Focus on 'The Good', People

I have, on several occasions, stated on these pages that ‘extinguishing someone else’s light does not make your light burn any brighter.”

It is still, sadly, far more effective to slander or denigrate someone than it is to give them a pat on the back or, indeed, praise them for their efforts.

One of the ways of this propagandist methodology is to take something that someone else has said, or written, and distort it; this can be done by subtly changing the words or by selective editing.

Let me show you an example of this and then we shall move on to the other side of the coin:

The quotes given are hard to find because whoever constructed this picture has no clue how the Qr’an (‘Koran’ here) is laid out.

The first one, for example, is actually ‘Juz 2: Al-Baqarah (Ayat 2) Verse 191.’ Ayat 2 is split between Juz 1 to Juz 3.

What it actually says is this:

“Kill them [the enemy—whoever that is] wherever they confront you in combat and drive them out of the places where they have driven you. Though killing is bad, creating mischief is worse than killing. Do not fight them within the precincts of the Sacred Mosque unless they attack you there; but if they attack you, put them to the sword; that is the punishment for such unbelievers.”

Note: ‘…wherever they confront you in combat…’ This means that you are allowed to defend yourself with deadly force. Of course, in a time when there was no police force or civil defence organisations.

We shall just look at one more. The second quote says that Muslims must not take non-believers (infidels) as friends. Bear in mind that Christians are not ‘non-believers’.

“Let not the believers make unbelievers their protectors rather than believers; anyone who does so will have nothing to hope for from Allah—except if you do so as a precaution to guard yourself against their tyranny. Anyhow, Allah warns you to fear Him: because with Allah is your final refuge.”

I should point out here that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was sheltered, and protected, with his people by Christians during a time of strife where they escaped to prevent themselves being wiped out.

Conversely, the Christians are supposed to be protected by Muslims. This was an agreement between the Prophet (pbuh) and the Monks of Mount Sinai; it was called the ‘Ashtiname’.

A translation exists here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashtiname_of_Muhammad

Hatred exists everywhere. It is easy to try and drag someone down to your own level of bigotry without checking the facts. It is easy to just ‘share’ or ‘cut and paste’ your argument because it suits your mind-set with no consideration about those for whom this could be upsetting or insulting.

I do not cast aspersions or trade insults with Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus or, even, Atheists.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and belief.

“There is no compulsion in religion,” the Holy Qr’an says.

So we shall return to the original point. We are, as a species, hell bent on bringing others down to ‘our’ level. It is easy. Maybe, at some stage, it is satisfying some primeval urge. It makes us feel superior.

But it does not make us superior. It makes us look small and bigoted.

We seem less inclined to pat someone on the back. Even less inclined to laud others for their efforts.

I find it extremely easy to pay silent homage to people like Isaac Asimov, Arthur C Clarke, Kurt Vonnegut, et al. Even to the point, on occasion, of telling others how much I enjoy their stories.

Indeed, in one ‘Blog’ I mourned their passing because there will be no more stories from these great minds.

Notice I said, ‘their passing’!

They are all dead.

What about paying homage to living writers? Are they not a threat to my success?

No. They are not.

I write Science-Fiction. I am good at it. See? I pat myself on the back—a socially unacceptable action but if you don’t blow your own trumpet who will?

Ray Owen wrote a story that is called ‘The Hole’. I thoroughly enjoyed it. It is not Science-Fiction it is a modern love story that uses humour and pathos to convey an excellent message.

R.B. Clague writes a story called ‘Whitefella Dreaming’. It is an interesting and absorbing story with supernatural leanings in accordance with Aboriginal beliefs. It is definitely not Sci-Fi.

Robin Gregory’s story, ‘The Improbable Wonders of Moojie Littleman’ is also not sci-fi but edges towards it here and there in the ‘alternate universe’ aspect. An intriguing and moving story.

I recommend all these three stories to you. There are others like the children’s books written by 'The BFF Crew' (‘Chele Sellman) that are available on Amazon.

Have I harmed myself and my popularity or success by revealing how good these tales are?

No.

Just like our beliefs and faiths there are versions for everyone. There is something that will make you comfortable and at peace with the world. Writing will do that. I am comfortable and at peace with those stories whereas I am less content with other stories—that I will not mention; you will discover those for yourselves and they will be different from mine, no doubt.

Next time you look at your keyboard and think of something really clever and disparaging to say about someone—or something, think first:

Is it true?

Does it change anything?

Will it hurt?

Is it necessary?

Qualifications and Learning

“The central task of education is to implant a will and a facility for learning; it should produce not learned but learning people. The truly human society is a learning society, where grandparents, parents, and children are students together.


In a time of drastic change it is the learners who inherit the future.

The learned usually find themselves equipped to live in a world that no longer exists.”

Eric Hoffer 1902 – 1983

(From ‘Wikiquotes.)

Eric Hoffer was an American writer of social and political philosophy. He worked as a longshoreman until his retirement in 1965 in spite of the success and popularity of his writings.

So he never gave up his day job!

So why have I given you this quote? Especially that last bit?

Because, this time, I want to speak to you about expertise and knowledge; an explanation of what he meant, in part, by that last sentence is in order.

When you go to a university and take your degree course—it doesn’t matter what it is or, even, whether you are doing a Bachelor’s or a Master’s, etc., The course was written long before you took it.

Someone, in some education ministry somewhere had a peek at what industry needs and what the ‘latest things’ in those industries are currently being fed into the industrial system.

Following this, somebody composed a syllabus from which the university designed a course to suit that syllabus. This would take several years to write in order to cover a new three to four year course.

You then go to the university and study for three, or four, years following which you will take ‘The Final’ (hurraaah!) examinations and, one hopes, emerge from the campus clutching your coveted award—the piece of paper that says you passed the course.

In the meantime ‘Industry’ has moved on six or seven years. In subjects like computing and aviation that period could represent a lifetime of development. Neither of these core subjects stands still for very long.

You are now “highly qualified for a world that no longer exists”.

Immediately.

Let me take a slightly different tack.

You go to a ‘Driving School’. The instructors at the driving school will, more often than not, teach you how to operate a vehicle. They will also teach you how to pass a driving test.

At no point will they spend very much time teaching you how to drive.

Driving is a skill—an art.

Once you get your license (hurraaah!) it is up to you to develop those skills and that art. But, sadly, people believe that, now they have their license, they no longer need to learn.

Thus it is with any qualification. It matters not if it is a certificate or a diploma, a degree or a Ph.D.

The course is only preparation for a life after passing the exam. The answer to success is not having a qualification but by being dedicated and flexible.

The World famous cellist, Pablo Casals, was asked on his 90^th birthday why he still practiced. He replied, “Because I think I'm making progress.”

'Chemtrails'

You may or may not have noted previously that I have an aversion to most ‘conspiracy theories’.

There has been, however, a couple that have grown very gradually in strength. One of them has already appeared in one of my ‘Blogs’ and so this one must take its turn for fame!

The theory that I am focusing on right now is this ‘Chemtrail’ nonsense.

I am certain that there are those who will object, perhaps vociferously, to my use of the word ‘nonsense’ and yet it appears (to me) to fit very well.

Here’s why.

Before I set off on my explanation I should like to tell you that I have been involved in aviation, in several guises, since 1961 when we spent happy hours at Exeter Airport with the Royal Air Force Volunteer Reserve people and their assorted collection of De Havilland Chipmunks, Mosquitoes and Vampires.

Chipmunk 

Vampire 

Mosquito

There are several reasons why I suggest that the possibility of ‘Chemtrails’ is a non-starter.

Let’s start with the idea of ‘why’.

What is the purpose of ‘Chemtrails’. To date nobody has offered a reasonable explanation as to why anyone would wish to spray chemicals from aircraft at high level to the ground.

That people should wish to spray chemicals at low level is understood. Fertiliser, pesticide, anti-fungal agents are commonplace. These are distributed from helicopters and small crop-spraying aircraft.

Water is sprayed at reasonably low level from flying boats for the purpose of extinguishing fires and, during times of combat, it has been known that defoliants have been sprayed to rid the leaves of trees allowing for a better look at the ground where enemy combatants may be lurking.

Thirty-six thousand feet is considerably extreme for these purposes.

Why?

It is likely that any chemical released in the form of small droplets from high altitudes would reach the ground at all. If they did they would be very far from the area where they were released.

The fact is that even fairly viscous liquids would vaporize (turn to gas) long before they reached the ground and that would mean that they would then drift and disperse in the various winds that exist (in different directions and velocities) at sundry altitudes.

Effect of wind, at various altitudes, on ascent and descent of balloons.

They would be largely ineffective before they achieved ground level through dispersal and weakening.

Let us now consider the people who are organising this attack on us from the sky.

Given that the destination of the chemical is going to be largely unknown—even with all the sophistication of computer modelling programmes, and the ‘when’ of its arrival at ground level is also fairly indeterminate, one wonders how the people that order this spraying will avoid, themselves, being sprayed.

It would seem inevitable that the progenitors of this systematic dispersal of toxins would also suffer from its effects.

In spite of a great many people regarding the ‘keeping of secrets’ to be normal for governments Worldwide there is very little that is, in actuality, a real secret. As soon as a group of people know about something there is a distinct chance that the information will leak out. The larger the group the more likely it is that someone will ‘spill the beans’ somewhere in some form.

If ‘Chemtrails’ were a valid option then whispers would abound.

However, assuming that whispers are effectively silenced we must consider another option.

That is:

The prevailing sentiment is that this chemical is being sprayed from commercial aircraft. This hits a major stumbling block immediately.

Fuel burn.

This next sentence is hugely important.

“Nothing, ever, is fitted to an aircraft unless it is there to overcome a problem. Nothing.”

Spraying people with chemicals does not overcome any problem on a commercial aircraft.

The equipment required to carry the chemical and pump it out to spray nozzles at the appropriate place on the aircraft would be heavy.

It would also be immediately noticeable to the average Maintenance Engineer and Technician.

The weight alone of this equipment, and the chemical, would mean that increased fuel burn would be necessary to get it off the ground. No commercial operator will tolerate that kind of fuel wastage if it is not being used to lift revenue paying cargo or PAX.

If, as it is likely to be claimed, the Government is reimbursing the operator for the fuel loss then this would show up in the financial sheets of the operator or, if it is set against tax, in the tax collectors ledgers.

In other words, another source of information leak!

Any Aircraft Maintenance Engineer, Mechanic or Technician worth his/her salt would recognise extraneous objects on an aircraft immediately. These objects would immediately become famous.

Shall we just assume, for the moment, that the tanks and equipment for spraying chemicals is fitted to an aeroplane?

Who fills it up?

There are apocryphal tales of men carrying mysterious containers out to aircraft. Such men are the ‘only ones permitted to do this’.

These tales derive from strange sources. It goes something like this, “My friend has a cousin whose wife’s Uncle knows someone who…”

Quite. Apocryphal.

These men carrying mysterious containers are more likely to be fellows going out to service the toilets. The container holds nothing more mysterious than disinfectant—probably ‘Racasan’!

Why only one man?

Because most operators will pay people extra money to carry out ‘unsavoury duties’. Clearly they do not want to pay everyone this extra money and so the persons doing this task tend to be limited.

Person who cleans the toilets on aeroplanes

Where this strange idea of ‘Chemtrails came from I do not know. How it is continuously perpetrated on ‘Facebook’ I also do not know.

The burning of hydrocarbon fuels in aero-engines will produce water, carbon dioxide, some carbon monoxide and a very small amount of NOx (Nitrous/Nitric Oxides) gases*. Note: 'Water'. This water will condense in the atmosphere (at certain altitudes) when it is mingled with the cold ambient air.
[Sulphur only exists in gasoline and not kerosene. Petrol engines will produce sulphurous or sulphuric oxides as part of the compbustion process. This will then become, with the addition of water, sulphuric and sulphurous acides - such as will corrode out your exhaust pipe and silencer (muffler).] 

It is also obvious that, at certain altitudes, the wingtip vortices will produce a sufficiently low pressure zone to force water droplets to coalesce out of the atmosphere.

This, then, is the answer.

The chemical that we are being sprayed with is…

DiHydrogen MonOxide.