contribute their mental and physical energies to the fulfillment of that purpose without any constraints from any of the aforementioned particular ideology, philosophy or belief, except for a consistency with Mr Lee Kuan Yew's idea of affirming only "what works". This is to ensure that the Party will not be hampered by dogmatic ideas and ideals, but will be guided by common sense and the ability to change and adapt to new or changing national or global circumstances.
(b) The Party do not have a hierarchical leadership structure, but is ruled by a committee of equals consisting of 11 people directly voted in by its members in an annual party election. Leadership decisions are made based on consensus by majority after they are kept well-informed by all ordinary members who may be in possession of deep insight or expertise in any area of human knowledge. Any of the 11 leaders can represent the Party provided he or she is guided by that consensus on any national or international issue. This form of leadership is to prevent a cult of personality and to make leadership positions dispensable in contrast to its focus on national interest and welfare of the people. Leadership changes are kept frequent to ensure that party policies do not become dogmatic or stagnant, but are always fresh and responsive.
(c) In a General Election, every member of the Party is obligated to vote for representatives of the Pure and Free Party. This, of course, is to ensure that Party will have at least 50% of the popular vote and the Party wants its victory and its margin to depend on votes from non-members so as to reflect its wider support.
If you can control your disbelief and/or laughter, and wish to give this simple idea a try, you are welcomed to do so without any attribution or acknowledgement of credit to this author at any time when you secured political power in Singapore. My only request, in the event of success, is that you should be true to the principles of the Pure and Free Party. I thank you in advance!
According to a report by the Today Newspaper on 15 April 2019, nearly 2.6 million Singaporeans (2,594,740 in exact numbers) are eligible to vote in the next General Election which must be held by early 2021.
https://www.todayonline.com/singapore/nearly-26-million-singaporeans-eligible-vote-next-general-election
This article is to instruct anyone who is interested in winning the next General Election how he or she could achieve that in 3 easy steps:
(1) Set up a new political party called the Pure and Free Party.
(2) Recruit by whatever legal and ethical method at least 1.3 million members with a token membership fee of $1 per annum.
(3) Issue a simple 3-point manifesto:
(a) The Pure and Free Party is not founded on any particular ideology, philosophy, political, economic, social, cultural, racial or religious belief; but on the principles of having a purity of purpose towards the maximal well-being of all Singaporeans in every aspect of life on our island-state and of the freedom of all members to contribute their mental and physical energies to the fulfillment of that purpose without any constraints from any of the aforementioned particular ideology, philosophy or belief, except for a consistency with Mr Lee Kuan Yew's idea of affirming only "what works". This is to ensure that the Party will not be hampered by dogmatic ideas and ideals, but will be guided by common sense and the ability to change and adapt to new or changing national or global circumstances.
(b) The Party do not have a hierarchical leadership structure, but is ruled by a committee of equals consisting of 11 people directly voted in by its members in an annual party election. Leadership decisions are made based on consensus by majority after they are kept well-informed by all ordinary members who may be in possession of deep insight or expertise in any area of human knowledge. Any of the 11 leaders can represent the Party provided he or she is guided by that consensus on any national or international issue. This form of leadership is to prevent a cult of personality and to make leadership positions dispensable in contrast to its focus on national interest and welfare of the people. Leadership changes are kept frequent to ensure that party policies do not become dogmatic or stagnant, but are always fresh and responsive.
(c) In a General Election, every member of the Party is obligated to vote for representatives of the Pure and Free Party. This, of course, is to ensure that Party will have at least 50% of the popular vote and the Party wants its victory and its margin to depend on votes from non-members so as to reflect its wider support.
If you can control your disbelief and/or laughter, and wish to give this simple idea a try, you are welcomed to do so without any attribution or acknowledgement of credit to this author at any time when you secured political power in Singapore. My only request, in the event of success, is that you should be true to the principles of the Pure and Free Party. I thank you in advance!
Friday, 31 May 2019
OUR SINGAPORE
Singapore’s economic miracle is predicated on 3 factors:
(1) An ideal location between Asia and Europe,
(2) Its decision to take advantage of its colonial links to open itself to the world, and
(3) An unapologetic readiness of its enlightened early leaders to intervene in every aspect of Singaporean life. So, Singapore’s success is no accident; it is the result of meticulous political planning, a populace that trust their political leaders and its ability to continuously reinvent itself in response to external changes.
That formula cannot be easily replicated and our younger leaders should keep that in mind as they take over the reins of power. They must think of new solutions to tackle the challenges of social and economic inequalities and the erosion of purchasing power by the high cost of living as experienced by the majority of its citizens.
Singapore’s economic miracle is predicated on 3 factors:
(1) An ideal location between Asia and Europe,
(2) Its decision to take advantage of its colonial links to open itself to the world, and
(3) An unapologetic readiness of its enlightened early leaders to intervene in every aspect of Singaporean life. So, Singapore’s success is no accident; it is the result of meticulous political planning, a populace that trust their political leaders and its ability to continuously reinvent itself in response to external changes.
That formula cannot be easily replicated and our younger leaders should keep that in mind as they take over the reins of power. They must think of new solutions to tackle the challenges of social and economic inequalities and the erosion of purchasing power by the high cost of living as experienced by the majority of its citizens.
Friday, 24 May 2019
TAKING THE HEAT
There’s a hole in my head,
Tho’ my mind’s far from dead.
There’s a stain in my heart
Asking me to forget my part.
Never we find, no contradiction.
So, no doubt, no persuasion.
Everyone dances to the beat,
Or be ready to take the heat.
Someone turned on the big light.
Oh wow, what a sight!
It’s right here, no surprise.
So, let’s stop rubbing our eyes.
When the poison gas is a flop,
Theft and robbery need to stop.
Having unwisely taken the bait,
We can only sit in perpetual wait.
Sunday, 24 March 2019
NO COLLUSION
Independent Special Counsel Mr Robert Mueller’s confidential report, "Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 Presidential Election" is out.
Attorney General William Barr stated in his Justice Department summary that “the Special Counsel's investigation did not find that the Trump campaign or anyone associated with it conspired or coordinated with Russia in its efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election.”
Or, in Mueller’s own words: "[T]he investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities."
So, it must be noted that in the nearly 2 years of independent investigations (almost as long as Trump’s administration so far), the Special Counsel “employed 19 lawyers who were assisted by a team of approximately 40 FBI agents, intelligence forensic accountants, and other professional staff. The Special Counsel issued more than 2,800 subpoenas, executed nearly 500 search warrants, obtained more than 230 orders for communication records, issued almost 50 orders authorizing use of pen registers, made 13 requests to foreign governments for evidence, and interviewed approximately 500 witnesses.” It is obviously a very thorough job.
If the Democrats want more investigations, you know that they are merely playing politics and they cannot be taken seriously.
Friday, 22 March 2019
"TERRORISM"
In the shadow of the Christchurch mosque massacres, let's ask ourselves some basic questions about "terrorism":
(1) Is there such a thing as "terrorism" as an enemy, a scourge or a phenomenon which we can fight and defeat?
No! Terrorism is merely a tactic of deliberate violence and often killing of innocent civilians with a political motive. So, for each act of terror, there is a different primary motive and therefore needs its own way of dealing with it. It's a common means used by different groups for different ends.
(2) Is "terrorism" the result of hatred between different racial or religious groups and therefore after each act of terror, the most important thing is to demonstrate our empathy and common acceptance of these different groups?
Again no! This is a false narrative seemingly promoted by politicians for their own reasons. Acts of terror are not committed for the aim of killing the victims out of hate, but to send a symbolic message by their perpetrators to their enemies. Their victims are not their intended enemies. Their real enemies are an entirely different group of people, usually a government.
(3) So, can terrorism be eradicated?
Sorry, no. "Terrorism" is a common means used by small, diverse and relatively powerless groups as a tactic of war against their much more powerful enemies for a variety of different grievances and causes. We can fight against the ends that they are pursuing if we find them objectionable or morally unacceptable, but we cannot dictate, persuade or even influence them not to use acts of terror to achieve their aims. As long as there are imbalanced wars between groups of vastly different strengths, "terrorism" will appeal to the much weaker groups as an effective weapon against their much stronger enemies and they will likely continue to use it.
(4) What can we as normal civilian non-combatants do to protect and prevent ourselves from being caught in the cross-fires of such "terrorism"?
Sadly, there is no foolproof way to keep ourselves out of harm"s way. We have to accept that "terrorism" is part of modern living. The only consolation is that the chance of dying in a terror act is infinitesimally smaller than say in a motor accident or a heart attack. If you had not hitherto encountered any terror attack, chances are you never will if you keep to your old routine.
In the shadow of the Christchurch mosque massacres, let's ask ourselves some basic questions about "terrorism":
(1) Is there such a thing as "terrorism" as an enemy, a scourge or a phenomenon which we can fight and defeat?
No! Terrorism is merely a tactic of deliberate violence and often killing of innocent civilians with a political motive. So, for each act of terror, there is a different primary motive and therefore needs its own way of dealing with it. It's a common means used by different groups for different ends.
(2) Is "terrorism" the result of hatred between different racial or religious groups and therefore after each act of terror, the most important thing is to demonstrate our empathy and common acceptance of these different groups?
Again no! This is a false narrative seemingly promoted by politicians for their own reasons. Acts of terror are not committed for the aim of killing the victims out of hate, but to send a symbolic message by their perpetrators to their enemies. Their victims are not their intended enemies. Their real enemies are an entirely different group of people, usually a government.
(3) So, can terrorism be eradicated?
Sorry, no. "Terrorism" is a common means used by small, diverse and relatively powerless groups as a tactic of war against their much more powerful enemies for a variety of different grievances and causes. We can fight against the ends that they are pursuing if we find them objectionable or morally unacceptable, but we cannot dictate, persuade or even influence them not to use acts of terror to achieve their aims. As long as there are imbalanced wars between groups of vastly different strengths, "terrorism" will appeal to the much weaker groups as an effective weapon against their much stronger enemies and they will likely continue to use it.
(4) What can we as normal civilian non-combatants do to protect and prevent ourselves from being caught in the cross-fires of such "terrorism"?
Sadly, there is no foolproof way to keep ourselves out of harm"s way. We have to accept that "terrorism" is part of modern living. The only consolation is that the chance of dying in a terror act is infinitesimally smaller than say in a motor accident or a heart attack. If you had not hitherto encountered any terror attack, chances are you never will if you keep to your old routine.
Saturday, 9 March 2019
IMPERTURBABLE
She stays, she leaves for another.
Whatever, it’s not a big bother.
Loving one but not the other,
Is a game we all play together.
Fortune rises, fortune falls.
Ignore the knocks and the calls
From crazy men in white overalls.
Stay mute within your four walls.
The cup holds things in equal measure,
Ever so slowly we sip with pleasure.
If we drink it like an eternal treasure,
Sharp sediments will surely injure.
Friday, 8 March 2019
”GLOBAL WARMING/CLIMATE CHANGE” CRISIS IS NOW OFFICIALLY RUBBISH
https://youtu.be/kcxcZ8LEm2A
Lord Monckton and his team of mainstream scientists have now proven unchallenged and beyond doubt that the global warming scare (later deviously changed to the “climate change scare” when it was found that there was no actual warming for the best part of the last 2 decades) as pushed by the United Nations’ IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is non-existent.
First, on the grounds of theoretical physics, they discovered that in the standard control theory equation that applies to all dynamical systems, including climate systems, the IPCC climatologists had erroneously omitted to include the sunshine input signal term called the Emission Temperature (heat contributed by the sun). This led to a gross miscalculation of the Feedback Factor. Supposed to be 0.116, the IPCC climatologists had wrongly inflated the number to 0.693. This has a major impact on their final predictions of the elevation of global temperature as the value of the Feedback Factor accounts for 85% of its uncertainty. The widely published average IPCC prediction of an elevation of global temperatures by 3.35K for every doubling of CO2 levels is wrong when the correct prediction should be only 1.15K (which does not present any problem or global threat).
Second, on empirical grounds, Lord Monckton’s team also showed the absence of a tropical mid troposphere hotspot having a warming rate 2-3 times that of the tropical surface 8-12 km below. The presence of this hotspot is a pre-requisite if, and only if, man is the cause of global warming.
Third, on statistical grounds, based on an objective professional analysis, they proved that they have 95% confidence that their estimate of 1.15K elevation of global temperatures for a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels is correct.
So, we can safely reassure everyone that there is no global warming or climate change crisis anywhere that will threaten our planet. Any change in global temperatures or climate may only be mild and manageable and certainly, natural and not man-made or man-caused. If any authorities were to tell you otherwise, be wary of their political agendas for saying so.
https://youtu.be/kcxcZ8LEm2A
First, on the grounds of theoretical physics, they discovered that in the standard control theory equation that applies to all dynamical systems, including climate systems, the IPCC climatologists had erroneously omitted to include the sunshine input signal term called the Emission Temperature (heat contributed by the sun). This led to a gross miscalculation of the Feedback Factor. Supposed to be 0.116, the IPCC climatologists had wrongly inflated the number to 0.693. This has a major impact on their final predictions of the elevation of global temperature as the value of the Feedback Factor accounts for 85% of its uncertainty. The widely published average IPCC prediction of an elevation of global temperatures by 3.35K for every doubling of CO2 levels is wrong when the correct prediction should be only 1.15K (which does not present any problem or global threat).
Second, on empirical grounds, Lord Monckton’s team also showed the absence of a tropical mid troposphere hotspot having a warming rate 2-3 times that of the tropical surface 8-12 km below. The presence of this hotspot is a pre-requisite if, and only if, man is the cause of global warming.
Third, on statistical grounds, based on an objective professional analysis, they proved that they have 95% confidence that their estimate of 1.15K elevation of global temperatures for a doubling of atmospheric CO2 levels is correct.
So, we can safely reassure everyone that there is no global warming or climate change crisis anywhere that will threaten our planet. Any change in global temperatures or climate may only be mild and manageable and certainly, natural and not man-made or man-caused. If any authorities were to tell you otherwise, be wary of their political agendas for saying so.
Saturday, 2 March 2019
IS THE 1962 WATER AGREEMENT BETWEEN SINGAPORE AND MALAYSIA FAIR?
Should it or can it be revised?
One may be tempted to sympathise with Dr Mahathir that the price of raw water at 3 sen per 1,000 gallons is ridiculously cheap and outdated given how valuable water is and that the price was set in the Water Agreement back in 1962.
One shouldn’t.
Water is a naturally occurring resource and it is only valuable if made drinkable and usable through its treatment. Time does not change this fact. Therefore, almost the whole of its value is created through such processing which is currently being done by Singapore.
Nevertheless, let’s examine Dr Mahathir’s case more closely.
If Malaysia sells 1000 gallons of raw river water to Singapore at RM0.03, but buys the same amount of treated water that costs Singapore RM2.40 to process at RM 0.50, then Malaysia would have benefited by RM30,880 daily for the 16 million gallons of treated water that Malaysia buys from Singapore every day. Malaysia also makes another RM7,020 from selling the other 234 million gallons of raw water to Singapore daily. So, the 1962 Water Agreement benefits Malaysia by RM37,900 daily. So, why is Dr Mahathir seemingly unhappy with this arrangement?
Johor sells drinkable water to its own citizens at RM3.95 per 1,000 gallons. Assuming that all 16 million gallons bought at a net cost of RM0.47 per 1,000 gallons is sold at that price, it will earn RM55,680 from its own citizens daily. Again, why is Dr Mahathir unhappy?
I think he is unhappy because Johor actually sells raw water at RM0.50 per 1,000 gallons to Malacca and he thinks that is now the market price for raw water. So, by selling it at RM0.03 per 1000 gallons to Singapore, Malaysia is losing RM109,980 for the net sale of the 234 million gallons at below-market price. If the market price of raw water is really RM0.50 per 1,000 gallons, then Johor will lose RM16,400 daily from its water trade with Singapore and its own citizens.
The trouble with that analysis is that the water transaction between Johor and Malacca is one that is between two Malaysian states and therefore the difference is akin to money transferring from the left pocket to the right pocket of Malaysia. That is hardly indicative of a true market price.
Also, if Singapore buys raw water at RM0.50 per 1000 gallons from Johor and sells treated water back at the same price, then Singapore would have done expensive water treatment for 16 million gallons of water for free and lose RM38,400 daily. That cannot be. Surely, if Malaysia increases the cost of raw water it sells to Singapore, obviously, Singapore will also have to increase its selling price of treated water given that raw water will now cost RM2.90 per 1,000 gallons to buy and process.
So, assuming that both parties agree to revise the 1962 Water Agreement, the real question is whether the much higher resultant price of treated water charged by Singapore will be acceptable to both Mr Mahathir and our own Singapore citizens. If the answer is no, it is wiser to leave that Agreement alone.
Yet, Johor’s intention to unilaterally revise the 1962 Water Agreement seems to be motivated by its secret plan to stop its dependence on Singapore for treated water. It appears to have developed its own capacity to treat water. Its suggestion to raise the selling price of raw water to RM0.50 per 1000 gallons appears to be a ploy to move things in that direction.
Other than crying foul about Malaysia not honouring the sanctity of international agreements, what can Singapore do to ensure its water security and not be at the mercy of the arbitrary pricing of raw Malaysian water? Are water agreements really sacred and truly untouchable?
Saturday, 2 February 2019
WALKING BACK A HUNDRED THOUSAND MILES
Where will this road lead us
If we don’t talk and discuss?
We should try not to make a big fuss,
But to release every drop of toxic pus.
Spare our usual parries and thrusts,
So that we won’t again miss the bus.
If everyone believes and everyone trusts,
We’ll gladly go where that road leads us.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)