How Efficient Engines Break Down

The first thing that you need to do to ensure that efficient engines break down is describe them as perfect. They cannot break down because they are perfect, and anyone who says that they are not perfect must be ridiculed and told to prove that the engines are not perfect.

The opposite is also true. An engine might well actually be perfect, but critics might point to unknowns, which are intended to undermine the mechanical perfection. There is no defence to unknowns, precisely because they are ‘unknowns’.

It surprises me how easy it is for certain academics to get away with claiming unknowns as a reason to ban things. Why is snus banned in the EU apart from Sweden? How has that ban survived the MASSIVE amount of evidence from Sweden that it is relatively safe?

We must use the word ‘relatively’ because there is no such thing as ‘absolute’ safety. Someone somewhere will choke to death on a piece of toast. Someone somewhere will be allergic to orange juice and die after drinking it. The survival of the human race has been because of genetic variations, intelligence, and courage.

But those attributes are being undermined, especially courage. Anyone who dares to be courageous is vilified. Only conformity is admired – even among scholars.

But the sanctification of conformity undermines discovery, and that is especially so when conformity is eulogised and funded, whereas discovery is vilified and starved of funding.

How is it that anti-smoking is still funded extremely well whereas alternatives, such as, snus (banned), chewing tobacco (strictly regulated), ecigs (essentially flavours with a little nicotine), are starved?

Would it not be wonderful if Trump in the USA and May in the UK just derailed the gravy train? It would be so EASY. Funding is the railway line upon which the gravy train runs. Remove the railway line, and the gravy train must fall over.

But there is a massive problem. The Quangos and Charities, funded by taxpayers, have grown and grown, and cost more and more. Further, their chief function is to try to get government to spend more and more money on their pet projects.

There is only one solution. It is to call a halt. The end of the line. But that would not be easy. It could be done by demanding that such entities show positive intentions rather than negative intentions.

It all becomes very messy. Sometimes only war sorts these things out.

 

Advertisements

3 Responses to “How Efficient Engines Break Down”

  1. Samuel Says:

    No mention of the obvious: that urban living and proximity to roadways, power plants and factories have profound affects on pulmonary health but tobacco is the cause of all things unhealthy.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/03/170303091332.htm

    *hope this link works*

    • Rose Says:

      Fear of political embarrassment led to government cover up of link between air pollution and lung cancer
      2002

      “Smog Conference: Leading historian documents how shift in public health agenda and political necessity combined to keep air pollution off the agenda.

      Delegates attending an international conference in London today to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the Great London Smog of 1952, which caused an estimated 12,000 deaths, will hear how governments from the late 50s onwards deliberately downplayed the huge threat to public health caused by air pollution, and sought to shift the blame firmly onto cigarette smoking instead.”
      http://www.lshtm.ac.uk/pressoffice/press_releases/2002/smogpollution.html

      The Government had sent all the clean coal for export, leaving the Londoners to burn the dirty sulphurous coal, then there was a temperature inversion that covered the city like a lid for four days.

      The Government set a cut off date of 4 days for the continuing deaths from the smog and invented a flu epidemic to cover the rest.

      I took a look at it myself in 2008, lots more links and information in there.

      Air Pollution and The Great London Smog
      https://web.archive.org/web/20130625013521/http://www.forces.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=363&t=1590

    • junican Says:

      The link worked. As far as I could see, there was nothing in the article which ‘proved’ that there was any harm actually suffered by anyone. Of course, I am not saying that there was not. Compare that with the correlation of deaths to the Great London Smog as described by Rose.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: