Thursday, May 15, 2008
Slightly off-topic but a good reflection of rubbish mainstream media reporting
The Telegraph: Mankind is the 'Earth's biggest threat'
Global warming is causing significant changes to the Earth's natural systems and it is highly unlikely that any force but man-made climate change can be blamed . Read the comments at the bottom; they are almost universally saying this article is garbage
Posted by sold 2 rent 1 @ 08:26 AM (951 views) Add Comment
62 Comments
- If you do not have an admin password leave the password field blank.
- If you would like to request a password allowing you to add comments and blog news articles without needing each one approved manually, send an e-mail to the webmaster.
- Your email address is required so we can verify that the comment is genuine. It will not be posted anywhere on the site, will be stored confidentially by us and never given out to any third party.
- Please note that any viewpoints published here as comments are user's views and not the views of HousePriceCrash.co.uk.
- Please adhere to the Guidelines
1. mken said...
sold 2 rent:
So the connection is hpc was not reported and nor was climate change.
This was "garbage" reporting.
Now hpc and climate change are being reported.
But the difference is the hpc is true and climate change is not?
(if there is no connection why post?)
If you read the learned comments and swap "climate change" for hpc - i.e. it is not happening
then it does become quite amusing display of VIs.
What's your VI?
2. Baroo said...
Evaryone has a VI in global warming not happening. That's why it's hard for a lot of people to accept. Denial will persist untill sea level starts to rise (significantly).
3. sold 2 rent 1 said...
I have no VI.
The connection is in the mainstream media's very selective and biased reporting to serve their owners goals.
All the way through the HP bubble the media pumped the market in its biased reporting
Now prices are dropping they are pumping the market in the opposite direction too.
It is quite clear that the media played a significant part in over pumping both sides of this bubble?
Why?
What is their VI?
4. Baroo said...
Regardless of whether it's our fault, the ice is melting. And I'm not just talking about the arctic sea ice, which will not cause sea level rises when it melts (it nearly melts completely each year these days anyway!). When the Greenland ice sheet goes, (which I accept is a difficult thing to predict, but bear in mind that the speed of those glaciers and the number of "ice quakes" is rising exponentially) sea level will rise a lot and the fall out will be very bad. All this argument about whether it's human activity that caused it will then be irrelevant as most people will be just trying to survive.
5. James said...
Sorry s2r1, you don't get to comment on the scientific credibility of *anything* as you reject the scientific method out of hand. I quote you...
"There are many things that cannot be explained scientifically but seem perfectly plausible to someone who consciousness has changed"
http://www.housepricecrash.co.uk/newsblog/2008/05/blog-big-brother-is-watching-13207.php
6. the haunted said...
I am not one of the tin foil hat brigade but I do think that global warming etc. is being used to distract the public from the real issues, such as poor managment of the country. Its also a great way to control certain behaviours and to tax people. Not entirley sure that this is the right forum for this kind of banter though.
7. Baroo said...
It is a sorry comment on our society/government/state of mind when people *presume* that most reporting of significance is either a bare faced lie or a ploy to control/get more money out of us. I include myself in the group of presumers. But do remember that in the case of climate change, this come originally from climate scientists, the majority of whom believe that 1. climate change is happening and 2. it's humans fault.
8. Orcusmaximus said...
Lots of scientifically researched facts, then a statement that these facts cannot be explained by natural variation, from which follows the conclusion that it is down to non-natural (ie man made) causes. The whole crux of this article is that the changes cannot be explained by natural variation, and more detailed stats should have been provided here.
However, as the researched facts are clearly not normal, the onus of proof should be upon the people who want to prove that it is natural. In other words, all those comments calling the article 'rubbish' without any justification, are in themselves, rubbish.
As to my own views, there are a whole load of natural causes pushing us towards global warming (increased output of the sun, increased cosmic radiation etc), as well as man-made (CO2 & rain forest destruction), and unless we can reduce the warming, the earth is going to move to a higher temperature state which will not be capable of supporting the same level of life that it does at the present. Merely saying "It wasn't our fault, it was natural causes" isn't going to help when the famine driven wars start.
9. Ah-so said...
Another random article from S2R1.
10. Will said...
Dinosaurs are extinct, but Man didn't cause that - if we had been around I am sure we would have all been guilty.
11. mark wadsworth said...
It is a very important parallel!! For years Joe Public has been led to believe that a) House prices only go up and b) temperatures only go up.
Temperatures have been pretty flat for about ten years, house prices have been falling for six month.
As The Haunted says, this MMGW nonsense is just an excuse for Big Government and More Taxes. House price bubbles are also a reason for cleverer taxation, namely a tax on teh bubble element of property prices (i.e on land values), it's the only tax with more good than bad effects (and all taxes have some bad effects, even Land Value Tax)
12. Papillon said...
Temperatures have not been flat for ten years.
It's a shame this off topic nonsense is being posted. The website is a valuable resource, don't spoil it by potraying yourselves as a bunch of paranoid nutters!
13. lierbag said...
This forum is increasingly absorbing extra-mural topics as part of the house price debate, because they do have (at least indirect) impacts on materials/transport costs, discretionary spending habits and the wider economy. Me, I'm hung up on the oil production/supply question. Apart from being the resource underpinning our entire way of life, its escalating cost threatens the very viability of the concept of 'suburbs'. In the US, vast swathes of outer lying districts are emptying quickly, as people find their daily journey to work is beyond their means of paying for it. While not such a problem here at present, the same sort of crisis is bound to affect those who have to make longish journeys every day - especially with oil forecast to reach over $200+ per barrel by the year's end.
This all knocks on in turn into food and clothing prices, and the ability of householders to meet their mortgage repayments - leading to defaults and repossessions when payments can no longer be maintained. With materials costs escalating, housebuilders can't turn their usual huge profits - especially against a background of reducing demand as people stop buying new-build homes in the same quantity, so workforces get laid off. It's a vicious downward spiral.
The climate change question is something else again. While the threat is real, and currently underway, I feel governments are using it principally as a means of masking the oil crisis - which is their foremost concern (we invaded Iraq to secure the oil - I don't see anyone invading the Amazon to save the rainforsts). In a global economic system that depends on such intangibles as 'confidence' and expecatations of 'endless growth', to break the bad news that we're heading into a historical period of contraction and belt-tightening would not be welcomed by the public at large, which wants to party-on forever. Better to reduce demand, by persuading people that it's 'good for the environment'' than introduce harsher measures such as rationing - at least for the moment.
And with climate change itself, we're already seeing the consequences to the housing market. The government's forecasts for those areas likely to be affected by increased risks of flooding, affect resale prices and insurance premiums. In extreme cases, people may not be able to get insurance cover at all. While the hammering insurance companies will increasingly take from unexpected severe weather events, will push up costs overall, as they seek to recoup their losses.
Make no mistake, oil/gas/coal/climate change - these ARE the real issues. And any incoming government is going to have to deal with a huge range of problems - not least of which the vanished revenue from North Sea oil and gas, which kept the country viable through the 80s and 90s - for which the fall in house prices is merely an early warning shot.
14. indiablue19 said...
You must say that trust in the media, and other issues presented as "overweaning" in the ultimate sense do have a direct effect on confidence in any way of life, and thus on large purchases -- such as a home. No matter how you slice it, the future of the world isn't looking grand at the moment, and investment in the old world ideals is a decidedly tarnished idea. To my thinking if anything has ruined the earth for mankind it IS mankind itself. But not simply through use of machinery, but through hatred, greed and unsustainable attitudes toward each other. And that IS a reflection of the purpose of this forum I would think -- to find a way round this wornout track to a more sensible housing future based on a sustainable economic ethic that is inclusive rather than exclusive.
15. Orcusmaximus said...
lierbag @5 "vast swathes of outer lying districts are emptying quickly, as people find their daily journey to work is beyond their means of paying for it."
Wow. I never thought anyone could convince me that the squitty little modern build cramped houses and flats were desirable, but you might just have done it!
16. brian t said...
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: you don't need to invoke "global warming", or "climate change", or even "Nature", to be concerned. You need only look at the effect people are having on people, and the parts of the world that we need to survive. Nature has survived worse disasters than Man - it's Man that's screwed.
Water, for example: glacier runoff from the Himalayas feeds the rivers that support the population of South and South-East Asia, and they are drying up. How many people are there in India? Food? Fresh air? (How the hell are they going to run a marathon in Beijing, when pollution from the Chinese mainland is bad enough to be detected all the way across the Pacific in the USA?)
17. Andy_m_n said...
mark w - I'm curious why you say temperatures have "been pretty flat for about 10 years". You are, in a way, right - 8 of the 10 warmest years in the last 150 years have been in the last 10 years.
So yes - compared to each other, they have been flat. But compared to every other year, they are far higher than the last 150 years and way outside the previous rise between 1910 and 1940.
See research (not a published press article, but I suppose still possible to have Vested Interests) here: http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/
Also, remember that scientists tend to win Nobel Prizes by showing that major established theories are wrong, so there is a strong argument that they have a vested interest in proving that human-caused Global Warming does not happen! And yet, they can't...
18. shipbuilder said...
The idea that MMGW is ‘invented’ is simply another conspiracy theory that has gained traction with the wider public because believing it is the easier/safer/more comfortable option.
Firstly we can dismiss any arguments by the public involving actual mechanisms or GW data – unless you’re a climate change scientist, you won’t convince anyone, one way or the other. It is a complex problem and applying ‘common sense’ or single refuting arguments like ‘there used to be an ice age, so the earth is getting warmer’ or ‘we’ve had a cold winter this year’ makes you sound like an idiot.
This leaves the argument that ‘some scientists disagree’. Unsurprisingly, some scientists disagree on most things – the question is, what is the general scientific consensus?
But then again – does the majority consensus really matter? GW has the potential for impact like nothing else in the world today – to me, it would be idiotic and irresponsible not to act on the evidence we have. The downside of acting if we’re wrong is temporary economic pain. The downside of failing to act if it’s correct could be death on an unimaginable scale.
Then there’s the argument that it’s just a tax scam dreamt up by governments.
Firstly, that’s hugely insulting to the scientific community whose raison d’etre is to find the truth by long, hard, rigorous analysis. What research did you put in to reach your conclusion?
Secondly, it assumes that governments would or could effectively carry out such a scam, without ANY evidence or precedents. Evidence and history suggest that governments always REACT to events, generally with clumsy legislation.
The third assumption is that governments and industry would impede commerce to raise taxes, that this would be a beneficial road for them to take – why? – simply idiotic to anyone involved in industry or business and again with zero evidence. The evidence is that industry generally fights legislation tooth and nail.
But then, I probably didn’t need to bother with those assumptions because the entire argument rests – like all conspiracy theories – on the flawed assumption (without evidence) that because a party benefits from a situation, that they engineered that situation.
Please - if you don’t believe in MMGW, be honest about why – you don’t want to change your lifestyle, you don’t want to sacrifice anything (especially not money) and you really don’t care much for future generations, as long as you’re OK.
19. Baroo said...
Shipbilder @ 8 Well said!!
20. jamonit said...
Ship, I wish you'd post that on the telegraph site. Not that it would mean much to most of the morons posting on there.
21. James said...
8 - hear, hear!
22. uncle chris said...
Speaking as scientist (astrophysics) with a PhD, I can safely say that global warming has already gone way beyond the tipping point where the world will face major climatic and geographic upheaval. The politicians have spent many years prevaracating about the bush, but we have seen little concrete action. To minimise the disruption faced by our children/grandchildren we need to stop using oil NOW, stop consuming NOW, act to lock-up CO2 NOW.
The only thought I leave you with is that without runaway global warming, the surface of the planet Venus should be around 50°C, but with it we see atmospheric temperaures in excess of 400°C.
23. Baroo said...
Uncle Tom @ 10 "The only thought I leave you with is that without runaway global warming, the surface of the planet Venus should be around 50°C, but with it we see atmospheric temperaures in excess of 400°C."
This won't happen on Earth as long as there is plate techtonics and phytoplancton in the oceans which draw CO2 down in to the crust. It's called the carbon cycle (volcanos are the other part of the cycle), and, as far as I know, Venus has nothing similar, hence its runaway greenhouse effect.
24. plato said...
Shipbuilder has a logical, reasoning mind and it would be futile to argue with such well expressed and equally well written observations.
I can only but agree.
However, I welcome imagination or theory. For this is where discovery is borne and discussion thrives.
25. shipbuilder said...
As someone said on the cannabis debate - we were all proved right about the house price crash, so it's interesting to have the odd fringe debate as well now.
26. Orcusmaximus said...
Shipbuilder - spot on. I stand in awe.
Uncle Chris - don't forget population control, maybe even as drastic as the Chinese measures! What's your view on solar shades as a solution?
27. letthemfall said...
I'm with shipbuilder and uncle chris (whose background is similar to mine) on this one. Global warming due to CO2 emissions is almost certainly the case. Evidence has been gradually mounting and one eventually has to ask how much evidence you need before you believe it. It is a complex field, but that doesn't mean to say we can't know one way or the other, or indeed should do nothing about it. The conspiracy theory, as with most theories of this kind, is absurd. Comparisons with house prices and VIs are pretty flimsy at best.
28. sold 2 rent 1 said...
UC,
"Speaking as scientist (astrophysics) with a PhD, "
Carl Johan Calleman has a Ph.D. and was a microbiologist working for the WHO before he made the link between the Mayan Calendar and his evolutionary model. Is he a crackpot or has his consciousness made him ahead of the game?
29. inbreda said...
crackpot
30. inbreda said...
Only jokin s2r1!!!
31. cornishman said...
There is no way present western governments are going to cut back on anything that may hamper 'growth' - even if it causes global warming or not. Trying to prevent warming has got to be tried of course - but it will be next to futile IMO. We need to be ready to adapt to whatever comes.
I have a feeling [completely unscientific] that, if the gulf stream stops, the weather in the UK will alter dramatically and loads more people will want to move to Devon and Cornwall. Quite how I prepare for that, I'm not sure - but it would have a dramatic impact upon relative house prices in the UK.
32. James said...
s2r1 – It’s the 16th tomorrow. You’ve repeatedly predicted that something will happen to ‘consciousness’ tomorrow. As we’re now less than 12 hours away, can you be a bit more specific? As always, I’m looking for something falsifiable that might lend some credence to your beliefs.
33. sold 2 rent 1 said...
Corno,
"There is no way present western governments are going to cut back on anything that may hamper 'growth' "
Best change our governments then.
"I have a feeling [completely unscientific] that, if the gulf stream stops, the weather in the UK will alter dramatically and loads more people will want to move to Devon and Cornwall."
The temperature will drop by 20c and the UK will be in very big trouble at all levels.
34. notaneconomicsguru said...
I'm with Shipbuilder. Based on my understanding of it, the weight & quality of scientific evidence is sunstantially stronger on the pro-MMGW side than the other. The standard contrarian arguments can either be explained within the consensus theory as being at variance with the establsihed facts, or can otherwise be criticised as being relatively poorly founded scientific objections. It is also the case that the alternative contrarian explanations of GW are thus far poorly established scientifically and their overall contribution to GW poorly understood. The contrarian science, is very valuable in challenging the orthodoxy but so far they have not produced a convincing case for non-human GW.
What you do in policy terms using the information provided by the science is an altogether different question and depends on how much faith you place in the predictions of the models. That is the great problem because nobody can claim to be able to accurately forecast by how much and how fast the climate will warm - there is always a broad range of outcomes allowed by the parametric nature of the computer models. Even if the global mean can be forecast accuratelly, its also very hard to be sure of the local effects. For example its not yet clear whether the UK would have much colder winters in a GW world because of the possibility of shutting down the Gulf Stream due to decreased saltiness of the northern oceans. There is still a lot of science still to be done.
35. sold 2 rent 1 said...
James,
16 May 2008 marks the turning point in world consciousness from power to ethics.
I can't say anything specific will happen. I am not a fortune teller.
When mapping WW2 battles onto the current "fifth night" you get the Battle for Stalingrad 12-20 May 2008
This pretty much ties in with the Chinese earthquake that happened on Monday 12th.
Expect the drama in China to continue at these intense levels until early next week before tailing off.
It looks like that region was the centre for the destruction, with the Burma floods in the news the week before.
This ties in with WW2 where the German invasion of Russia dominated the battleground for several years in the early 1940s.
It will be 3-4 weeks before we get the destruction move to Europe/US and the western world.
The D-Day landings will be in mid June and expect more financial/polical destruction/scandals in the West.
Burma and China are playing out diferently.
The Burmese authorities are not acting ethically and if they carry on much more they are likely to get overthrone.
The Chines authorities seem to be doing a great job with the relief effort.
In both case I hope to see "ethics" to continue to win over "power".
36. plato said...
s2r1
Have to give you a mention in that personally I always appreciate your posts in general. They are certainly a catalyst for debate and response. In my case: I am completely open-minded realisng that man cannot control nature and the opposite is actually the truth.
In this light : A Great Post and your efforts are recognised.
37. James said...
s2r1 - you could have just said "no". As long as you accept that your models are worthless for prediction on any rational basis, then we're both happy. If you can't say anything specific will happen, then you can't claim that your "model" predicted anything specific that did happen.
38. cornishman said...
@ S2R1 "The temperature will drop by 20c and the UK will be in very big trouble at all levels"
- but some areas much more so than others. That was my point.
Anyone looking to property long term needs to think about some of these things that some posters are slating as being irrelevant on this site.
If fuel costs go up dramatically and stay up, then that country house where you have to have two or three cars and you spend all your time running the kids to school and to their friends and clubs - that will become less desirable. Town houses will become more sought after. If the east of the country becomes snow-bound for a good part of the year, then people will migrate westwards since it will be 'less bad' than the east. Regional differences will alter markedly from the way they are see today.
Just a thought to ponder for anyone who sees property as their pension.
39. sold 2 rent 1 said...
Cheers Plato.
We live in extremely interesting times.
40. indiablue19 said...
At which point science and religion meet [finally] and agree that the world is in this day courting a disaster of the magnitude never before experienced. The predictions are all there in seven or eight world religions, and several ancient ones as well, including the Hopis, whom I've spoken with on the subject of global warming at their reservation in Arizona in 1995. They're prophecies declared endgame in 1994, shortly after they were finally allowed [after four attempts] into the United Nations building to explain why they had been entrusted with a means to prevent the collapse of the environment and why the world would deteriorate into chaos if native peoples of the earth weren't permitted to contribute urgent information on the need for immediate world peace. Elders of the native tribes of the Americas [North and South] had invested their hopes in Thomas Banyacya, who was nominated to speak. Banyacya didn't deliver his entire speech because nearly no one came to listen at the UN, and he spoke to a nearly desserted chamber. He offered to return, but in 1994 he died. At that time the Hopis' prophecies declared an inexorable natural disaster for the world and that no one will escape unscathed.
41. notaneconomicsguru said...
There is a view that maintains the Gulf Stream is less important to our winter weather than the orthodox view asserts. Heat delivery by air masses is more important than the heat from the Gulf Stream itself. So long as the prevailing air flow comes from the SW regardless of Gulf Stream and there are reasonable reasons to believe it would continue to do so (essentially there is a W to E air circulation round the globe and by virtue of Newtonian mechanics, the mountains of N America inevitably force the air flow SE into more southerly Atlantic waters than if they were not there), the air still picks up ample heat and moisure before finally moving NE and the loss of the Atlantic conveyor may not have as disastrous an effect on UK winter temperature as popular intuition would expect. Temperatures would indeed fall, but not by as much. That the air flow is extremely important to winter temperature in the UK is evidenced by those extreme winters in which frigid air is pushed westwards over Britain, thereby blocking the warming SW martime flow from the Atlantic. Nothing happens to the Gulf Stream in those winters - its still flows as before - but the country is markedly (and sometimes extremely) chilled at those times.
So the regional climate difference may not become so extreme and it would be unwise to bet on a GW driven Cornish property bubble!!!
42. sold 2 rent 1 said...
indiablue19,
"At which point science and religion meet"
Presently, science is moving toward a Unified Theory that unites all the forces in nature into One. At the same time the spiritualists are unifying the God in heaven with the divine in our soul into the One. Science is also moving toward the metaphysical world with its Quantum Theory which reveals that space and time are only perceptions and that matter is no more than locked up energy and can only be expressed mathematically as a probability.
This is an extract from
The Metaphysical Search for the Ultimate Reality
http://www.my-broker.com/zen/index.html
43. notaneconomicsguru said...
The difficulty with religious prophesy is that it is usually framed in vague or ambiguous terms and its very hard to make rational sense of it or even to determine when the events they speak of are meant to occur. Of course even the most rational human has a spriritual and emotional dimension in which it can experience events in a religious way. Some great scientists are and have been very pious. Sometimes they are open about this and sometimes not. However, I don't think science & religion are moving any closer.
Science, or more specifically natural science, simply provides a framework for a quantatiive, reductionist view of the world in which all natural phenomena (including those of epoc making violence or catastrophe) are measured, understood and predicted in terms of a relatively small number of precisely formulated mathematical rules.
Its certainly true that in the last century and perhaps even more so in the last 30 to 50 years, that science has identified or recognised a number of different mechanisms by which human kind could be afflicted by great, and even species threatening tragedy. But I think that is more because science has made huge strides in understanding the world, not because it has concsiously moved towards a religious view. Of course the visions and prophesies do inform and inspire the scientists to examine the world to determine to what extent they may, crazy as they may seem, hold some kind of truth, but coming together, no I don't think so.
44. indiablue19 said...
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind. ...Albert Einstein
45. malct said...
best not to quote Einstein out of context ! indiablue 19
Einstein Letter Warning Of
Zionist Facism In Israel
Letter That Albert Einstein Sent to the New York Times
1948, Protesting the Visit of Menachem Begin
Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine.
http://www.rense.com/general59/ein.htm
don't get me wrong I love most of Einstein's quotes, he was indeed a great man.
Within the Jewish community they have preached an admixture of ultranationalism, religious mysticism, and racial superiority. Like other Fascist parties they have been used to break strikes, and have themselves pressed for the destruction of free trade unions. In their stead they have proposed corporate unions on the Italian Fascist model. During the last years of sporadic anti-British violence, the IZL and Stern groups inaugurated a reign of terror in the Palestine Jewish community. Teachers were beaten up for speaking against them, adults were shot for not letting their children join them. By gangster methods, beatings, window-smashing, and wide-spread robberies, the terrorists intimidated the population and exacted a heavy tribute.
most things are other than what we have been told to believe because VIs have done the telling - don't be fooled into thinking you are immune.
46. James said...
Indeed... it is best not to quote the man out of context. Especially if you're a new-age fruitcake, given the man's exceptional logical and powers of reason.
"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this...For me the Jewish religion like all others is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions"... also big Alby E.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion
47. jamonit said...
Just out of curiosity, is everyone posting on here male?
48. malct said...
jamonit - last time I looked I think I was still male but I can't remember when that was, is this a quiz?
Your question begs another question, which is taboo in male dominated circles that have a fear of women.
How to Treat a Woman
by "Emma" – henrymakow.com May 11, 2008
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=8602 - oops orf toepick
Disclaimer: Many people who have read this article write to me asking, “How can you call yourself submissive when you are dictating how a man should treat you?” My response to that question is that I know the difference between allowing a man to lead a household and allowing him to be abusive. Most intelligent women do. Submission does not equal doormat or punching bag in my world.
I am a submissive woman. I long to be with a man who has strong leadership skills, someone who is not hesitant to exert his power in a relationship with me. Someone I can take care of and look after and be a helpmate to but also depend on to take charge when needed. Someone I can complement, not someone I can dominate.
Today’s men, however, need to learn the difference between responsible leadership and abuse. In the upside down world of feminism we live in today (and to their credit, it is no wonder men are confused), I generally come across two types of men:
The first type is the kind who have been brainwashed by the feminist movement and think that what women want is for their men to worship and idolize them. Nothing turns me off faster than a man who worships me, puts my needs and desires before his own and bends over backward to fulfill my every whim. I run from men like that.
The other type of men I come across are the ones who call themselves ‘dominant,’ but are actually just emotionally abusive (and sometimes physically) and don’t have a clue that they are. They are the ones who will go all the way to China or Russia looking for a ‘submissive’ wife, because they say there are no submissive women in the United States. There is such a complete disconnect in the brains of these men, it is beyond me how they function in any relationship. What they don’t realize is that women (yes, even here in the US) are inherently submissive, to one degree or another. It’s in our DNA. It is hard-wired into us (in the same way your masculinity is hard-wired into you), in spite of the fact that the feminist movement has done its level best to squash it.
To the men in the first category: Don’t buy into the feminist propaganda. Be kind, be sensitive but don’t go overboard trying to meet every one of her needs. It won’t work.
To the men in the second category: Any woman who truly loves you will go to the ends of the earth for you. She will feed you and take care of you until death. She will bear and raise your children and take care of your home. She will put her feet to the fire for you. She’ll stand by you and support you through the worst life has to dish out. She’ll put her life on the line for you and she will do it all without reservation – as long as you are treating her well.
Start NOT treating her well, start being disrespectful and criticizing everything she does, and all you’ll do is piss her off. All of a sudden you have this indignant, angry woman in front of you, and you have no idea what she’s angry about. Inevitably, because you cannot see where you are doing anything wrong, you’ll throw your hands up in the air and dismissively accuse her of being an angry feminist, thereby sabotaging the relationship and dooming it to fail.
Newsflash: She doesn’t have an anger problem. She has an abusive husband problem. Most women with an IQ above 40 and an ounce of self-respect will not stay with an abusive husband.
Let me say it again: If you treat your woman well, you won’t have to ask for her submission. She will give it willingly, freely, happily and without reservation until the day you die.
Most of the men in this category do not know what the word ‘marriage’ or ‘partnership’ truly means. They carry a deep-seated, thinly veiled contempt for women in general that is apparent in almost everything they do. They don’t view their women as partners or helpmates; they view them as property and treat them as less than human, with barely a shred of simple common decency or respect.
So what does it mean to treat a woman well? What do women really want?
Well, of course we want your leadership and direction. We like our men to be men. We want you to be strong and decisive in the ways we aren’t. We love that you can get the lid off the flipping pickle jar for us, or move a cement step to free a trapped kitten. We LOVE that mysterious masculine side of you. But we also want and need your respect, approval and appreciation. That’s not feminism talking, it’s simple human nature.
I once had a conversation with a man who had just been through a devastating divorce after a 27-year marriage to a woman he obviously loved very much. He said to me, “She was so beautiful and I was always so proud to have her for my wife.”
I asked (gently), “Did you ever tell her that?”
“NO!!!” He said, as if it was beneath his macho dignity to actually compliment his wife. It made me want to cry for her.
H – E – L – L – O !?!
Guys, come on. Get a grip.
Just because you expect a meal to be on the table at a certain time (and we are fine with the fact that you do) would it kill you to give the courtesy of a simple thank you when it is?
There’s a huge difference between saying, with a twinkle in your eye:
“I’d like you to wear this today.”
and
“Take that thing off, it makes your ass look fat.”
There’s a huge difference between:
“I realize you have a different opinion, but I’m going to do it this way instead.”
and
“Your opinion means nothing.”
There’s a huge difference between:
“I appreciate all that you do.”
and
“It’s your JOB, woman!”
There’s a huge difference between:
“I appreciate that you don’t expect me to take you out to expensive restaurants every weekend.”
and
“Hey, you’re a cheap date!”
and
“I like your hair better down.”
As opposed to:
“Your hair looks like hell up.”
See the difference? I am constantly amazed by the number of men who don’t. The first statements are relationship builders and the second statements are relationship destroyers. To a man, it’s a subtle distinction. To a woman, it’s a sledgehammer. The first statements are what women thrive on. They are what create and sustain that undying lifelong devotion for her partner. The second statements are emotionally hurtful and abusive and make her feel disrespected, unappreciated and unloved. They slowly tear down her self-worth and self-esteem. Do that long enough and she will eventually go away, whether you are a good provider or not.
You are her best friend, and she wants to be yours. You’ll catch more flies with honey than with vinegar: Show your appreciation once in awhile and she will do more of whatever it is you appreciate. Constantly criticize everything she does, and she will do less, if any at all. A simple common courtesy like saying thank you for a meal doesn’t make you any less of a man; quite the opposite. It’s those little things that assure her that she is important to you and go a long way toward building the kind of trust and loyalty that lasts forever. It’s the key to creating that submissive woman you all claim to want.
It’s not rocket science, guys. It takes very little effort on your part, with lifelong rewards, to build your partner up instead of tearing her down. It is simple human nature for anyone —male or female— to not want to remain in a relationship where they are consistently made to feel bad about themselves. Stop blaming feminism for that.
Feminism has been both bad and good for society. On the good side, it empowered women to get out of horrifically abusive relationships, something that was very much needed back in the day. But one of the many ways in which it has been bad is that it has taught men to use ‘feminism’ as a scapegoat for their own lack of communication and relationship skills.
Where are the REAL men, the ones who can dance on the edge of dominance without falling off the cliff into emotional abuse?
now look what you've done jamonit!
49. letthemfall said...
s2r1: "Science is also moving toward the metaphysical world with its Quantum Theory which reveals that space and time are only perceptions and that matter is no more than locked up energy and can only be expressed mathematically as a probability."
Hmm, this strikes me as pseudo-science claptrap. Quantum theory is not about perceptions, and that stuff about matter being expressed as a probability makes no sense. It's often the case that difficult science (especially quantum theory and relativity) leads to rather wacky interpretations by people who don't really understand what it's about. QT isn't metaphysics anyway, although you could make something of an argument along those lines for the untestable string theories, if you're interested in that kind of thing.
Anyway, we're about house prices here aren't we?
50. shipbuilder said...
Treat both women and money with respect - a good lesson for life, I guess.
51. malct said...
49. letthemfall said... nothing but he quoted :-
s2r1: "Science is also moving toward the metaphysical world with its Quantum Theory which reveals that space and time are only perceptions and that matter is no more than locked up energy and can only be expressed mathematically as a probability."
and then he dribbled on about a load of bo££ocks
QT is over 100 yo - we've moved on mate get a grip
letthemfall - what a name! says it all really - p4ac can help
52. malct said...
50. shipbuilder said...
Treat both women and money with respect - a good lesson for life, I guess.
meaning ? us men are in charge! not money, not women, oh bu&&er I've been backing the wrong dogs/horses!
Call me Mary and feed me to the lesbians! - again.
ffsgag shippy. - sorry I agree with you. Puffters should treat women and money with respect because they don'y understand either.
53. Unplugged said...
Our entire civilisation seems to promote greed, materialism and personal gain. This forms a root that dictates how people behave. We're all going as fast as possible with no real idea where we're going or what the purpose is. In the meantime were doing untold damage to the environment while exhausting precious resources to make stuff we dont need and will throw away in a couple of years to get the latest model Its absurd!!
Surely our governments/rulers have an agenda in promoting this? Or is it just 'the way we are' and their problem is how to stop us without us voting them out? Is it due to our collective fault or are we manipulated into this behaviour? I wonder if our rulers have put great effort into mastering how to manipulate us. They set the agenda so they can dictate the outcome?
Personally I would like to see lots more discussion on how to overcome these problems as well as those of the housing market. But its the foundations of society that need fixing not a few new policies here or there. The whole system doesnt work. Humans created the problems, therefore it is possible for us to fix them. All we need to do is look out for each other (IMO). Competition is old hat!
54. Unplugged said...
By the way http://www.optimumpopulation.org/
and for those unaware of the golden mean http://goldennumber.net/ (the basis for elloit wave theory I believe)
55. jamonit said...
OMG Malct, I think I might belong to the third type.
56. shipbuilder said...
Malct - on something?
57. planning4acrash said...
THE planet Earth has dismissed claims it is in danger from global warming, stressing the worst that could happen is the extinction of the human race.
'If you don't mind, I've got some orbiting to do'
The Earth spoke out after a series of books, television programmes and environmental campaigns urged people to do everything in their power to 'Save the Planet'.
The planet said environmental campaigners should change their slogan from 'Save the Planet' to something more relevant such as 'Save Your Sorry Ar$e'.
58. indiablue19 said...
How truly sad. I've contributed to this forum for many years and never been so thoroughly disappointd with it's membership. Good wishes to you all then.
59. indiablue19 said...
And, especially for James, the quotation you give from a letter published by the "Guardian" isn't borne out at all in the last work by Einstein, which I quoted "Out of My Later Years," in which he derides moral decay and social injustice and even calls for World government before it is too late.
"Now, even though the realms of religion and science in themselves are clearly marked off from each other, nevertheless there exist between the two strong reciprocal relationships and dependencies. Though religion may be that which determines the goals, it has, nevertheless, learned from science in the broadest sense, what means will contribute to the attainment of the goals it has set up. But science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration towards truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a geniune scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." Albert Einstein, 1955.
As this is a compilation of his final words, chosen by him at the end of his life, copywritten by him, and published on his behalf by his Estate on his death, I take this as definitive excerpt of his lifetime thought and achievements. I would say it is the Guardian newspaper who chose words out of context and interpreted them as they would for the occasion.
60. indiablue19 said...
Oh, and on your astute "new age fruitcake" comment James, it may interest you to know, but perhaps not, that the Hopi indigenous people grow lush crops in the bone dry desert and modify the weather to water their fields by means of musical vibration. Anybody who understands anything of science or religion knows that sound vibration is the source of life. The purpose of my visit with the Hopi was to understand and document the methods they use to control the weather. Something the UK and it's gully-washed environs in need of billions of £££££s of flood prevention investment, might be glad to know these days. But you just have it your way, please. Have a good laugh why don't you.
61. indiablue19 said...
And, while we're at it, emphatically "no" not all contributors here are Men. Not all men with a lower case "m," and definitely not with the upper case "M" either. And seated in a forum with thirty "primitive" male Hopi elders, I received respect and acknowledgment, apart from those connotations, because for all their lack of grandiose "education" such as some purport to have in this world, they are well aware that Truth has no sexual orientation whatsoever. Perhaps the internet and online communications should be the ultimate indicator here. What does it matter what sex any of us is, except that not knowing whether this is an "all male" club sadly limits our ability to involve ourselves successfully in petty, derisive and small-minded hee-hawing at the expense of others.
62. notaneconomicsguru said...
Indiablue19 @ 44 and 59.
When I made my post at 43 I was unaware of that quote from Einstein, but if you read what I wrote you will see that he is saying virtually the same things as me, although I accept without hesitation that he says it much more eloquently.
However, there are some aspects of his view that I disagree with. First, I do not accept that religion is the source as he implies of the aspiration for truth & understanding. I think that is a fundamental human desire which exists in itself and is quite separate from religion or indeed from science. Second, I do not accept as he does that it is an act of faith to accept that the world is ordered in a rational way. I would see it more as an axiomatic assumption that the mechanisms are comprehensible by rational analysis. I would agree though that all scientists today take that as their starting point without much questioning it, because it is the simplest assumption to make. I think that viewpoint is quite different from saying it is an act of faith in the religious sense of that word. This assumption (or act of faith) makes it possible to formulate rational rules (laws of physics) that allow us to predict the future outcome of experiments, even if it turns out that the rational nature of the world so constrains us, such that only the relative probabilties of many different possible outcomes can be calculated. That was something Einstein never felt comfortable with - "God does not play dice with the world".
I think in your quotation he also hints at his idea of faith and of God, or rather his way of interpreting or reconciling these issues: as of a rational universe which must therefore have inevitabley have been made by a rational creator that made us in his image and gave us rational thought so hat we may understand his creation. However, whether that is true or not (and that is surely what he meant by the use of the word "faith" in the context he used it?) the best evidence we have to date is that Quantum Theory can calculate the observed interaction between light and matter to an accuracy of 10 decimal places and that strongly suggests that "God does indeed play dice" and also that Einstein was certainly not infallable.
In short I don't see anything in his words that support your assertion that science and religion are moving towards each other. In fact Einstein starts by saying they are quite different realms. The fact that there are dependencies between them is neither surprising, nor particularly remarkable in my view for they are both profound expressions of the same human conciousness.