Ingnorant Reporters peddeling misinformation?

 

Considering the seriousness of the eco systems problems and the sheer scale of what we have to do to avoid certain disaster, I feel it essential we stop allowing miss-information, half truths, and general deviousness from those in power who are sailing us into catastrophe.


Each and every time you let lies and bullshit get through you allow the situation to worsen and more harm to be done.


How is it that when its a funny shaped tomato or an ignoramus with tits or some game company releases an update, its front page news! But as its only the biggest change to life on Earth for millions or years and certainly terminal for the majority of species here, we have half arsed politicians being allowed to get away with (literally?) murder?

Under the circumstances:
1 Do you think you should continue this way?
2 What level of rigor will you apply to the answers given?



Below is a letter sent to Working lunch on this very subject.


Dear Working lunch
I just watched the BBC2 TV (1:00pm to 2:00pm) news and the discussion on climate change.

The "eco" situation is so universally dangerous that letting ill informed journalists and bullshitting politicians get away with it is playing into the hands of the irresponsible.
In general even the most obvious lies from politicians are allowed to pass without comment especially those connected to the biosphere.
Don't be part of it.
I think that dangerous incompetence is just that, and should be exposed as such.
The stakes are high.
Considering our "eco" situation is the most dangerous thing to happen on Earth since the demise of the dinosaurs, you needed to have a better informed interviewer, and you lacked an honest critique of the preventative measures and how effective they would be.

Ie
"Yes minister and if we do all of that, scientists say, mankind could still be destroyed.
Under the circumstances do you think that that is an adequate response?"

If we were at war we would change everything even our economy and did but climate catastrophy is very much more dangerous and yet we are doing nothing.


What is lacking here, and would help, is rigor and a post-interview analysis by a serious and well researched "authority".
If measures are being taken exactly what are they?
How helpful will they be?
Are they enough?

Don't forget we are talking about mankind's survival on Earth and it all happens in the next 20 years. That means a complete change of almost all the ways in which humans do things, and that just to survive.
I think a little forthrightness towards politicians is not excessive.


We don't want idiots on our roads but when it comes to the whole planet, we have a surfeit of idiocy.
The planet is real, Money, Business, Politics, Religions are all temporal and fun stuff for humans but they are not important when compared to life on planet planet Earth.

As part of the most trusted news organization in the world, you have a real responsibility here.

Thanks






====================================
Dear John Bowis OBE, Robert Evans, Gerard Batten, Baroness Sarah Ludford, Mary Honeyball, Claude Moraes, Syed Kamall, Charles Tannock and Jean Lambert,

Considering the seriousness of the eco systems problems and the sheer scale of what we have to do to avoid certain disaster, I feel it essential we stop allowing miss-information, half truths, and general deviousness from those in power who are sailing us blythly into catastrophe.
Each and every time you tell lies and bullshit you allow the situation to worsen and more harm to be done.
How is it that when its a funny shaped tomato or an ignoramus with tits or some game company releases an update, its front page news! But as its only the biggest change to life on Earth for millions or years and certainly terminal for the majority of species here, we have govenrment and buiseness giving half arsed excuses.
99% the solutions given are so laughably ill considered that it proves that you have absolutly no idea whats goin on, or how serious it is.
You are doing an excralbe job and literaly getting away with murder.
Sorry but anything less is just not true.

So,,
Under the circumstances:
1 A. Do you think you should continue this way?
   B. If we dont change, how long can we go on?
2 What level of rigor will you apply to the solutions given?

Considering you worked, struggled, and generaly spent half a lifetime getting to your positions of responsibility dont you think its about time you did some real work and started to realy make a change in the way we do things and the value we put on life on this planet?

in 20 years time when the sea has started its 25 foot rise and hundreds of millions of  miles of arable land is under water and their populations are fleeing to safe places, when most animals can no longere see because of the cataracts caused by ozone depleation, when global starvation is happening because of droughts and storms and floods and poisoned soil and the colapse of fish stocks, then do you think that the excuse of "it was dificult" or" it did not make economic sence" will be acceptable by the public?
The shere scale of what you have to do is extrodinary but more extrordinary is the complete lack of appropriate action.
"Are you quite insane" is what people will be asking.



Below is a letter sent to Working lunch on this very subject.


Dear Working lunch
I just watched the BBC2 TV (1:00pm to 2:00pm) news and the discussion on climate change.

The "eco" situation is so universally dangerous that letting ill informed journalists and bullshitting politicians get away with it is playing into the hands of the irresponsible.
In general even the most obvious lies from politicians are allowed to pass without comment especially those connected to the biosphere.
Don't be part of it.
I think that dangerous incompetence is just that, and should be exposed as such.
The stakes are high.
Considering our "eco" situation is the most dangerous thing to happen on Earth since the demise of the dinosaurs, you needed to have a better informed interviewer, and you lacked an honest critique of the preventative measures and how effective they would be.


"Yes minister and if we do all of that, scientists say, mankind could still be destroyed." 
So Under the circumstances "do you think that that is an adequate response?"

If we were at war we would change everything even our economy and did but climate catastrophy is very much more dangerous and yet we are doing nothing.


What is lacking here, and would help, is rigor and a post-interview analysis by a serious and well researched "authority".
If measures are being taken exactly what are they?
How helpful will they be?
Are they enough?

Don't forget we are talking about mankind's survival on Earth and it all happens in the next 20 years. That means a complete change of almost all the ways in which humans do things, and that just to survive.
I think a little forthrightness towards politicians is not excessive.


We don't want idiots on our roads but when it comes to the whole planet, we have a surfeit of idiocy.
The planet is real, Money, Business, Politics, Religions are all temporal and fun stuff for humans but their not important when compared to life on planet Earth.

As part of the most trusted democracy in the world, you have a real responsibility here.

Thanks






leonard Igbodo    0207 926 3591  ligbodo@lambeth.gov.uk
transport               0207 926 9000 op 4
================================================

Dear June Fewtrell, Ashley Lumsden and Jeremy Clyne,
AS we have all seen The Times Last week an the fires in california do you think it might be time to start takeing this situation seriously.
Everything we are doing so far will not make any real differance to the plight we face.
Its about time to realy start to make some real and fundamental changes.
I want to know what realy affective measures are being taken?
Also I want to test out how receptive you are to positive suggestions and to see if there is any point in trying.

I went to a wind farm in the wash about 2 years ago. 
It was about 7 years old and owned by the local council who paid for it out of the council tax.
In 5 years it had paid for its self and, apart from maintainance, was producing free power for the population.

1. Why doesnt Lambeth have an array of wind farms?
2. in light of the environmental calamity I want to know what really affective measures are being taken to safeguard us?




Yours sincerely

Free website powered by Beep.com
 
The responsible person for the content of this web site is solely
the webmaster of this website, approachable via this form!