Category: Inspiration

Reminds me of the line, “Most people grossly overestimate what they can get done in a day and grossly under estimate what they can accomplish in a decade.”

So your question for today is, “What activity do you do that is a relative waste of time for 90 minutes a day or 10 hours of your week? Or, if that is too harsh, “What do you presently do for 10 hours a week that is a low priority activity that you could easily drop from your schedule?”

Because that adds up to, let’s see, 10 hours a week is 520 hours a year, 5,200 hours in 10 years divided by 40 hours a week is 130 weeks divided by 52 weeks in a year is 2.5 years.

What major goal would you like to accomplish if someone said, “You don’t have to work for the next 30 months, your bills are covered, go for it!”

Reminds me of the line, “Most people grossly overestimate what they can get done in a day and grossly under estimate what they can accomplish in a decade.”

So your question for today is, “What activity do you do that is a relative waste of time for 90 minutes a day or 10 hours of your week?” Or, if that is too harsh, “What do you presently do for 10 hours a week that is a low priority activity that you could easily drop from your schedule?”

Because ten hours a week adds up to a lot over ten years.
10 hours a week is 520 hours a year or 5,200 hours in 10 years.
5,200 hours divided by 40 hours a week is 130 weeks.
130 weeks divided by 52 weeks in a year is 2.5 years or 30 months.
What could you accomplish if you had two and a half years to do it?

Thonk about what major goal would you like to accomplish if someone said, “You don’t have to work for the next two and a half years, your bills are covered, go for it!”

Now allocate that 10 hours a week to it!

And enjoy the proud satisfaction of production and accomplishment of something worthwhile!

What major goal would you like to accomplish if someone said, “You don’t have to work for the next 30 months, your bills are covered, go for it!”

I found this interesting for a couple of reasons:

1. The amount of effort and the magnitude of scale put into a sctructure that was intended to fail, in order to prevent a bigger destruction and
2. The great example it was of the philosophy of the Lee Child character, Jack Reacher, “Hope for the best, plan for the worst.”

A philosophy sadly lacking in our state and federal governments.

So, as it is the start of a new year, what are you doing to hope for the best with your goals for the year and plan for the worst with your disaster prepardness plans?

When men form communities they soon come to recognize that the protection of property is the paramount consideration in drafting constitutions. Such legal protection, however, has never proved sufficient deterrent to a man or group of men from expropriating the property of others. This theft is often perpetrated by those elected or appointed to make or enforce the law and historically these legislators will go to great lengths to perpetuate their power and their influence over the property of their compatriots.

In light of this propensity of the powerful to deprive the governed of the full measure of their God-given liberty, the trial was developed as a way of providing those accused by government or by other men of violating the law of the land with a process by which guilt or innocence could be declared by a group of men equal to the accused in legal standing, in other words, a peer.

https://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2019/09/09/trial-by-jury-a-jewel-of-freedom/

I just had a major realisation on something I have been doing wrong all my life on the subject of communication.

There is a particular person I interact with who is very opinionated. When I discuss a topic with this person they will come up with examples to support their opinion.

I would disprove the validity or applicability of the data but the opinion would not alter. Obviously this dicappointed and frustrated me because I was “unable to change their mind”.

My big realisation was that THEIR MIND DID NOT CHANGE BECAUSE THEIR OPINION WAS NOT BASED ON THE DATA THEY WERE TENDERING! The invention of the data was as a rationale for their opinion came AFTER their opinion. So disproving their data did NOTHING to alter their opinion! The tendered data was too late on the time track.

I just launched the petition “Federal Politicians: So ScoMo doesn’t think firefighters are a priority? Cut parliamentary benefits and perks!” and wanted to see if you could help by adding your name.

My goal is to reach 100 signatures and we need more support. You can read more and sign the petition here:

http://chng.it/4w2dQSyv6q

No matter how abundant or renewable, solar power has a thorn in its side. There is still no cheap and efficient long-term storage for the energy that it generates.

The solar industry has been snagged on this branch for a while, but in the past year alone, a series of four papers has ushered in an intriguing new solution.

Scientists in Sweden have developed a specialised fluid, called a solar thermal fuel, that can store energy from the sun for well over a decade.

“A solar thermal fuel is like a rechargeable battery, but instead of electricity, you put sunlight in and get heat out, triggered on demand,” Jeffrey Grossman, an engineer works with these materials at MIT explained to NBC News.

The fluid is actually a molecule in liquid form that scientists from Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden have been working on improving for over a year.

This molecule is composed of carbon, hydrogen and nitrogen, and when it is hit by sunlight, it does something unusual: the bonds between its atoms are rearranged and it turns into an energised new version of itself, called an isomer.

Like prey caught in a trap, energy from the sun is thus captured between the isomer’s strong chemical bonds, and it stays there even when the molecule cools down to room temperature.

https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-develop-liquid-that-sucks-up-sun-s-energy

From https://waxlyricals.com/2019/06/26/your-liberty-and-freedom-come-from-magna-carta-not-the-eu/

In the UK an individual has rights laid down since Magna Carta was signed in 1215.

This is particularly important when a crime is committed or suspected of being committed. As under the rights laid down from Magna Carta onwards, someone in the UK is deemed innocent until proven guilty. If you are accused of a crime, the onus is on the State to prove your guilt.

The writ of Habeus Corpus prevents the State from imprisoning you without evidence of a crime.

Under the European legal system, they never had a Magna Carta of their own and as such they work under a different assumption than we do, in that you are guilty unless you can prove your innocence.

Thus, the State has the legal authority to imprison you whilst they find the evidence and formulate the case to convict you. The onus is on you to prove your innocence as there is no automatic assumption in law of your innocence.

Under UK law you have a right, as laid down under Magna Carta to have a trial by your peers, in Europe your trial will be heard by a panel of judges. It may not seem like much of a difference but it is crucial in ensuring impartiality in the legal system. To prevent abuse by the State jailing people purely for political reasons. We do not have a history of such things in the UK, continental Europe however does.

The main difference between the two systems can be summed up quite simply.

In the UK you can live your life, free of intrusion by the State as long as what you are doing isn’t illegal, in Europe you can do the same but only as long as what you are doing is enshrined in law as being legal.

This is why we Brits look at the Germans and find it peculiar that they follow rules to the letter. They have to, as their legal system tells them what behaviours and actions are allowed in law whereas ours tells us what isn’t allowed. That is such a fundamental difference to your ability to think and act freely and to go about your business without intrusion by the State because if theres nothing in law to say you cannot do something, then by default, here in the UK it is legal.

This is primarily why German society is far more ordered and regimented than here in the UK but that orderliness comes at a cost. As the State controls the people, whereas here the people (supposedly) control the State. They are supposed to work for us and not the other way around, although many in Parliament since the Brexit vote have seemingly been influenced by the European way of thinking somewhat. This fundamental difference in law is why every Englishman has by law been deemed a free man since birth, that is our birthright and it is why I want to leave the EU. As slowly but surely, our legal system is being overidden by the prescriptive ideas of European legal thought and the rights enshrined by Magna Carta, the worlds first ever declaration of the inalieniable rights of the individual over the Institutions of State are being undermined.

That alone is reason to leave the EU and when you hear people claiming that the EU protects their Human Rights, ask them how it is protecting their rights of liberty as laid down 800 years ago at Runnymede on the banks of the River Thames?

As this seemingly obscure document signed by King John in 1215 is absolutely fundamental in ensuring your freedom and liberty that the US Constitution borrowed huge parts of it to ensure that America and Americans would have the same when they created ’the land of the free.’

From Campaign For Democracy:

the first point to consider is that the 1215 Great Charter Constitution Magna Carta binds the U.K. government. That is to say, parliament cannot legitimately pass laws which infringe upon (contravene) the stipulations of the People’s Constitution Magna Carta 1215.

For that reason, the British government-approved Australian Constitution (Act) must be read with and is subject to the Great Charter’s provisions which define and prescribe the timeless Constitutional Common Law Trial by Jury for all causes (lawsuits), civil, criminal and fiscal. This places randomly selected Citizen-Jurors as the judges of the laws which politicians and those who control them wish to impose upon the People.

Convenors of trials (nowadays misnamed ’judges’) have no judicial role. Their true Rule of Law role is as convenors and for arranging security; advisory, inasmuch as this may be requested by the jury, of whose advice jurors may take only what is adjudged appropriate by them; and for the arranging of re-trials and appeals if necessitated by circumstances.

https://www.tomgrimshaw.com/VALID_ASPECTS_OF_ARTICLE_SIXTY-ONE.pdf

Several stories this week carry home the importance of this message for those willing to look for themselves rather than listen to authority.

Whether it is global warming, vaccinations, chemtrails, Marxist ideology, GMOs are safe, left versus right, miseducation, ‘doctor knows best’, fluoridation prevents cavities, chemotherapy is the most effective therapy for cancer, the food pyramid, EMFs can’t hurt you, Roundup is safe, the Iraqis have weapons of mass destruction, the Afghanis caused 911, the list just goes on and on about the lies being foisted on us by “Authority”.What gets me is how short a memory most people have, they still vote them in next election! Sheesh!