Boudica was the icean queen whose husband died and left a will, which the Romans asserted gave them control over the Icean lands. Boudica said otherwise, and for her refusal to hand over her territory, the Romans whipped her and raped her daughters.

Thus it came to pass in ~61AD, that whilst the Roman Governor was in NW Wales fighting the Welsh, and some British druids who had fled there, Boudica along with other tribes started a war of independent against Roman control.

The Fake Story

The general lead up to the events is accepted, but then it all gets ridiculous. Because some academic in the last millennium decided that the Roman governor of Britain galloped down Watling Street to London (the Roman road from Wales), took one look at the situation in London, and then (ignoring the text that says he was looking for a “seat of war” and had to be encouraged to “put off delay”, the academic asserted the Roman governor, took one look at London and immediately fled to safety … not doubt galloping again … not toward Rome, the natural direction of any Roman seeking refuge, but toward Wales and into the heart of Britain where he would be surrounded by hostile peoples only recently slaughtered to conquer by the Romans.

Thus that appalling academic then asserted that Boudica’s last battle must be along Watling Street. It was the work of a madman, and all the more insane because it was eagerly seized upon by British academic Roman Scholars as the authoritative account.

And, ever since then, the idiots have been working out detailed timelines of the days that followed and  just how far someone could gallop up Watling street and then looking for signs of some magical battle site along the line of Watling Street. The battle was “in a valley” … so there probably isn’t a single valley up Watling Street that didn’t get suggested as the likely site.

And, then metal detectors arrived … and people started combing these sites looking for the evidence of battle … and they found none. Continue reading →

Yesterday, I made huge and unexpected progress on my project … a bit like climbing mount Everest and sitting down to rest, and then finding a door going up higher. It really shouldn’t be possible!

And, the world moved one step closer to peace, and the EU continued to fall apart … except now they admit it no longer functions as a block of any importance.

Or to put it another way, those who were democratically elected with huge popular support against the wishes of the controlled media, like Putin and Trump, worked as the only grown ups** in the Ukrainian room toward peace, whereas the children of the controlled media threw an enormous tantrum.

**I’d include Hungary, Belarus, and perhaps a few others who want peace.

A while back when researching what Stonehenge might have been used for, I wanted to know “how often can a sunrise be seen from a location like Stonehenge”. Given how many people have commented on Stonehenge and it’s alignment to the Sunrise/set, I assumed that there would be plenty of data on sunrises/sets, and I could easily get, or at least estimate the chances of seeing a sunrise/set. But, apparently there was absolutely no research, nor even a definition of “seeing a sunrise” that I could use.

Given that People have been viewing sunrises and sunset since the dawn of the human line, it seemed a shortcoming. But, perhaps no one had thought to record it.

Today, I found another unanswered question. What is the average or most frequent note of music, or if you prefer western music, or even a subset of western music. It seemed a fairly easy question. There are numerous music scores available, and all one need do, is to count the notes and get a statistical spread and come up with the result. It could possibly be done as a School Kid’s project. Yet, no one has done it and no one knows the answer.

I try not to follow US politics after their appalling and evil support for genocide and ethnic cleansing by Israeli of the original population of Palestine. However, the confirmation of RFK junior is noteworthy, because, except for his support for the evil that is Israel, he has his heart and hopefully his mind in the right places.

In particular, something has got to be done to tackle the epidemic of obesity in the US, which I think is down to components in their diet like modified corn syrup which should be treated like an addictive drug.

Likewise Big Pharma who knowingly pushed a covid jab that clearly did no good and a lot of harm. It is therefore very likely the same is true of many other “vaccines”. I would not trust Big Pharma with my health, nor any doctor who hasn’t called out their appalling behaviour.

A simple question. One that if I asked it before the election of two tier Kier would have seemed pretty pointless to most people, because what on earth did it matter what Reform’s policy on the BBC was, when they had no chance of forming the next government.

But I said Labour would collapse within two years. No one agreed with me, just as no one agreed with me that Johnson was going to go when he started pushing the Nut Zero policy. Just as no one agreed that the Tories would lose the last election (something I predicted when the Tories were still well ahead in opinion polls, years before the election).

I said Labour would crash, no one agreed with me … indeed some said I was barmy, and just a few months later, Reform is now ahead of the other two parties. With the economy getting worse, and therefore likely to boost Reform even further, there is a real prospect of Reform as the next government.

I can’t say Reform will definitely form the next government … because since the election of the evil Starmer, I’ve not been following UK politics at all. Not unless it makes news abroad. It’s too painful to watch the deliberate destruction of Britain clapped on by BBC morons.

Likewise I’ve not listened or looked at the BBC for ages, but there is no doubt that they will be beginning to ask themselves whether they still want to antagonise the party that could be the next government. There are many who want to scrap the BBC altogether. The BBC kept them out of power, but now the BBC know that a Reform government could very well decide to close down the BBC.

The BBC might wonder how did it all came to this?

The answer is simple: “I told you Nut Zero was economic suicide and any party that pushed it, was going to get slaughtered.” It’s just a simple fact of economics … it isn’t evolutionary science! Nut zero destroys the economy. And, whether people recognise it as such or not, a wrecked economy from Nut Zero is a massive vote loser. Yet first the Tories and then Labour pushed Nut Zero suicide, and now they are getting slaughtered just as I predicted.

OK, I’d have preferred sane politicians who never embraced the insanity of Nut Zero, but given we did get these insane politicians, second best is to boot them all out.

Under Bidem and the Corruption of USAID, we were close to Nuclear war many times. In other words, another stupid move by Bidem-deepstate  and incompetence and lies of the west created a slippery slope which would have taken us into an escalating series of tit for tat moves down which the world would have slid with only nuclear war at the bottom. The world was only saved from this entering this slide to Nuclear war because of the quality of leadership in Russia.

That particular threat (Bidem) has gone, the US deep state has had some of a its feathers trimmed (but by no means all). But, whilst we might not be walking along the cliff edge as we did during Bidem’s tyranny, where any one small mismovement would have put us on a path to global nuclear war, that does not mean the threat has gone.

Trump may be nearly as good a leader as Putin … indeed, if he wasn’t so easily led by the Israeli lobby, I might be prepared to consider the possibility he is better. But Bidem, the deep state and the Israeli lobby have taken the world to the cliff edge of nuclear war, and it is now very difficult for either Putin or Trump to step back … especially as Israel’s land grab has and is pushing the world closer and closer to WWIII and nuclear conflict.

So, whilst the immediate threat has massively reduced, the fact is, the evil and corruption of the last years may have set the world onto a course where nuclear war is inevitable. But, at least we will see a build up manoeuvring that gives us time to prepare … not a sudden lied-about “mistake” of a corrupt and incompetent leader “leading” almost immediately to global death …. before most of the public had even the faintest idea that they were being lied to about what was happening (the situation under Bidem).

I was envisaging the complexity of economic constraints, as some change from virtuous to vicious cycle. A constraint is something like Energy .. or people & diversity of ideas, without which the economy cannot grow.

Enerconics is a way to describe an economy measured by energy where energy takes a similar role to money in “economics”. Many rules are the same, but the one key rule is that energy cannot be created … it is a flow subject to the laws of physics … not the rate at which money can be created.

So, if there are many virtuous and vicious cycles, when these constrain the economy, they can behave like energy when it constrains the economy. As such we might have “Gallium-economics” for an economic model where Gallium (as an example) is a constraint on economic output (not growth … constraints also lead to shrinkage).

So, I wanted a way to describe an economy where there are many small things that can and do constrain it. Hence “Many-conomy”. Where the small things matter and money does not.

Which, then made me wonder … but humans are also a constraint, so shouldn’t I also have “maneconomy?” And, then I realised, that one of the key economic constraints is diversity of ideas.

Today, the Totalitarianism of Google is creating a brainwashed generation with no ideas of their own. You listen to one google brainwashee … you’ve heard all the ideas of all google brainwashees. There is no reason to talk to more than one … they are boring. Which made me realise, that we are already in a vicious cycle of decline intellectually. We might have more access than any previous generation to information … but there is now a total clampdown on thinking. It is now a severe constraint … which is bound to lead to economic stagnation.

Google is not just the dinosaur … it is the meteor that ended the dinosaurs as well. Which presumably means that the economies of the future will be those that google cannot reach.

Yesterday, I pondered on what would have happened if the insane reality of Net Zero could have been forced on humanity. That will never happen, so it was just an entirely theoretical situation. However, I was intrigued by the idea of virtuous and vicious technology cycles. A virtuous cycle is one where we do something that then makes it easier to do the same thing. So, things get easier and easier, or to put it another way, more and more resources become available. A vicious cycle is one, where we do something that makes it harder to do the same thing again, and then it become harder and harder.

Continue reading →

One of the most fundamental virtuous cycles that created the industrial revolution was this:

Cheaper Energy -> Cheaper materials -> Cheaper equipment -> Even Cheaper Energy.

In other words, because there are cheaper forms of energy this has a knock on effect on the price of materials like Iron that require a lot of energy to produce, and that has a knock on effect on the price of equipment, and as the price of equipment reduces, it costs less to mine coal.

In a real economy there are enormous numbers of such virtuous, and even at the same time vicious cycles, but energy is such a key resource that this cycle tends to dominate.

But that in turn suggests the reverse cycle:

More expensive energy -> More expensive materials -> More expensive equipment -> Even more expensive energy.

Now, rather than an economy in a virtuous cycle and long term GDP growth, there now find an economy, which is in a vicious cycle and long term decline and GDP decline. In other words, the trend is that people can afford to buy less and less real goods with a day’s work.

For the last several hundred years, the western world has generally been in a virtuous cycle of growing GDP. Putin funded green groups then persuaded the arrogant morons of government to commit economic suicide. We are now entering a vicious cycle of decline … much to delight of Putin who is ensuring Russia continues to grow.

And that is how Russia won WWIII … by getting the west to attack itself.

Nut Zero, if it had happened (which it could not … but if it had), would have been not just the destruction of the entire modern global economy … which is now reliant on fossil fuels, but, the impact would be far worse.

Because people before the industrial revolution, could only live the life they lived because of years of training to live in the economy at that time. Not, just by people on a farm, but those people also in turn relied on others for things like iron or copper or if we go back far enough for flint. As far as we go back, there was a reliance on others who also had years to perfect their craft so that everyone could live. Every stage of civilisation requires a infrastructure of other people and resources … and most people only barely survive when everything is just right. You can’t take a modern person and throw them into the stone-age and expect them to survive. It might take a couple dozen generations until humans are even doing nearly as well as whatever stage of development they went back to.

Likewise, the landscape had matured in harmony with those who lived there. So, for example, in the past there were animals to hunt.. Animals survived by being the ones that were just beyond the human ability to hunt them. So, modern animals are not the same as ancient ones … they are far harder to catch without modern technology.

Take away the modern technology (which last only till the ammo runs out) and the animals left have evolved to be skittish at the first sign of humans, and to get several hundred meters away. For people trying to fling rocks … those animals are beyond their means to catch.

But, it will be far worse!

If 70million people suddenly began starving due to Nut Zero in the UK … the first thing to go, would be any and all large animals. Not just every cow, sheep and horse would be stolen and slaughtered, but every dog and cat, and also every fox, badger, deer, rat, snails … if it moved and was edible, it would be eaten.

In my area, there are about 1000  people for each deer. Whilst, there is no doubt, that no individual is ever going to secure a reliable supply of deer … whilst humans still live, there will be 1000 people trying to catch each deer. So, whilst the people starve, the deer are ALL killed.

The result would be the extinction of most large animal speeches, followed by the extinction of most human populations. Almost no one would survive, because almost everything that people needed to live off, would be consumed in the global famine that Nut Zero caused.

Who would survive?

The best candidates for survival are those communities who are already most self-reliant and who have access to local resources. Indeed, arguably, those who were last to the industrial revolution, will be the best candidates for survival.

In the UK, we are probably talking about a few remote islands, which would be difficult to reach during the famine, and so would have least of their resources plundered by the starving population of the mainland. The faster the collapse, and the quicker fuel for boats, etc. disappears, the better the chances of these small communities. They will suffer, but not nearly as much as people and animals on the mainland.

Globally, the “poorest” countries, would undoubtedly see their populations plummet, but large numbers would survive … although with the same massive assault on wildlife. But, despite having a rapid velopment (if that is the opposite of de-velopment) … a rapid velopment to the stone-age … not iron, there being few iron source that are now readily available using primitive technology, it all having been worked out long ago … and indeed, no copper, or any other modern costly mineral.

Basically, the world would rapidly return, not so much to “stone age”, but “pre-stoneage”, because the skills of living in the stone age have been lost to most groups. What we think of as “Stone age groups” would be the few advanced civilisations.

Yes, there would be some remnants of the modern world. In particular scrap iron would be the prime source of iron for generations. But, that also means, there would be no development of mining. So, by the time all the iron had rusted, the technology to smelt iron would be lost. Rapidly everything else would decay as well … because houses would be damp and almost all books would …. probably be burnt, by a population starved of fuel for heating.

Yes, sure the odd globalist would emerge from their bunker when the food ran out and try to reassert their control using the guns and ammo that they had hoarded, along with a few other people to be their soldiers … the soldiers would then kill the globalists, and soon the soldiers would run out of ammo and die. So, they would die out and we can ignore them.

Back on the development ladder

Of course people, after the collapse, would start to progress again. But, the problem is that the last development of civilisation used up all the easily available resources. So, there is no easily available copper in the UK, there is very little easily available coal, and that which there is, is very poor quality. Iron might be easier, but, without the knowledge to find it and process it, iron is pretty useless.

The question I have is this: would there be enough resources, to develop society enough to create a viable economy that can get to the “next stage” of technology evolution, through all the various stages? It seems unlikely.

It is certain that the industrial revolution could not happen again in the UK or Europe as all the easy to mine mineral and coal disappeared long ago. A new industrial revolution would have to occur somewhere else, where there is easy to mine coal, but where, for some reason that coal was left in the ground. In other words, coal that is viable using medieval mining technologies, but which was ignored when later mining technology became available. Unless there is such a place, it seems unlikely that another human civilisation will ever get the economy vitality to create anything close to the modern world.

The Ice-age cometh

The one thing that could massively transform the availability of minerals is a new ice-age. That ice-age, would eat away at rocks, revealing large areas of untapped rock, which if they were lucky, might just provide the raw materials needed to trigger another industrial revolution.

Another pathway?

Is coal the only pathway to a modern civilisation? Coal was essential to the industrial revolution, but, could it have happened without coal? My gut feeling is no. The industrial revolution was the result of a sudden availability of cheap energy from coal, which in turn led to cheap iron, electricity, explosives, and without all these cheap items, the modern would would never have happened.

Wood could replace coal, but there have been wood-burning economies for thousands of years, and if wood would have led to modern society, it would have happened long ago. Wood never created the stimulus necessary to trigger the development of modern society.

The only proviso, is that not everything we now know need be forgotten. Perhaps a small group would continue making and using electricity in some remote part of Siberia, and then in a few thousand years, despite there only being wood, that technology would spread and slowly rekindle development towards something that has some resemblance to out modern world?

But, the same argument of slow growth … can also be used to suggest slow decline. That people start out cobbling together technologies we now have, but slowly as things wear out and cannot be replaced, things just regress and regress and even the iron, that was once easy to produce, becomes too hard and that technology is also forgotten.

There is no fundamental reason for technology progression … and it is quite possible that if the available resources have all been exploited, that we see technology regression.

Will it matter?

Has it happened before?

Is it possible that technology progressed before and then, for some reason (like a new ice-age), the progression was wiped away? It seems unlikely, but so too, is that the modern world would commit economic suicide through Nut Zero.

Maybe, the fate of humanity, is that in another million years, when almost all traces of this civilisation have been wiped clean, but sufficient new resources have been revealed by the retreating ice, that it all happens again.