Jump to content

Grumpy Owl

Members
  • Posts

    5,261
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    21

Posts posted by Grumpy Owl

  1. 23 hours ago, jois said:

     The issues isn't the sea ice.its the ice on land that would increase sea levels.

     

    Greenland however will rise several metre's when the ice goes we can all go and live there

    Seriously if in the unlikely event that happened all though we would loose land. The habitable land in the world would increase as long as you don't mind living in Siberia

     

    Regarding the ice/snow on the land, this would only cause an issue if there was a sudden and immense increase in temperature that caused all this ice and snow to melt instantaneously and turn into water. Yes, instant flood, and sea levels rise as the formerly frozen water rushes down into the seas.

     

    But if you look at glaciers, consider them as 'frozen rivers'. And don't forget that water expands as it freezes, so the volume of water actually carried in these glaciers will be less than it looks.

     

    Also consider that as glaciers slowly melt, a lot of the meltwater will naturally just soak down into the ground too.

     

    Think about the number of times you may have had a huge amount of snowfall in your garden, yet your garden doesn't get flooded when the snow melts away.

    • Like 1
  2. On 9/15/2022 at 6:00 PM, sickofallthebollocks said:

    If this is possibly true, are we looking at something beyond imagination happening on 22nd, 23rd or 24th September?  I hope not, please forgive me for dooming, that is definately not my thing, I remember in October 2020 people here in the UK shitting themselves over an asteroid hitting and a load of people I knew literally took to the hills.  I thought, fuck it, if it's true then take me away, bollocks to all this.  Obviously it turned out not to be true.
    But this one?  I find it highly strange that this has been spoke about so long ago even by those that work to enslave us.  I hope I'm wrong.
    Either way - I'm getting my own backpack full of stuff ready just in case?  I knew I should have built an Ark?

     

    I have certainly seen references recently to something 'big' to occur between September 23rd and 25th, there's another thread here where it was claimed that a Carrington-style coronal mass ejection (CME) will strike the Earth on the 23rd, though I do find those sorts of claims quite doubtful.

     

    However I am simply taking the opinion that nothing of note will actually happen on these dates, and that there are 'certain people' trying to social engineer people into 'believing' that 'something bad will happen'.

     

    As David Icke himself says, if we do indeed manifest our own reality based on our own beliefs and perceptions, be mindful of those trying to alter your beliefs and perceptions.

     

    The old saying of course is "be careful what you wish for".

    • Like 8
  3. 8 hours ago, allymisfit said:

    I have an app called Nextdoor and it's a way of speaking to those who live around you. Good for reporting lost pets etc. I don't use Facebook, so it's quite handy for me. 

     

    NextDoor is a 'local social network'. I joined my local neighbourhood there a couple of years ago now, I quit after it became infiltrated with people pushing agenda/propaganda talking points. It's just as bad as Facebook in my opinion, 77th Brigade agents everywhere it seems!

    • Like 2
  4. On 9/12/2022 at 8:55 PM, oddsnsods said:

    They are running out of lithium for the battle against climate bollocks.🤤 Greta is not amused.

     

    'We don’t have enough' lithium globally to meet EV targets, mining CEO says https://finance.yahoo.com/news/lithium-supply-ev-targets-miner-181513161.html

     

     

    Maybe this is a cue to 'discover' a vast source of lithium somewhere "off-world"? Perhaps on the moon, or in one of the asteroids beyond Mars.

     

    Thus then begins a new race for investors to funnel billions into 'projects' to 'get that damned lithium here'.

     

    7 hours ago, k_j_evans said:

    So the plebs can't drive cars as there aren't enough to go round. Where's the problem? All part of the plan

     

    And in the meantime, you end up with a classic supply/demand problem, if such electric vehicles cannot be mass-produced, then they will never become as 'affordable' as petrol/diesel vehicles, thus they remain expensive and only affordable to the wealthy.

    • Like 1
  5. On 9/10/2022 at 6:00 AM, masonfreeparty2 said:

     

    I started to have some doubts about that Electroverse site some time back now.

     

    The headline claims that this CME 'will' hit Earth on the specified date, yet if you actually read the article and the paper quoted, it does say "This short paper forecasts the next Solar Storm".

     

    A forecast is just that, a prediction, and not a statement of fact.

     

    You get the same tedious shit parrotted by the mainstream media whenever the Met Office puts out a warning about a bit of wind/rain/snow/sunshine. "Exact time snow will fall..." etc, and in most cases it never happens.

     

    In my opinion, its pretty difficult to know if such a 'Carrington-style CME' is going to happen, not until it does.

  6. 5 hours ago, sickofallthebollocks said:

    Tell us something new - we know sunscreen is well dodgy?  I don't know about you - but I always felt headachey after putting any of this stuff - especially over the face?
    There is some better organic stuff around, but - as alot of you here are aware - this stuff is probably a mjor factor in alot of skin cancer cases:
    https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/banana-boat-sunscreen-recalled-due-cancer-causing-chemical

     

     

    This really needs a thread of its own, if there already isn't one. David Icke once claimed in one of his books (forget which one) that it was the suntan lotion that caused the skin cancer, not the sun.

     

    I stopped using sunscreen a few years ago, though to be fair I was never a regular user of the stuff anyway, apart from maybe when I was on holiday in 'hot sunny countries'.

    Even after liberally plastering myself with sunscreen, I'd still somehow end up burned somewhere.

     

    What I learned that the sun lotions were also doing, is that they act as a filter for UV rays - the UV rays your skin needs so that the melanin can produce vitamin D.

     

    So people are literally plastering themselves in "anti-vitamin D shield", which contains numerous other chemcials that get absorbed into the skin, yet it is the sun that causes the skin cancer!

     

    • Like 3
  7. 2 hours ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

     

    I'm not sure that I agree. There are plenty of articles criticizing her role in things like colonialism. Nobody is forced to support the royals like they're some supreme leaders like Kim Jong-un either.

     

    But that is itself just another aspect of the 'narrative/agenda pushing'.

     

    4 hours ago, Tinfoil Hat said:

    I agree. And we wondered why so many fell for the jab BS - there's little doubt now that it's because many are fooking bonkers!

     

    It's all social engineering / behavioural 'messaging'.

     

    Especially on social media, people really are just 'sheep', and will do whatever they are told, no matter how insignificant. For example, Facebook did its usual trick of "why not add this frame to your profile picture" and many people I know just went along with it. Then you have of course all the big companies and brand-names "going black" with their cover photos, or posting up RIP images of the Queen.

     

    "Everybody else is doing it, so should we" - seriously I had to stop myself for a moment as even I was considering a short RIP post on our work's social media account. It did feel briefly like I was being hypnotised, but luckily I managed to snap out of it.

     

    Social engineering, behavioural messaging, the 'nudge effect', psychological manipulation, call it what you will. This is what we're all up against.

    • Like 5
  8. 1 hour ago, Steven Tansell said:

    Do we actually know, beyond a shadow of doubt, that he really is dead? He had money, and heavy political clout, plus a fair amount of blackmail footage I'd imagine! Maybe some poor sap took the drop for him, and now he's on some pedo island somewhere alongside McAlpine, Max Clifford, Grevile Janner etc. It seems funny how 'dying suddenly' seems to be a popular get out of gaol card these days!🤨

     

    • Thanks 1
  9. 3 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

    yup...see its the perfect precursor to the event 201 covid scamdemic

     

    hit the public with flu jabs and then call the adverse reactions 'covid'

    Last weekend, I started suffering with cold-like symptoms, which I attributed to hay-fever, and most of this week I've had a nasty chesty cough which I presume is some kind of chest infection.

     

    I've never been 'jabbed', and I know this isn't 'Covid' because... I've had this before in the past, several times, going back to my childhood. In fact, last time I had this was in December 2019, just before Christmas...

  10. It's true, so many websites being disappeared down the memory hole, mainly because either:

     

    1 - Google doesn't think the content is 'relevant' or 'appropriate' (ie it doesn't suit the narrative/agenda)

    2 - you haven't paid enough to get your keywords 'boosted' in search results.

     

    Basically, search results are just another 'advertising platform' where results are sold off to the highest bidders.

     

    image.png.0d0127965f29a763460fb16094402ba9.png

     

     

    image.png.a473607b3ba738a4354dd02b37d11a10.png

  11. 30 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

    i'm in david's camp that we shouldn't have a monarchy, i'm just a little wary about what we replace it with and feel we should be looking to build up to that problem from the ground up to guard against the wrong outcome

     

    I agree, I'm always mindful of the saying "be careful what you wish for".

     

    I've always envisaged replacing the monarchy with a 'true peoples' republic' - the United Kingdom becoming the British Union or 'Republic Of Great Britain'. Led by an elected President of course. But the downside is that unless proper mechanisms were put in place, you'd end up like the USA, where it is the same 'chosen ones' from the Royal bloodlines that would end up as 'British President', so in which case nothing much would really change.

    • Like 2
  12. 1 hour ago, Macnamara said:

    There are two reasons why i don't feel jubilant about liz dying

     

    firstly is from a completely practical perspective that what has actually changed in terms of us gaining greater freedom? All that has happened is that the baton has been passed from one old reptilian consciousness person who at least we never heard a peep out of except once a year when she gave a speech at christmas, which i never listened to anyway, to her younger son who is much more vocal and who we know is fully onboard with the whole great reset agenda? Nothing has actually changed for the better here. Charles is a meddling so and so who has written lots of letters to people in positions of influence seeking to influence them.

     

    Charles has been waiting years for this opportunity. Despite what he said in his recent speech, I expect his reign as King will see him taking on a more 'hands-on' approach, with him becoming more 'involved' and continuing his 'influencing'.

     

    41 minutes ago, numnuts said:

    It's Prince William we want to worry about. Regardless of whether he is actually a freemason, or just a fellatioer of, matters not. He is their man. Charles won't abdicate the throne, which will be William's role. I wouldn't be surprised, if Charles gets bumped off somehow, in the next few years. This would be because it's hard to complete the denationalisation of the U.K., in the mass consciousness of the general public, with a monarchy still in place.

     

    I can't find the article now as the Birmingham Mail are spamming their own news homepage with incessant stories about the Queen, Charles, the state funeral etc. But there was some short piece where someone was predicting that King Charles III could be one of the shortest-lived monarchs the UK has known. Which I found a bit strange - given the timing, as Charlie had only just been officially announced as King - how would they know or even begin to predict?

     

    I also can't find the story from today about someone being arrested by police for jumping over a barrier in front of Charles.

     

    I think Charles will be allowed a few years as King, to push his masters' green agenda, and then maybe 'ill health' or some assassination attempt will see King William crowned.

     

    Or maybe it will be the case that Charles will be the last monarch of this country.

    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1
  13. 32 minutes ago, Sit down, Waldo said:

    The symbolism at the funeral is going to be off the scale.

     

    Good job I won't be watching then! 😆

     

    I see the date is now confirmed as Monday 19th September. I'll likely either work from home, or go and hang out with the geese down the park. 🦆

  14. 18 minutes ago, Anti Facts Sir said:

    How many more business will go under. 

     

    From what I can gather, nobody is being forced to close up shop, or to cancel any organised events.

     

    It's pretty much business as usual as far as I am concerned.

    • Like 1
  15. 3 minutes ago, Shy Talk said:

    According to official stats 1 in 2 people in the UK will suffer from cancer at some point in their lives. When was the last time we heard of a Royal with cancer? Margaret? They have an enviable record when it comes to the Big C. Are the rumours about there being a cure true?

     

    The Royals live a lifestyle where they want for nothing. They seem to escape cancer because they don't have to put themselves through what the rest of us 'ordinary' people have too.

     

    I don't know about a 'cure' for cancer, but I don't believe cancer is what we have all been led to believe it is.

     

     

    • Like 3
  16. It occurred to me the other day, that even in my own relatively brief lifespan on this planet, there's definite patterns of cycles to be seen, as long as you know how to look for them.

     

    The UK gets a female prime minister, at the same time the US has a senile President.

     

    1120459920_YmgHE2mVscVxAIXIUarXcFuJVjqpmfEKF8pHuR9MhMbwi2vEtqZcNU0s0-d-1234752405.jpg.f868cb68253ae5318d533fab9328db01.jpg

    US President Joe Biden meets UK Prime Minister Liz Truss... oh wait...

     

    "Tensions with Russia"

     

    Unions in the UK are taking 'strike action', walking out demanding fairer pay increases.

     

    The UK even has a new monarch, King Charles III, well good luck with that if you remember what happened with previous English kings named Charles. 🙄

     

    (Charles III's current prime minister Liz Truss has history as an anti-monarchist - cough cough Oliver Cromwell)

     

     

     

    • Like 2
  17. 13 minutes ago, Morpheus said:

    There's no way she passed yesterday. They announced it yesterday but I'd bet my mortgage that she didn't die yesterday. 

     

    There was a discussion on this in another thread here, worth looking back at now to avoid any repetition in this one:

    What I find strange is this:

    On Monday, Liz Truss travelled to Balmoral to be appointed as Prime Minister.

    There are question marks about the photo that appeared in the newspapers being 'photo-shopped'.

    Despite being a bit old and frail - hence why she was 'unable' to travel to London - Queen appears to be 'fine' and smiling in that photo.

    Three days later, Queen takes a turn for the worse, and passes away.

     

    If that photo is real and not photo-shopped, perhaps it was taken a while ago?

     

    Maybe that's why some parts of the media had already pretty much decided that Truss was the prime minister, before the Tory party members had finished posting in their ballot papers.

    Because it had all been arranged and 'rehearsed' before-hand?

     

     

    • Like 7
  18. 16 minutes ago, alexa said:

     

    I wouldn't be at all surprised if Charly hands over the kingship to Will's.

     

    I doubt that. Charles has waited so long for this to happen, he's not likely to abdicate any time soon.

     

    If its any consolation, at the ripe age of 73 already, his reign won't be for too long. Perhaps there will be another change of monarch within my lifetime!

  19. 19 hours ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

    I like the fact that he is now adopting dissident Right talking points by talking about the dangers of too much legal immigration, not just illegal. That being said, I believe that he is only acting as a pressure release valve because he senses that Brits are getting angry about Britain losing its identity.

     

    Ultimately, I don't trust him because of his stance on the vaxx, and because he shares some of Blair's views on digital IDs.

     

    He's an opportunist.

     

    Yes, I agree that he acts as a 'pressure release valve', but mainly for the benefit of the Tories.

     

    When he was with UKIP, he was all about getting the UK out of the EU, and for a period of time it looked like UKIP could become a serious threat to the Establishment parties.

     

    But no, of course once the Tories promised and delivered the referendum that UKIP had been demanding for years, he considered it "job done" and left UKIP, leaving others to try and pick up the pieces and keep the momentum going. For whatever reason, that never happened, and the final straw for me was when he turned round and urged UKIP members and supporters alike to "back Boris".

     

    He then hijacked and took over the Brexit Party - he never set this party up himself despite some claims he made - just so he and his ex-UKIP cronies could get re-elected as MEPs, couldn't give up that gravy train after all!

     

    He has a show on GB News, which should tell you all you need to know about that channel too.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...