Friday, December 18, 2015

How health and Safety can ruin a perfectly good Christmas

Friday, December 18, 2015 0
oldbearnews editor Please be advised that all employees planning to dash through the snow in a one-horse open sleigh, going over the fields and laughing all the way are required to undergo a Risk Assessment addressing the safety of open sleighs. The assessment must also consider whether it is appropriate to use only one horse for such a venture, particularly where there are multiple passengers. Please note that permission must also be obtained in writing from landowners before their fields may be entered. To avoid offending those not participating in celebrations, we request that laughter is moderate only and not loud enough to be considered a noise nuisance. Benches, stools and orthopaedic chairs are now available for collection by any shepherds planning or required to watch their flocks at night. While provision has also been made for remote monitoring of flocks by CCTV cameras from a centrally heated shepherd observation hut, all facility users are reminded that an emergency response plan must be submitted to account for known risks to the flocks. The angel of the Lord is additionally reminded that prior to shining his/her glory all around s/he must confirm that all shepherds are wearing appropriate Personal Protective Equipment to account for the harmful effects of UVA, UVB and the overwhelming effects of Glory Following last year’s well publicised case, everyone is advised that legislation prohibits any comment with regard to the redness of any part of Mr. R. Reindeer. Further to this, exclusion of Mr. R Reindeer from reindeer games will be considered discriminatory and disciplinary action will be taken against those found guilty of this offence. While it is acknowledged that gift-bearing is commonly practised in various parts of the world, particularly the Orient, everyone is reminded that the bearing of gifts is subject to Hospitality Guidelines and all gifts must be registered. This applies regardless of the individual, even royal personages. It is particularly noted that direct gifts of currency or gold are specifically precluded under provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Further, caution is advised regarding other common gifts, such as aromatic resins that may initiate allergic reactions. Finally, for those involved in the recent case of the infant found tucked up in a manger without any crib for a bed, Social Services have been advised and will be arriving shortly. Wishing you a very Merry Christmas – be safe out there....... bear print

Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Modern day court jesters are failing to deliver the goods on climate change

Wednesday, December 16, 2015 0
oldbearnews editor


Modern day court jesters are failing to deliver the goods Court jesters have been around for millennia. Their job is what I would call a non-productive role. A court jester traditionally did not produce anything trade-able- they never baked bread or worked with the black smith. Goods that would have an immediate benefit to the other person or even the whole local village. You will never find a court jester in the "traditional" trades - that’s not their role. Their role is to use music or stories in order to entertain the noble men during some down time or festivals - read - as in - if and when required at the whim of their masters. Thus a court jester is in "employ" and on the goodwill of their master.

With that comes one major drawback. Basically - they stay "employed" for as long as they please their masters. For as long as they provide the goods they have a place at their masters side. Should they displease the master once to often - they can be at best out of their realm - meaning they have to travel and find another willing pay master or at worst, it is of with their heads. Either way - their lively hood was under severe threat - and as many travelling minstrels found out - their repudiation precedes them and it is not so easy to displace the incumbent at a possible new masters table.


History will tell you a great number of jesters - some more famous then others. One of the earliest recoded "court jesters" existing was David. He gained his role at King Saul’s palace because it seemed at the time that only his harp playing skills would sooth the frayed kings nerves. There are countless numbers of court jesters in the middle ages - the German word for them is "Hofnarr" Eventually they gained a better repudiation and were able to "sell" their skills on equal terms. In a sense they were the first self employed non-trade people. Musicians and composers came from that back ground. Mozart was still a slave to the whims of the rich and famous - the Strauss family started to dictate who when and and how much they charged for any concert or music services provided. Modern day singers / entertainers / actors etc of course have a much wider audience and have a loyal following - thus keeping them well fed. That is if you are an established person. It is hard to "break into that market" Just ask any aspiring model working shifts as waiters in the many restaurants in Los Angeles waiting for their 'big break'. . . . Being a traditional court jester had one major benefit though - you had the masters ear. You had some influence. You could 'guide' major decisions in certain directions. At David’s time - eventually he became King himself - more on that later.
Modern day scientists are what I regard as the new court jesters. They do not contribute anything materialistic measurable to their society. They have the ear of their pay masters (governments / Universities and other organisations). They are in the same boat as our biblical David - having to produce reports that are in line to their masters liking.

There is just one teeny weeny wee problem. Being 'yay' sayers they feed the masters thinking. So if that thinking itself is flawed - they feed that flawed thinking!? yes?! Remember - if you displease them - you are out of a job - so naturally they have a vested interest . . . .

Alex Newman writing for the 'New American' ( Embarrassing-predictions-haunt-the-global-warming-industry) writes about the embarrassing predictions that haunt the global-warming industry.

It makes for very interested reading ( I copy and paste the full article below)

His opening paragraph:
It is often said that non-scientists must rely on “expert opinion” to determine whether claims on alleged “catastrophic man-made global warming” are true. Putting aside the fact that there is no global-warming “consensus” among experts, one does not have to be a scientist, or even proficient in science, to be able to review past predictions, and then form an informed opinion regarding the accuracy of those predictions. Suppose, for example, you regularly watch a local TV weatherman forecast the weather for your area. Would you need a degree in meteorology in order to decide for yourself how reliable, or unreliable, the weatherman’s forecasts are?

Alex's researched premise is, that so far, not one of the hundreds of predictions our well paid scientists have forecast in the last 50 - 60 years have come to actually pass. The most famous of those failed predictions (remember - perfectly scientifically researched) was the time (early 1970's) when our experts said that Scotland would be under permafrost by the year 2000 to 2010 due to global cooling. I do remember the time this was announced and the furore and changes it caused in Europe. Well - here in in late 2016 - I am still waiting for any evidence of that scientifically fore-casted event in Scotland to materialize.

More from Alex:  
(Another jester) - From White House Science “Czar” John Holdren. “A growing body of evidence suggests that the kind of extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States as we speak is a pattern we can expect to see with increasing frequency, as global warming continues,” he claimed. That assertion, of course, is exactly the opposite of what the UN “settled science” IPCC predicted in its 2001 global-warming report, which claimed that the planet would see “warmer winters and fewer cold spells, because of climate change.” Ironically, perhaps, Holdren warned decades ago that human CO2 emissions would lead to a billion deaths due to global warming-fuelled global cooling — yes, cooling, which he said would lead to a new ice age by 2020.

Most alarmingly though (and yes I have experienced this myself) is Alex's  closing paragraph:
Few people would make an important decision based on next week’s weather forecast. When it comes to “climate,” though, the $360 billion-per-year climate establishment is telling humanity that civilization must be reorganized from top to bottom based on failed models purporting to make predictions decades and even centuries in advance. Flawed predictions aside, a great deal of evidence suggests accuracy or truth was never the intent — generating fear to seize more money and power was (and is). Many top alarmists have admitted as much, with some responding to the implosion of their theories with calls for censorship or, more extreme still, the imprisonment, re-education, and even execution of “climate deniers.”

The Earth’s climate has always changed, and very likely will continue to change, regardless of what humans do. What is now clear, though, is that the establishment has no idea what those changes will be — much less what drives the changes or how to control them.


So - anyone brave to read this rant from this old bear  --- I dare you to go and start a conversation with anyone you care to choose - really - anyone, and state categorically that you do not believe in man made climate change and be prepared for the fireworks!

Thus the court jester has stepped beyond his role - and just like biblical David who replaced Saul as King- so have our modern day climate scientists become our masters despite the fact that to-date they have failed to accurately forecast any global climate event!!

With some scientists and yes some politicians calling for censorship or, more extreme still, the imprisonment, re-education, and even execution of “climate deniers" is it any wonder that many Sceptics keep their own council??

Actually they have to make these calls - it is after all their new gained status as king that is at stake . . . . . . .

God help us all



bear print








Here is the full text from Alex:

It is often said that non-scientists must rely on “expert opinion” to determine whether claims on alleged “catastrophic man-made global warming” are true. Putting aside the fact that there is no global-warming “consensus” among experts, one does not have to be a scientist, or even proficient in science, to be able to review past predictions, and then form an informed opinion regarding the accuracy of those predictions.
Suppose, for example, you regularly watch a local TV weatherman forecast the weather for your area. Would you need a degree in meteorology in order to decide for yourself how reliable, or unreliable, the weatherman’s forecasts are?
Warnings have been issued for many decades now regarding catastrophic climate change that forecasted certain trends or occurrences that we should already have witnessed. Yet such predictions have turned out to be very, very wrong. This was certainly the case with the alarmist predictions of the 1960s and ’70s that man’s activities on Earth were causing a catastrophic cooling trend that would bring on another ice age. And it is also the case with the more recent claims about catastrophic global warming.
What follows is a very brief review of these predictions compared to what actually happened.
Global Cooling?
Americans who lived through the 1960s and ’70s may remember the dire global-cooling predictions that were hyped and given great credibility by Newsweek, Time, Life, National Geographic, and numerous other mainstream media outlets. According to the man-made global-cooling theories of the time, billions of people should be dead by now owing to cooling-linked crop failures and starvation.
“If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but 11 degrees colder by the year 2000,” claimed ecology professor Kenneth E.F. Watt at the University of California in 1970. “This is about twice what it would take to put us in an ice age.” Of course, 2000 came and went, and the world did not get 11 degrees colder. No ice age arrived, either.
In 1971, another global-cooling alarmist, Stanford University professor Paul Ehrlich, who is perhaps best known for his 1968 book The Population Bomb, made similarly wild forecasts for the end of the millennium in a speech at the British Institute for Biology. “By the year 2000 the United Kingdom will be simply a small group of impoverished islands, inhabited by some 70 million hungry people,” he claimed. “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000 and give ten to one that the life of the average Briton would be of distinctly lower quality than it is today.” Of course, England still exists, and its population was doing much better in 2000 than when Ehrlich made his kooky claims. But long before 2000, Ehrlich had abandoned global-cooling alarmism in favor of warning that the Earth faced catastrophic global warming. Now he is warning that humans may soon be forced to resort to cannibalism.
To combat the alleged man-made cooling, “experts” suggested all sorts of grandiose schemes, including some that in retrospect appear almost too comical to be real. “Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climate change, or even to allay its effects,” reported Newsweek in its 1975 article “The Cooling World,” which claimed that Earth’s temperature had been plunging for decades due to humanity’s activities. Some of the “more spectacular solutions” proposed by the cooling theorists at the time included “melting the arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers,” Newsweek reported.
Of course, the big alleged threat hyped in recent decades has been global warming, not global cooling. But the accuracy of the climate-change predictions since the cooling fears melted away has hardly improved.
United Nations “Climate Refugees”
In 2005, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) warned that imminent sea-level rises, increased hurricanes, and desertification caused by “man-made global warming” would lead to massive population disruptions. In a handy map, the organization highlighted areas that were supposed to be particularly vulnerable in terms of producing “climate refugees.” Especially at risk were regions such as the Caribbean and low-lying Pacific islands, along with coastal areas.
The 2005 UNEP predictions claimed that, by 2010, some 50 million “climate refugees” would be frantically fleeing from those regions of the globe. However, not only did the areas in question fail to produce a single “climate refugee,” by 2010, population levels for those regions were actually still soaring. In many cases, the areas that were supposed to be producing waves of “climate refugees” and becoming uninhabitable turned out to be some of the fastest-growing places on Earth.
In the Bahamas, for example, according to the 2010 census, there was a major increase in population, going from around 300,000 in 2000 to more than 350,000 by 2010. The population of St. Lucia, meanwhile, grew by five percent during the same period. The Seychelles grew by about 10 percent. The Solomon Islands also witnessed a major population boom during that time frame, gaining another 100,000 people, or an increase of about 25 percent.
In China, meanwhile, the top six fastest growing cities were all within the areas highlighted by the UN as likely sources of “climate refugees.” Many of the fastest-growing U.S. cities were also within or close to “climate refugee” danger zones touted by the UN
Rather than apologizing for its undisputable mistake after being first exposed by reporter Gavin Atkins at Asian Correspondent, the global body responded in typical alarmist fashion: with an Orwellian coverup seeking to erase all evidence of its ridiculous predictions. First, the UNEP took its “climate refugees” map down from the Web. That failed, of course, because the content was archived online prior to its disappearance down the UN “memory hole.
Then the UNEP tried and failed to distance itself from the outlandish claims, despite the fact that the map was created by a UNEP cartographer, released by UNEP, and repeatedly hyped by the outfit in its scaremongering campaigns. Eventually, as more and more media around the world began picking up the story, a spokesperson for the UN agency claimed the map was removed because it was “causing confusion.”
It was hardly the first time UN bureaucrats had made such dire predictions, only to be proven wrong. On June 30, 1989, the Associated Press ran an article headlined: “UN Official Predicts Disaster, Says Greenhouse Effect Could Wipe Some Nations Off Map.” In the piece, the director of the UNEP’s New York office was quoted as claiming that “entire nations could be wiped off the face of the earth by rising sea levels if global warming is not reversed by the year 2000.” He also predicted “coastal flooding and crop failures” that “would create an exodus of ‘eco-refugees,’ threatening political chaos.”
Other UN predictions were so ridiculous that they were retracted before they could even be proven wrong. Consider, as just one example, the scandal that came to be known as “Glaciergate.” In its final 2007 report, widely considered the “gospel” of “settled” climate “science,” the UN IPCC suggested that Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035 or sooner. It turns out the wild assertion was lifted from World Wildlife Fund propaganda literature. The IPCC recanted the claim after initially defending it.
Pentagon Climate Forecasts
Like the UN, the Pentagon commissioned a report on “climate change” that also offered some highly alarming visions of the future under “global warming.” The 2003 document, entitled “An Abrupt Climate Change Scenario and Its Implications for United States National Security,” was widely cited by global-warming theorists, bureaucrats, and the establishment press as evidence that humanity was facing certain doom. It also served as the foundation for the claim that alleged man-made “climate change” was actually a “national security concern.” However, fortunately for the taxpayers forced to pay for the study, the Pentagon report turned out to be just as ridiculous as the UN “climate refugees” forecasts.
By now, according to the “not implausible” scaremongering outlined in the report for a 10-year time period, the world should be a post-apocalyptic disaster zone. Among other outlandish scenarios envisioned in the report over the preceding decade: California flooded with inland seas, parts of the Netherlands “unlivable,” polar ice all but gone in the summers, and surging temperatures. Mass increases in hurricanes, tornadoes, and other natural disasters were supposed to be wreaking havoc across the globe, too. All of that would supposedly spark resource wars and all sorts of other horrors. But none of it actually happened.
The Pentagon report even claimed there was “general agreement in the scientific community” that the extreme scenarios it envisioned could come to pass, and reporters treated it as if it were a prophecy delivered to climate sinners by God Himself. However, when interviewed by the Washington Times for a June 1, 2014 article, consultant and report co-author Doug Randall expressed surprise at how often the now-debunked forecasts were parroted. Yet he still defended the hysterical fear peddling. “When you are looking at worst-case 10 years out, you are not trying to predict precisely what’s going to happen but instead trying to get people to understand what could happen to motivate strategic decision-making and wake people up,” Randall said. “But whether the actual specifics came true, of course not. That never was the main intent.”
The first article about the climate report appeared in early 2004, when the report was leaked to the U.K. Observer, under the sensationalistic title: “Pentagon tells Bush: climate change will destroy us.” In a bullet-point summary at the top of the Observer article, journalists Mark Townsend and Paul Harris added: “Secret report warns of rioting and nuclear war” and “Britain will be ‘Siberian’ in less than 20 years.” The rest of the article was just as outlandish, going even beyond what the now-discredited Pentagon report claimed. Other reporters took their cue from the Observer article, which in retrospect would have been a hilarious piece of writing if it had not been taken so seriously at the time.
No More Snow?
For well over a decade now, climate alarmists have been claiming that snow would soon become a thing of the past. In March 2000, for example, “senior research scientist” David Viner, working at the time for the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia, told the U.K. Independent that within “a few years,” snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event” in Britain. “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” he was quoted as claiming in the article, headlined “Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past.”
The very next year, snowfall across the United Kingdom increased by more than 50 percent. In 2008, perfectly timed for a “global warming” legislation debate in Parliament, London saw its first October snow since 1934 — or possibly even 1922, according to the U.K. Register. “It is unusual to have snow this early,” a spokesperson for the alarmist U.K. Met office admitted to The Guardian newspaper. By December of 2009, London saw its heaviest levels of snowfall in two decades. In 2010, the coldest U.K. winter since rec­ords began a century ago blanketed the islands with snow.
In early 2004, the CRU’s Viner and other self-styled “experts” warned that skiing in Scotland would soon become just a memory, thanks to alleged global warming. “Unfortunately, it’s just getting too hot for the Scottish ski industry,” Viner told The Guardian. Another “expert,” Adam Watson with the Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, told the paper that the skiing industry in Scotland had less than two decades left to go. Yet in 2013, too much snow kept many Scottish resorts closed. “Nevis Range, The Lecht, Cairngorm, Glenshee and Glencoe all remain closed today due to the heavy snow,” reported OnTheSnow.com on January 4, 2013. Ironically, by 2014, the BBC, citing experts, reported that the Scottish hills had more snow than at any point in seven decades. It also reported that the Nevis Range ski resort could not operate some of its lifts because they were “still buried under unprecedented amounts of snow.”
The IPCC has also been relentlessly hyping the snowless winter scare, along with gullible or agenda-driven politicians. In its 2001 Third Assessment Report, for example, the IPCC claimed “milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms.” Again, though, the climate refused to cooperate. The year 2013, the last year for which complete data is available, featured the fourth-highest levels on record, according to data from Rutgers University’s Global Snow Lab. Spring snow cover was the highest in a decade, while data for the fall indicate that it was the fifth highest ever recorded. Last December, meanwhile, brought with it a new high record in Northern Hemisphere snow cover, Global Snow Lab data show.
Blame Global Warming?
After the outlandish predictions of snowless winters failed to materialize, the CRU dramatically changed its tune on snowfall. All across Britain, in fact, global-warming alarmists rushed to blame the record cold and heavy snow experienced in recent years on — you guessed it! — global warming. Less snow: global warming. More snow: global warming. Get it? Good.
The same phenomenon took place in the United States just last winter. As record cold and snowfall was pummeling much of North America, warming theorists contradicted all of their previous forecasts and claimed that global warming was somehow to blame. Among them: White House Science “Czar” John Holdren. “A growing body of evidence suggests that the kind of extreme cold being experienced by much of the United States as we speak is a pattern we can expect to see with increasing frequency, as global warming continues,” he claimed.
That assertion, of course, is exactly the opposite of what the UN “settled science” IPCC predicted in its 2001 global-warming report, which claimed that the planet would see “warmer winters and fewer cold spells, because of climate change.” Ironically, perhaps, Holdren warned decades ago that human CO2 emissions would lead to a billion deaths due to global warming-fueled global cooling — yes, cooling, which he said would lead to a new ice age by 2020.
Ridiculous forecasts have been made by other “climate scientists” who, like Holdren, continue to reap huge amounts of U.S. taxpayer dollars in salaries, grants, and benefits despite being consistently wrong. James Hansen, for instance, who headed NASA’s Goddard Institute for three dec­ades before taking a post at Columbia University, is one of the best known “climatologists” in the world — despite his long and embarrassing record of bad forecasting spanning decades.
In 1988, Hansen was asked by journalist and author Rob Reiss how the “greenhouse effect” would affect the neighborhood outside his window within 20 years (by 2008). “The West Side Highway [which runs along the Hudson River] will be under water,” Hansen claimed. “And there will be tape across the windows across the street because of high winds. And the same birds won’t be there. The trees in the median strip will change.... There will be more police cars … [since] you know what happens to crime when the heat goes up.” In 1986, Hansen also predicted in congressional testimony that the Earth would be some two degrees warmer within 20 years. In recent years, after the anticipated warming failed to materialize, alarmists have cooled on predicting such a dramatic jump in temperature over such a short period of time.
Separately, another prominent alarmist, Princeton professor and lead UN IPCC author Michael Oppenheimer, made some dramatic predictions in 1990 while working as “chief scientist” for the Environmental Defense Fund. By 1995, he said then, the “greenhouse effect” would be “desolating the heartlands of North America and Eurasia with horrific drought, causing crop failures and food riots.” By 1996, he added, the Platte River of Nebraska “would be dry, while a continent-wide black blizzard of prairie topsoil will stop traffic on interstates, strip paint from houses and shut down computers.” The situation would get so bad that “Mexican police will round up illegal American migrants surging into Mexico seeking work as field hands.”
When confronted on his failed predictions, Oppenheimer, who also served as former Vice President Al Gore’s advisor, refused to apologize. “On the whole I would stand by these predictions — not predictions, sorry, scenarios — as having at least in a general way actually come true,” he claimed. “There’s been extensive drought, devastating drought, in significant parts of the world. The fraction of the world that’s in drought has increased over that period.” Unfortunately for Oppenheimer, even his fellow alarmists debunked that claim in a 2012 study for Nature, pointing out that there has been “little change in global drought over the past 60 years.”
Arctic Ice
Perhaps nowhere have the alarmists’ predictions been proven as wrong as at the Earth’s poles. In 2007, 2008, and 2009, Al Gore, the high priest for a movement described by critics as the “climate cult,” publicly warned that the North Pole would be “ice-free” in the summer by around 2013 because of alleged “man-made global warming.”
Speaking to an audience in Germany five years ago, Gore — sometimes ridiculed as “The Goracle” — alleged that “the entire North Polarized [sic] cap will disappear in five years.” “Five years,” Gore said again, in case anybody missed it the first time, is “the period of time during which it is now expected to disappear.”
The following year, Gore made similar claims at a UN “climate” summit in Copenhagen. “Some of the models … suggest that there is a 75 percent chance that the entire north polar ice cap, during some of the summer months, could be completely ice-free within the next five to seven years,” Gore claimed in 2009. “We will find out.”
Yes, we have found out. Contrary to the predictions by Gore and fellow alarmists, satellite data showed that Arctic ice volume as of summer of 2013 had actually expanded more than 50 percent over 2012 levels. In fact, during October 2013, sea-ice levels grew at the fastest pace since records began in 1979. Many experts now predict the ongoing expansion of Arctic ice to continue in the years to come, leaving global-warming alarmists scrambling for explanations to save face — and to revive the rapidly melting climate hysteria.
Gore, though, was hardly alone in making the ridiculous and now thoroughly discredited predictions about Arctic ice. Citing climate experts, the British government-funded BBC, for example, also hyped the mass hysteria, running a now-embarrassing article on December 12, 2007, under the headline: “Arctic summers ice-free ‘by 2013’.” In that piece, which was still online as of July 2014, the BBC highlighted alleged “modeling studies” that supposedly “indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years.” Incredibly, some of the supposed “experts” even claimed it could happen before then, citing calculations performed by “super computers” that the BBC noted have “become a standard part of climate science in recent years.”
“Our projection of 2013 for the removal of ice in summer is not accounting for the last two minima, in 2005 and 2007,” claimed Professor Wieslaw Maslowski, described as a researcher from the Naval Postgraduate School who was working with co-workers at NASA to come up with the now-thoroughly discredited forecasts about polar ice. “So given that fact, you can argue that may be [sic] our projection of 2013 is already too conservative.” (Emphasis added.) Other “experts” quoted in the BBC article agreed with the hysteria.
In the real world, however, the scientific evidence demolishing the global-warming theories advanced by Gore, the UN, and government-funded “climate scientists” continues to grow, along with the ice cover in both hemispheres. In the Arctic, for example, data collected by Europe’s Cryosat spacecraft pointed to about 9,000 cubic kilometers of ice volume at the end of the 2013 melt season. In 2012, which was admittedly a low year, the total volume was about 6,000 cubic kilometers.
Indeed, in 2007, when Gore and others started making their predictions about imminent “ice-free” Arctic summers, the average sea-ice area extent after the summer melt for the month of September was 4.28 million square kilometers. By 2013, even on September 13, the minimum ice-cover day for the whole year, ice levels were way above the 2007 average for the month — by an area almost the size of California. The lowest level recorded on a single day during 2013 was 5.1 million square kilometers. By late July 2014, Arctic sea-ice extent was almost at its highest level in a decade, and scientists expect even less melting this summer than last year.
Despite parroting the wild claims five years ago, the establishment press has, unsurprisingly, refused to report that Gore and his fellow alarmists were proven embarrassingly wrong. No apologies from Gore have been forthcoming, either, and none of the “scientists” who made the ridiculous predictions quoted by the BBC has apologized or lost his taxpayer-funded job. In fact, almost unbelievably, the establishment press is now parroting new claims from the same discredited “experts” suggesting that the Arctic will be “ice-free” by 2016.
Antarctic Ice
Even more embarrassing for the warmists have been trends in the Southern Hemisphere. Of course, all of the “climate models” and “climate experts” and “scientists” predicted that rising CO2 emissions would increase global temperatures, which would melt the ice in Antarctica — by far the largest mass of frozen H2O on the planet. Indeed, the forecasts were crucial to many of the other predictions about surging sea levels and related gloom and doom.
The problem for global-warming theorists is that the opposite happened. Indeed, sea ice in Antarctica is off the charts, consistently smashing previous record highs on a near-daily basis. Sea-ice area in the south is now at the highest point since records began — by a lot — and the warmists are searching frantically for an explanation. Some are, incredibly, considering their past forecasts, trying to blame global warming. But the fact remains: Their predictions for Antarctica were as wrong as they possibly could be. Instead of melting as forecasted, ice levels are surging to new and unprecedented heights. As of early July, an area of the southern oceans the size of Greenland is frozen that, based on the average, should currently be open waters. If both poles are considered together, there is about one million square kilometers of frozen area above and beyond the long-term average.
Even UN warmists have been forced to concede that they do not know what is going on or why their “climate models” that predicted melting have been proven so wildly off the mark. “There is low confidence in the scientific understanding of the observed increase in Antarctic sea ice extent since 1979, due to … incomplete and competing scientific explanations for the causes of change,” the IPCC admitted in its latest report. For now, the warmists have simply been trying their best to keep the public from noticing or examining the phenomenal growth in Antarctic ice.
As The New American reported earlier this year, the desperation and denial among warmists was illustrated perfectly in December. A ship full of global-warming alarmists led by a “climate scientist” went on a mission to study how “global warming” was melting Antarctic ice. Instead of completing their mission, they ended up getting their vessel trapped in record-setting levels of sea ice.
Obama Claims
In his second-term inaugural address, Obama also made some climate claims, saying: “Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires and crippling drought and powerful storms.” Ironically, all three of the examples he provided of what he called the “threat of climate change” actually discredit his argument.
As Forbes magazine pointed out last year, the number of wildfires has plummeted 15 percent since 1950, and according the National Academy of Sciences, that trend is likely to continue for decades. On “droughts,” a 2012 study published in the alarmist journal Nature noted that there has been “little change in global drought over the past 60 years.” The UN’s own climate alarmists were even forced to conclude last year that in many regions of the world, “droughts have become less frequent, less intense, or shorter.”
Regarding hurricanes and tornadoes, it probably would have been hard for Obama to choose a worse example to illustrate the alleged threat of man-made warming. Contrary to predictions by global warmists, hurricanes and tornadoes have been hitting in record-setting low numbers. “When the 2014 hurricane season starts it will have been 3,142 days since the last Category 3+ storm made landfall in the U.S., shattering the record for the longest stretch between U.S. intense hurricanes since 1900,” noted professor of environmental studies Roger Pielke, Jr. at the University of Colorado, who last year left alarmists who had predicted more extreme weather linked to alleged global warming silent after pointing out the facts in a Senate hearing. “The five-year period ending 2013 has seen two hurricane landfalls. That is a record low since 1900.” After adjusting the data for trends such as population growth and better reporting, it appears that 2013 also featured the lowest number of tornadoes in the long-term record.
In June 2008, Obama declared: “I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children … this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal.” He was referring, of course, to his own election, as if he were some sort of savior here to save humanity from its carbon-climate sins. In the real world, though, despite his grandiose and bombastic view of himself as global climate messiah, Obama has no more power to stop the “climate” from changing than his legions of discredited “experts” have demonstrated to successfully predict it.
Also ironically, perhaps, is that there had been no global warming since long before he took office. Worldwide, the disastrous forecasts by climate alarmists have proven to be similarly embarrassing. By now, anybody who follows “climate” news knows that “global warming” has been on what alarmists call “pause” for 18 years and counting, despite ongoing increases in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere. The stubborn refusal of temperatures to rise (and accelerate) as forecasted by all of the UN’s 73 “climate models” has discredited the models, the UN, and the alleged “science” behind the computer forecasts. Every single model predicted more warming than has occurred, an atrocious record that defies explanation. Even a monkey rolling the dice or a scam artist pretending to read the future from a crystal ball would have a better record, based only on the laws of probability.
Of course, alarmists have come up with at least a dozen excuses for the failure of temperatures to rise in accordance with their debunked models. The Obama administration’s favorite: the theory of “The Ocean Ate My Global Warming.” Last year, the Associated Press, citing leaked documents, reported that the U.S. government had pressured the UN IPCC to incorporate that excuse, for which there is not a scintilla of observable evidence, into its most recent global-warming report.
A Prediction
The website Watts Up With That (WUWT), run by meteorologist and climate researcher Anthony Watts, highlighted the embarrassing record in late 2013 following a particularly devastating year for “climate” predictions. “It seems like every major CAGW [Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming] prediction has failed in 2013,” the article explains, citing a vast trove of scientific data debunking alarmist forecasts. “Regardless of efforts to nebulize CAGW to explain all forms of climatic and weather variation, in 2013 every loosely falsifiable prediction of the CAGW narrative seems to have failed. The apparent complete failure of the CAGW narrative in 2013 could make the most fundamentalist agnostic wonder if Mother Nature sometimes takes sides, aka the Gore Effect.” Perhaps the Almighty has a sense of humor.
Few people would make an important decision based on next week’s weather forecast. When it comes to “climate,” though, the $360 billion-per-year climate establishment is telling humanity that civilization must be reorganized from top to bottom based on failed models purporting to make predictions decades and even centuries in advance. Flawed predictions aside, a great deal of evidence suggests accuracy or truth was never the intent — generating fear to seize more money and power was (and is). Many top alarmists have admitted as much, with some responding to the implosion of their theories with calls for censorship or, more extreme still, the imprisonment, re-education, and even execution of “climate deniers.”
The Earth’s climate has always changed, and very likely will continue to change, regardless of what humans do. What is now clear, though, is that the establishment has no idea what those changes will be — much less what drives the changes or how to control them.












Thursday, December 3, 2015

How Rudolph the red nose reindeer saves time . . . .

Thursday, December 3, 2015 0
oldbearnews editor

Quit possibly the most famous reindeer - and he does it again!!!












 bear print

The legend of the spider in the Christmas tree

oldbearnews editor








A poor but hard-working widow once lived in a small hut with her children. One summer day, a pine cone fell on the earthen floor of the hut and took root. The widow's children cared for the tree, excited at the prospect of having a Christmas tree by winter. The tree grew, but when Christmas Eve arrived, they could not afford to decorate it. The children sadly went to bed and fell asleep.
Early the next morning, they woke up and saw the tree covered with cobwebs. When they opened the windows, the first rays of sunlight touched the webs and turned them into gold and silver. The widow and her children were overjoyed. From then on, they never lived in poverty again.


A variant of this story goes like this:

A long time ago in Germany, a mother was busily cleaning for Christmas. The spiders fled to the attic to escape the broom. When the house became quiet the spiders slowly crept downstairs for a peek. Oh what a beautiful tree!
In their excitement they scurried up the trunk and out along each branch. They were filled with happiness as they climbed amongst the glittering beauty.
But alas! By the time they were through climbing, the tree was completely shrouded in their dusty grey spider webs.
When Santa Claus came with the gifts for the children and saw the tree covered with spider webs, he smiled as he saw how happy the spiders were, but knew how heartbroken the mother would be if she saw the tree covered with the dusty webs. So he turned the webs to silver and gold. The tree sparkled and shimmered and was even more beautiful than before.

That's why we have tinsel on our tree and every tree should have a Christmas spider in it's branches !



The origins
of the folk tale are unknown, but it is believed to have come from either Germany or Ukraine.   In Germany, Poland, and Ukraine, finding a spider or a spider's web on a Christmas tree is considered good luck. Ukrainians also create small Christmas tree ornaments in the shape of a spider (known as pavuchky, literally "little spider"), usually made of paper and wire. They also decorate Christmas trees with artificial spider webs. The tradition of using tinsel is also said to be because of this story.

It may be based on an older European superstition about spiders bringing luck (though not black spiders in Germany),  or conversely that it is bad luck to destroy a spider's web before the spider is safely out of the way first.


Have fun



 bear print

Thursday, October 8, 2015

Wednesday, September 2, 2015

LOCAL MAYOR REFUSES TO REMOVE PORK FROM SCHOOL CANTEEN MENU AND EXPLAINS WHY.

Wednesday, September 2, 2015 0
oldbearnews editor




 There is this thing doing the rounds on social media
see below:

LOCAL MAYOR REFUSES TO REMOVE PORK FROM SCHOOL CANTEEN MENU  AND EXPLAINS WHY.
Muslim parents have demanded the abolition of pork in all the school canteens of a Montreal suburb. It seems it is offensive to the Muslim families and shows much disrespect.
The mayor of the Montreal suburb of Dorval, has refused, and the town clerk sent a note to all parents in the municipality to explain why.

The following is what the note stated:
“Muslims must understand that they have to adapt to Canada and Quebec, its customs, its traditions, its way of life, because that is where they chose to immigrate. They must understand that they have to integrate and learn to live in Quebec. They must understand that it is for them to change their lifestyle, not the Canadians who so generously welcomed them.” “They must understand that Canadians are neither racist nor xenophobic, they accepted many immigrants before Muslims (Whereas the reverse is not true, in that ALL Muslim states do not accept non-Muslim immigrants.).
“They must also understand that, no more than other nations, Canadians are not willing to give up their identity nor their culture. And if Canada is a land of welcome, it is not just the Mayor of Dorval who welcomes foreigners, but the Canadian-Quebecois people as a whole. “ “Finally, they must understand that in Canada (Quebec) with its Judeo-Christian roots, Christmas trees, churches and religious festivals, religion must remain in the private domain. Therefore, the municipality of Dorval was right to refuse any concessions to Islam and Sharia.” “For Muslims who disagree with secularism and do not feel comfortable in Canada, there are 57 beautiful Muslim countries in the world, most of them under-populated and ready to receive them with open halal arms in accordance with Shariah law. If you left your country for Canada, and not for other Muslim countries, it is because you have considered that life is better in Canada than elsewhere. So, ask yourself the question, just once, “Why is it better here in Canada than where you come from?”
“A canteen with pork is part of the answer.”



I went and did some research and it turns out first of all that there is an earlier version of this letter for a Belgium town.  This  mayor in Belgium is on public record that no letter of request has ever been received by their council  let alone a reply sent. This was some 3 years back.

So I been thinking why is this still doing the rounds on social media??

Immigration is a hot topic - not just for Europe who at this point in time certainly faces a flood of willing immigrants. Other countries suffer from this too and it is no co-incidence that this is a problem by modern western and shall we say 'well-to-do' (not wanting to call them rich) countries?!
America is having issues with Mexico and here down under we have migrants from the Pacific / Asia countries as well.
Nor is it a particularly NEW issue. For decades Greeks and Turks  have wanted to live and work in Northern Europe - simply because the economic situation (or the ability to earn more money there then "at home"!

I guess this particular hoax touches on a deeply buried nerve on universal Hospitality.  Take out the specific words like Muslim and replace with a generic version and so forth and the issue becomes a bit clearer.
In the olden days - those days when humans where less then a hart-beat away from its monkey ancestor, there would have been huge gaps of land before you would meet the next local tribe - regular connections between other humans was just - well - rare.  Thus the concept of hospitality was gradually forged - one of offering food and shelter to another human being that crossed your path no matter what.  This was done on an instinctive understanding that one day you might be in the same position - of being "on the road" and in need of shelter / food / comfort.

In the process both parties gained new insights and perhaps skills, an exchange of ideas on how to make things better - such as your bow and arrow -  or hunting techniques - or well, whatever.   Thus the offer of food / shelter was seen not only beneficial to your immediate needs but also to your knowledge base.
Very seldom was hospitality denied.  Obviously if your tribe of 20 people faced a horde of mean looking to the teeth armed army of 200 plus then the situation might be a bit different . . . 

However = usually both parties gave freely, and accept uncritically "other-ness" as being equally valid.

We get into difficulty if one party is starting to set terms.
Terms such as - "only my way of doing things is the correct way"!
When one party demands that their needs / customs are to be respected above everything or anyone else.  It doesn't matter which party this is - host or hostee!
It does work both ways - for the thing it touches on is respect for the other person, on validating the other party OR lack thereof.
For example when you ask me to take my shoes of when entering your house you are asking me to respect your space and customs.  When you hold a gun to my head and say shoes off or else - then you want my submission - and there is a big difference.

THUS

the article above (hoax as it is) is touching on hospitality and respect and acceptance for or better of each other.  The moment one side demands concessions,  it has lost the plot.  Guess that is why it still doing the rounds on social media . . . . .  

If this was a real life situation I would expect that there would be a school canteen that serves not only pork but also Halal meals and then both sets of communities have a equal choice . . . 

sighs

seems so simple

Have fun



bear print

Sunday, August 23, 2015

Some common phrases, sayings, with their meanings and origins explained

Sunday, August 23, 2015 0



oldbearnews editor I used to discuss these prior to the internet with history teachers - now you can find this stuff on the internet! wohooo

Ever wondered why we say some things - like being piss poor? Wonder no more:


They used to use urine to tan animal skins, so families used to all pee in a pot and then once a day it was taken and sold to the tannery.......if you had to do this to survive you were "Piss Poor"

But worse than that were the really poor folk who couldn't even afford to buy a pot......they "didn't have a pot to piss in" and  were the lowest of the low

The next time you are washing your hands and complain because the water temperature isn't just how you like it, think about how things used to be.

Here are some other facts about the 1500s:

Most people got married in June because they took their yearly bath in May, and they still smelled pretty good by June.. However, since they were starting to smell . ...... . Brides carried a bouquet of flowers to hide the body odor. Hence the custom today of carrying a bouquet when getting Married.

Baths consisted of a big tub filled with hot water. The man of the house had the privilege of the nice clean water, then all the other sons and men, then the women and finally the children. Last of all the babies. By then the water was so dirty you could actually lose someone in it.. Hence the saying, "Don't throw the baby out with the Bath water!"

Houses had thatched roofs-thick straw-piled high, with no wood underneath. It was the only place for animals to get warm, so all the cats and other small animals (mice, bugs) lived in the roof. When it rained it became slippery and sometimes the animals would slip and fall off the roof... Hence the saying "It's raining cats and dogs."

There was nothing to stop things from falling into the house. This posed a real problem in the bedroom where bugs and other droppings could mess up your nice clean bed. Hence, a bed with big posts and a sheet hung over the top afforded some protection. That's how canopy beds came into existence.

The floor was dirt. Only the wealthy had something other than dirt. Hence the saying, "Dirt poor." The wealthy had slate floors that would get slippery in the winter when wet, so they spread thresh (straw) on floor to help keep their footing. As the winter wore on, they added more thresh until, when you opened the door, it would all start slipping outside. A piece of wood was placed in the entrance-way. Hence: a thresh hold.

In those old days, they cooked in the kitchen with a big kettle that always hung over the fire.. Every day they lit the fire and added things to the pot. They ate mostly vegetables and did not get much meat. They would eat the stew for dinner, leaving leftovers in the pot to get cold overnight and then start over the next day. Sometimes stew had food in it that had been there for quite a while. Hence the rhyme: Peas porridge hot, peas porridge cold, peas porridge in the pot nine days old. Sometimes they could obtain pork, which made them feel quite special. When visitors came over, they would hang up their bacon to show off. It was a sign of wealth that a man could, "bring home the bacon." They would cut off a little to share with guests and would all sit around and chew the fat.
Those with money had plates made of pewter. Food with high acid content caused some of the lead to leach onto the food, causing lead poisoning death. This happened most often with tomatoes, so for the next 400 years or so, tomatoes were considered poisonous.

Bread was divided according to status. Workers got the burnt bottom of the loaf, the family got the middle, and guests got the top, or the upper crust.

Lead cups were used to drink ale or whisky. The combination would sometimes knock the imbibers out for a couple of days. Someone walking along the road would take them for dead and prepare them for burial.. They were laid out on the kitchen table for a couple of days and the family would gather around and eat and drink and wait and see if they would wake up. Hence the custom of holding a wake.

England is old and small and the local folks started running out of places to bury people. So they would dig up coffins and would take the bones to a bone-house, and reuse the grave. When reopening these coffins, 1 out of 25 coffins were found to have scratch marks on the inside and they realized they had been burying people alive... So they would tie a string on the wrist of the corpse, lead it through the coffin and up through the ground and tie it to a bell. Someone would have to sit out in the graveyard all night (the graveyard shift.) to listen for the bell; thus, someone could be, saved by the bell or was considered a dead ringer.
And that's the truth....Now, whoever said History was boring?

Some more --

When getting married the groom and bride would physically be tied by their hands with a rope for the full day - thus signalling to everyone they are lawfully bound together as husband and wife - whence the "tying the knot".   In later years this practice became burden-some  so the priest would lay the stole of his robe on the (holding) hands of groom and bride at the ceremony to symbolize the 'tying the knot'  and we often talk about that "band of gold" (wedding ring) that ties us.  When a prospective groom went to ask the future father-in-law for the "hand-in-marriage" for his daughter, he was in fact asking for permission to "tie the knot.

In parts of Africa the wedding ceremonies to different customs altoghter.
In some villages the females, when becoming of marrying age, would make a special broom of certain branches and then lean said broom against the door frame of her hut.  Any male brave enough to "jump the broomstick" was then deemed forever living in the hut and tied to the female.  The broom stick then would be used to sweep the floor.  When things turned sour the female would physically break the broomstick and and toss it out into the yard - everyone then knew that this relationship was over.



On Salt
You might think of salt as nothing more than the inexpensive stuff that tastes good sprinkled on French fries and popcorn, but in fact it’s far more than just a seasoning and has a long history as a highly prized substance. Today, there are reportedly more than 14,000 known uses for salt. Not only does the human body need it to function properly, but salt also is utilized for everything from producing chemicals to de-icing roads.

Before the days of artificial refrigeration, the main method for preserving food was to treat it with salt. In this way, salt came to represent power; without it, armies couldn’t travel great distances and explorers couldn’t sail to new lands because their provisions would spoil. Throughout the ages, a variety of cultures also used this mineral in ceremonies and religious rituals. For many centuries, until salt deposits were discovered throughout the world and extraction methods improved, salt was scarce, which made it more valuable. Mozart's Birthplace was Salzburg - a town built on Salt (Salz) extraction nearby and the resulting salt trade

In some ancient societies, roads and cities developed as a result of the salt trade.
The expression to be worth one’s salt, which means you’re competent and deserve what you’re earning, is most often said to have its roots in ancient Rome, where soldiers were sometimes paid in salt or given an allowance to purchase it. The word salary is derived from the Latin “salarium,” which originally referred to a soldier’s allowance to buy salt. 


Getting the sack
This comes from the days when workmen carried their tools in sacks. If your employer gave you the sack it was time to collect your tools and go.


White elephant
White elephants were once considered highly sacred creatures in Thailand—the animal even graced the national flag until 1917—but they were also wielded as a subtle form of punishment. According to legend, if an underling or rival angered a Siamese king, the royal might present the unfortunate man with the gift of a white elephant. While ostensibly a reward, the creatures were tremendously expensive to feed and house, and caring for one often drove the recipient into financial ruin. Whether any specific rulers actually bestowed such a passive-aggressive gift is uncertain, but the term has since come to refer to any burdensome possession—pachyderm or otherwise.



 bear print

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Things I have eventually learned

Wednesday, August 19, 2015 0
oldbearnews editor What I have learned:
It has been a while - have been busy - so here are some thoughts


Thoughts on our Life 
 
I've learned.... life is like a roll of toilet paper. The closer it gets to the end, the faster it goes.

I've learned.... that the best classroom in the world is at the feet of an elderly person.

I've learned.... that when you're in love, it shows.

I've learned.... that just one person saying to me, "You've made my day!" makes my day.

I've learned.... that having a child fall asleep in your arms is one of the most peaceful feelings in the world.

I've learned.... that being kind is more important than being right.

I've learned.... that you should never say no to a gift from a child.

I've learned.... that I can always pray for someone when I don't have the strength to help him in some other way.

I've learned.... that no matter how serious your life requires you to be, everyone needs a friend to act goofy with.

I've learned.... that sometimes all a person needs is a hand to hold and a heart to understand.

I've learned.... that simple walks with my father around the block on summer nights when I was a child did wonders for me as an adult.

I've learned.... that we should be glad God doesn't give us everything we ask for.

I've learned.... that money doesn't buy class.

I've learned.... that it's those small daily happenings that make life so spectacular.

I've learned.... that under everyone's hard shell is someone who wants to be appreciated and loved.

I've learned.... that even the Lord didn't do it all in one day. What makes me think I can?

I've learned.... that to ignore the facts does not change the facts.

I've learned.... that love, not time, heals all wounds.

I've learned.... that the easiest way for me to grow as a person is to surround myself with people smarter than I am.

I've learned.... that everyone you meet deserves to be greeted with a smile.

I've learned.... that opportunities are never lost; someone will take the ones you miss.

I've learned.... that when you harbor bitterness, happiness will dock elsewhere.

I've learned.... that I wish I could have told my Grandma that I love her one more time before she passed away.  

I've learned.... that one should keep his words both soft and tender, because tomorrow he may have to eat them.

I've learned.... that a smile is an inexpensive way to improve your looks.

I've learned.... that I can't choose how I feel, but I can choose what I do about it.

I've learned.... that when your newly born grandchild holds your little finger in his little fist, that you're hooked for life.

I've learned.... that everyone wants to live on top of the mountain, but all the happiness and growth occurs while you're climbing it.

I've learned.... that the less time I have to work with, the more things I get done




Cheers



 bear print

Friday, June 12, 2015

Mystery explosions solved - does long dead volcano become alive again??

Friday, June 12, 2015 0
oldbearnews editor



As you know - we had a rather large earthquake in Christchurch and that February  shake did do some decent damage to the area.  As you probably also know - Christchurch is the largest city in the South Island of New Zealand, and the country's third-most populous urban area. It lies one third of the way down the South Island's east coast,   just north of Banks Peninsula (ok so that part is the important part here).  wohooo
Banks Peninsula forms the most prominent volcanic feature of the South Island. Geologically speaking, the peninsula comprises the eroded remnants of two large composite shield volcanoes (Lyttelton formed first, then Akaroa), and the smaller Mt Herbert Volcanic Group. These formed due to intraplate volcanism between approximately eleven and eight million years ago (Miocene) on a continental crust. The peninsula formed initially as offshore islands, with the volcanoes reaching to about 1,500 m above sea level. Two dominant craters formed Lyttelton and Akaroa Harbours. The portion of crater rim lying between Lyttelton Harbour and Christchurch city forms the Port Hills.  Actually Banks Peninsula comprises 15 volcanic vents/cones - not 3. These have not been active for 6 million years and the subduction zone and 'hot spot' that made their creation possible has long since moved away - much like the Hawaiian chain islands of extinct volcanoes.  So they say . . . . .
So naturally when we had the 6.2 earthquake one of the most often questions asked was: is the volcano coming alive again?!  Common consensus  until that point in time was - no chance - it is extinct  and has been so for some long time. 

Further our GNS scientists here in NZ have tested the hot springs around Banks Peninsula post-quakes.  The chemical composition of that water is not that which would indicate volcanic activity/source.  The massive amount of liquefaction and earthquakes that Christchurch has experienced has caused changes in our water table and natural spring levels but again nothing indicating volcanic activity or presence of magma. 

See this link and read the story there:  http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/christchurch-earthquake/5183064/Lyttelton-eruption-not-possible

However in the last few months there have been "mystery explosions" and deep rolling boom sounds recorded in the eastern part of town.  The hot springs tested - have also  been noted to be - well - hotter.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/67417742/Mystery-big-explosion-in-Christchurch

Further - I lost count how many aftershocks we have experienced since Feb 2011 but it is fair to say it is in excess of 3000.


So guess what was observed today - urm - yesterday??  One gigantic enormous steam-cloud being spewed forth from the crater rim, rising vertically  several hundred meters before it flattened  out.  Steam - which means water had to be heated by magma and find its way up and out.   It was a impressive sight for sure!
I tried to ring the local Geonet people who intially did take my call - but then laughed this off - and hung up.  Subsequent phone calls were ignored.  I think they may have put me on a barred list.  Sighs
Luckily for me - I had my camera with the long lens with me at the time, so was able to take urm - 'an evidence - photo'.  

Leaving work later in the afternoon and taking another look - by then the steam had dissipated - so I guess the volcano run out of - urm - steam?? Or was it puff??
Either way -  Banks Peninsula may be declared as dead volcanoes, now I am not so sure anymore . . . . .

Have fun


 bear print

Thursday, March 19, 2015

Shark-hunting bear goes home - or at least tries to

Thursday, March 19, 2015 0




 The day dawned nice and red - and so were some eyes! Not from the crying but from the lack of sleep - seems the flight pattern changed and the planes came in to land - more or less over our heads - until the small hours!!

Not being in a hurry we stayed in bed for a bit - but eventually had to get up.  Saw the young lady from the 4wheel drive in the morning - she looked ok - if still very grumpy.  Hmmmm anyhow - we did what we had to do - breakfast and so forth - then actually packed our bags and cleaned up the Camper van.  We were ready by mid-morning - in no real rush but eventually decided it was better to drop of the van and head to the airport - so we closed doors and belted up and put keys in the ignition - and --- nothing.  WHAT?!?!?!?!
Pulls key out, re-inserts key and turns and - *cough* nothing.  Not a peep / sound engine noise - just - - nothing!

Mild panic rising!!


One call to the camping ground folks - who are only 10 km across the airport - who said to ring road-side assistance - who said - we send you a Mercedes mechanic - if he hasn't turned up in an hours time - please ring back.
I did contemplate jump-starting the van myself - but mid morning the camp-site was deserted - everyone must be out in town and even though the useless car manual pointed where things should be, the battery itself was in a completely different space (and found after a bit of detective work by the mechanic) !! 
The chap did turn up - right on an hour later.  He tested and jump started us - and long story short - the Battery is a dud!!  Just as well he came - and gave us a paper that made it all official.  Could not stop anywhere for top-up of Diesel so had to make our way to the rental place and explain the situation there.  They were good - waiving the fill up (around 20 Liters).

From there to Sydney Airport and unlike here in Christchurch we could check in our bags early - leaving us free to roam.  We then discovered there is a direct train link to the middle of town and we checked watches and decided we could make that - only to be thwarted by the train tickets - seems we run out of cash.
Ah well
Time to sit and relax at the airport and catch a plane home.
Time to wind up for Mondays work
Time to do last minute shopping at the airport.
Time to reflect on what we have seen / tasted /experienced.

First up - the wild life.
    We never saw a single shark on any watery course ( and those in a tank do not count) - so there went the hunt south
    We never saw a crocodile either - even though the Park/Zoo we visited had one on display - it must have been hiding!  Am told later that it is too cold for them south of Brisbane.
    We did not come across a snake or spider or any other harmful critter either.  We are sure they exist - it's just they made a biiiiig be-line around us!! Smart move on their part.
    We did see some interesting other wildlife (and humans).  The birds (the feathered ones) are so different and colorful and - yes - very noisy.  Mamabear in particular thrilled to have wild kangaroo skipping past our Camper-van on some occasions.
    ANTS - they are EVERYWHERE.  Literally. I kid you not. They have to out-number any other living creature in Australia by a factor of at least 10000.  In one camping ground we saw a regular highway of ants going up a tree to who knows what for.  They were going up in 4 lanes wide - AND coming down in two lanes! A 6 lane ant highway!!   No wonder the birds had a feast right next to our Camper-van!!  I contemplated taking a pic - but realized the small ants and focus and . . . . .
    Koalas - saw them only at the sanctuary.  Seems they have it best - sleeping most of the day!  Inspiring stuff.
    Possums - would you believe it - they are "protected" in Australia as a species.  Seriously?!  They are a major unwanted pest here in NZ - carrying TB and stripping the leaves of the trees and also raiding the nests of our native birds.
    Farming - inland before you get to the 'outback' is a lot of farmland - but we saw very little cow's or sheep, unlike in NZ where you see them everywhere.  The land is just soooo vast - I am sure they just spread further apart . . .
    Weather - we had fabulous sunny warm days - with Brisbane being almost too hot. Along with that come the extreme storms and we saw in Coff's Harbour how much the pacific can dump if it so pleases!
    Plant-life - you think Australia - dessert - right?!?! Gum trees and cactus!  It also has a rain forest!  It is naturally different to the one here in NZ - and I am sure different to any other part in the world, and yet it does exist! 
    Time -  we are so used to daylight savings and our sun setting at 9pm or later
during summer, and to sit outside at 6.30pm having our dinner in darkness - took some getting used to.
    People - very friendly and helpful in Brisbane - nothing was too much trouble and you felt very welcome.  This diminished the further south we got. 
    Food - some stuff just divine (especially some hunter valley wines).  And everything is larger/bigger/fuller then in New Zealand. Not sure if the warmer longer sunnier days have got something to do with that.  Also there is a huge variety of fruit due to its tropical climate.  If you love food - go there - it has an amazing range of color/taste/size available.
    Road-safety - we think we have it tough - wait till you met a traffic officer in NSW. . . . .
    Patriotism - I am sure NZ is just as passionate about their country as our Western Island cousins are about theirs.  They however seem to be able to show it more openly.  We saw more flags flying and represented in towels etc etc then  here.  Then again - we have the All Blacks, who needs a flag . . . . 
     Multicultural - Sydney in particularly was noticeable - so many people from so many different cultures.  One thing above that, that stood out - a casual observation Asians seem to be around 40% of the population.  Not sure if that bears out in their census data, as I said - it is just an observation, but as a ethnic group they stood out.

Anyhow - will we go back - probably?! When - who knows?!?!
First up we have a weekend in Tekapo (my Birthday treat) - then my sister is talking about coming out from Europe and we haven’t spent any time lately in our favorite spot - the Coromandel, and further, Mamabear really wants to spend a week or two in Cook Islands . . . .
Hmmmm we better win Lotto soon . . . . .

Anyhow - arrived home well after midnight and just fell into bed. 

Have fun



 bear print
 
◄Design by Pocket