Post by Joachim Of Fiore on Jul 9, 2022 8:58:57 GMT 8
Great that there is this awakening going on in Holland. I am finding myself too disturbed to figure out what the problem is about. "Nitrogen Emissions" is an insane problem to worry about since nitrogen is the single most abundant gas in the atmosphere. So what are they talking about? They must surely mean nitrogen oxides or ammonia. The use of the Orwellian "nitrogen" doesn't seem to be mere shorthand. It seems like a stock deep state tactic to maintain a high level of confusion. Like substituting "global warming" for CO2 emissions. Usually you would want fixed nitrogen to get into your soils. If the nitrogen were coming out as animal manures you simply want this mixed into the soil. If its too rich then you want more carbon in the soil and getting that balance right will soak up extra nitrogen compounds. But this assumes a healthy soil bacterial and fungal life, which may not be where all Dutch farming is at, given there incredibly intensive land use.
So what is the drama? Is it too many nitrogen gasses escaping to the atmosphere? Have surrounding countries been complaining? If its not too strong it ought not be too much of a problem. I would have thought the UV light would split these molecules up. Or is the alleged problem to do with these compounds over-fertilising ocean water and thereby leading to too much growth of algae's sucking oxygen supply out of the nearby sea? Something of this nature? We are not seeing clear explanations of what the alleged problem is.
But here is the thing. Holland, tiny that it is, is the second largest agricultural exporter. So if you want to create global hunger thats a pinch point right there. Whatever one thinks about intensive farming, and I don't really approve of it for us here in Australia, the reality is if you want to create grave hunger, put the clamps down on food exports and watch the people crushed under high food prices. The target then isn't the Dutch farmer. Sure the deep state hates middling farmers like shit on their shoes. The real target is people struggling to feed themselves generally.
Post by Joachim Of Fiore on Jul 9, 2022 9:28:56 GMT 8
Here is an OECD Aussie gimp seeding the alleged nitrogen problem 3 years ago. He lists five problems and the first he links is pretty obvious bullshit. He links nitrogen (oxides and ammonia) pollution to particulates pollution. Thats bullshit right there and does Holland have air pollution problems? Air pollution problems disturbing its neighbours? No I think quite the contrary. I think they run a pretty clean shop and for an highly urbanised area, the most densely populated country in Europe I would have thought, there air is relatively clean. So what else does the OECD gimp complain about? This asshole simply makes the rhetorical equivalence between particulate pollution, a real problem, with the lesser problem of odourless non-particulate gasses that can be split up by UV once they mix high enough. So the real problem is particulates. They have linked this real problem rhetorically to their deep state target.
His next point is about overfertilisation of ocean areas leading to dead zones. So before we had a problem not related to nitrogen oxides. And here we have a problem that is indeed related to nitrogen oxide runoffs. So the question is do we have these dead zones off the coast of Holland yes or no? See I don't think we do. Holland is mostly below sea level. So the problem is likely contained. So I think they are lying here.
Next he talks about soil pollution. But mostly the problem is with soil with not enough nitrogen. Not the other way around. If this were a problem in Holland they couldn't grow anything and would have to deal with it with extra carbon in the soil as mentioned in the earlier post. In practice this will be bullshit and the problem will be almost exclusively with damaging waterways. Which is a specific problem which can be addressed in specific fashion.
He talks about nitrous oxide being a powerful greenhouse gas. So you know. Total bullshit from the start. Don't need to go into that. Greenhouse gasses probably warm a tiny bit at night, but only near the ground and only when the air is dry. And what could possibly be wrong with that? But when they mix above the troposphere they have to be presumed to be a net cooler, as he admits inadvertently later when he claims that NO2 absorbs UV light. If it absorbs UV light in the stratosphere thats thermal energy that won't make it to ground level. So his criticism here is incoherent. One doesn't wish for this cooling effect since one wants some UV light hitting the ground. But needless to say his characterisation of the threat is pure idiocy.
Then he claims the NO2 is damaging the ozone layer. But if Ozone protects the ground by absorbing UV light, then what the flying fuck is NO2, by his own admission doing? So more incoherent criticism. The one must substitute for the other so its "a wash" as the Americans say.
So really all we are left with, when it comes down to it, is dead zones off the coast. That is it. A specific problem to be dealt with by specific methods.
So I think we can say right here that all our suspicions have been confirmed. This is clearly and directly a deep state plot to drive food prices up. Holland is merely collateral damage in the wider goal of starving people via international food prices. There is a case to be made to fix up these dead zones and thats it.
Post by Joachim Of Fiore on Jul 9, 2022 9:52:25 GMT 8
Here is the gimp again and it turns out he's a New Zealand gimp. The clouds are beginning to part and the true nature of this scam is shining through. What we have here is PROBLEM SUBSTITUTION. We have the real problem of dead zones. But through a dishonest process, these guys have substituted a fake need for NATIONAL NITROGEN BUDGETS. So then they would seem to have placed this artificial problem on Holland and demand that they meet some kind of arbitrary NITROGEN BUDGET. Thats all that is happening here.
Now how do we deal with this dead zone problem? Very slowly. Very cost-effectively. We try and contain the nitrogen in the soil where it belongs, And stop it going into the water. But how do we clear up the dead zones? We start with a very slow very low-level budget for removing algae, and turning it into fertliser. If you close a few government departments, and start with a minimal daily cash allowance, given enough time, you can get a very efficient, streamlined communist operation where algae is turned into fertiliser and taken deep inland via rail. Maybe in 30 years time some entrepreneurs can leapfrog off this slow cost-effective process and integrate this production chain into the free enterprise network, and so thats when the problem gets solved. Some algaes are so micronised they can be turned into jet engine fuels. But all ocean algaes contain vital minerals that have been robbed from the land but are abundant in the ocean. Its part of the duty of the human race to bring those nutrients back deep into the centre of the continents.
In permaculture ideology the problem is the solution. This excessive growth can be turned into a fantastical benefit. But it cannot be done quickly. It must not be done using debt or excessive spending.
Post by Joachim Of Fiore on Jul 9, 2022 11:33:13 GMT 8
While its true a problem isn't properly solved until its fully integrated into the free enterprise network, still it remains the case that libertarian ideology is getting in the way of solving problems long term. Because there is this horrific obstruction of anything that requires slow long-term action. For example if anyone mentioned a 5-year-plan or a 50 year plan all these alleged libertarians would cry STALIN or look, he's Chairman Mao!!! Then their brains go kind of dark and the successful derailing of the problem has been achieved.