Friday, 16 June 2017

The Most Fireproof High Rise Design in Response to Grenfell Tower Tragedy

THE MOST FIREPROOF HIGH RISE APARTMENT TOWER BLOCK IN THE WORLD

Following on from the disgraceful and preventable Grenfell Tower fire tragedy in White City, London... I have designed what I believe to be the most fire safe/fire proof high rise/tower apartment block in the world. I believe that 3 or 4 of the 15 or so fireproof design features I have included have never been done before. I am still working on the conceptual diagrams. Within hours of this infuriating tragedy one of the key features came to me, but yesterday yet another life saving feature occurred to me which is relatively cheap in construction. Will governments and councils include these life saving fireproof features or do they want to save money instead of lives? #GrenfellTower #FireproofTowerBlock

Friday, 10 February 2017

ESCAPING CONFORMITY

 ESCAPING CONFORMITY

[conformity club - zayd depaor]

I guess surgery is not the only thing 'cosmetic' in nature today, it seems that so much of what makes up modern society is cosmetic. I think the best way to escape conformity is to question everything and develop a more comprehensive method of thought, judgement and analysis. If someone has fixed principles based on a reasoned foundation, then I don't see them being easily duped, bribed, blackmailed or intertwined into crowd-comfort.



One of the main mental chains keeping people in intellectual, social, political, economic and spiritual slavery is conformism. Blindly following people, crowds, society, governments, media, education, ideology and individual concepts and ideas.

Conformity is often born out of cowardice, being unwilling to differ with the majority, fearing you will be isolated or victimized.

Conformity is also born out of intellectual laziness, copying others is easier than actually thinking and evaluating ideas.

Conformity can also be born out of dissident voices being silenced by government or locked out by the mainstream media. People only hear one tune being sung at them all day and night, so it is the only music they know of. We are all used to pantomime phony debates, that are presented to us in the mainstream. The establishment view being well represented and the opposition being a weak representative or in reality not being a genuine or credible opponent.

Conformity is dangerous to an individual and society as it strips the individual of intellectual independence and the society of variety, critical analysis and individual input and creativity. Conformity creates drones, slaves, server units of an elite. The public mind becomes monopolized by the few directors of ideas.

Conformity leads to the oppression of the mind, body and spirit. Conformity breeds conformity, every instance of delegating thought to others acclimatizes the brain to not thinking, so it becomes more difficult to think the next time it is required.

All the mess we see around us is usually because people conformed and collaborated with oppressive and autocratic structures. People conform to bad ideas, false beliefs, nonsense concepts, misguided ideology and artificial knowledge and then wonder why the political, economic and social conditions are failing and destructive.

To escape this conformity to chaos requires stepping aside from the downward spiral and viewing reality as it is, away from the spin, without a blinkered view. We should ask ourselves whether things make sense, are they rationally sound, where is the benefit, where is the evidence? We should question our own motives and relationships, what are we doing? Are our thoughts our own or are they just harmful, malicious implants? The media is owned by who with what agenda? The education is mapped by who for what? The fashions and fads are being driven by who on the basis of what? The slogans being circulated, do they make sense, are they true? The common concepts that people are clinging to, are they in accordance with reality or fantasy? Are the foundations and branches of society sound, coherent, clear and correct or baseless, contradictory, confused and erroneous?

Wednesday, 8 February 2017

illegitimate Star Wars prequels and sequels


A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away...filmmakers changed their minds and ruined their stories... recently, in a world very close to home.

Only the original unedited first three Star Wars movies are legitimate Star Wars.... all the other prequels and sequels are illegitimate and phony.

 As for those who think they are legitimate, genuine and authentic, then they are wrong. They show they do not have artistic, filmmaking, cinematic, narrative-coherent, integrated-visionary judgement...they are just consumers. People can like what they want, but only the original three films are legitimate. I only watched 20 mins of the first prequel and rightly boycotted the rest of the commercial, social engineering, populist distortion. They can fool some of the people but not all of the people.

You can't start changing the whole character, culture and technology of a story after you have told it.

You can't start changing scenes after you have announced, advertised and presented them.

Sure, you can make alternate versions with these cuts and remakes, but to eliminate the original history of the story, the original vision that people held in their minds, emotions and memories...to be replaced with some fashionable, artifically forged, rubbish? No.

Changing original movies and eliminating the original vision is one act of destructive butchery. Another act of fabricated inauthentic nonsense is when you make prequels and sequels that betray the nature, culture, coherence, integrity and vision of the original story. You can't say "The world is like this, a supernatural horror or sci-fi war between tradition and corrupted modernity, step inside..." and then later down the line, say "I've changed my mind, now we are in a cowboy comedy or a party political broadcast for the socially corrupt, morally degenerate party." If you want to do that, then just become a politician, be part of the government education system or work for the mainstream media in the sphere of political and social commentary.

How about if song writers, musicians and composers start eliminating their original published versions, changing both the meaning and the sound in some new concoction which retains the same title?

How about if two people get married and after the wedding reception, contract, vows and marriage ceremony, the husband says to the wife, "What I mean now is that you are not a wife but a house maid?"

When a filmmaker releases a movie to the public, not to a preliminary test audience before the movie is completed, he is making a contract with the viewer. He is effectively saying, I want to take you on a journey in a world I have crafted, do you want to come with me? Do you want to accept and be part of what I show you? Do you want this to be part of your conceptual tapestry, your cultural experience, your artistic, psychological and emotional memory? Do you accept this to be part of your social and experiential background? They then accept and watch it and the movie becomes part of their history and a socio-cultural reference point, it may well be a basis for important conceptual allegories and symbolism they may draw upon in the wider world.

So on the basis of that heavy mental implant being accepted, the viewer, the observer, wants to relive the story again, perhaps to share the experience, message and key moments with a new audience. And then he finds the key scenes missing or changed. His trust has been betrayed, history has been wiped, the vision has been smashed and the trance broken.

You are sitting with your wife, friends or children, wanting to show and share with them an experience and suddenly you find yourself robbed. Where the hell did this scene go? Who the hell corrupted the vision? Who has vandalized this story? This is unforgivable, what is this rubbish?

If you do this as a filmmaker, as a director or whatever, then you will no longer be trusted. Your next movie, you want people to buy into it? You want them to have confidence in this story or is that just some experimental junk which you will play with after you sold it? No, you will be just be regarded as a cheat now, a liar, a fraud. You are not a filmmaker but a story breaker.

If an audience accepts this sort of thing then they themselves do not understand the cinematic experience, they don't understand the necessary coherence and continuity of story telling. If they accept this then they are in fact illegitimate viewers, they are invalid spectators, they are inwardly deaf, dumb and blind. They are probably the sort of people who like to see a trailer before a movie or listen to a critic's review before seeing the movie themselves.

And as for all those new 'actors' in the recent illegitimate star wars prequels and sequels who think they are part of the Star Wars world...Sorry, you are not part of it, you are just part of some fabricated counterfeit commercial joke.

IDIOCY OF THE PLASTIC BAG CHARGE


10 Reasons Why the 5p Bag Charge is Idiotic

1) It hits the poorest in society the hardest, those who have less resources to ruin the environment with

2) Reusable Bags are a haven for Bacteria, not a good idea for your fresh food

3) Plastic Bags were used as bin liners, now people will just be buying more bin liners

4) Plastic bags had many uses and were cheap or free to apply to those uses, now the payment has to be made...they will be less available and there will in fact be less recycling in relation to those extra uses and other resources will be used. Perhaps the park drunks who at least gathered their litter into one bag and placed it in the recycle bin will now instead leave their litter scattered everywhere and it wont get recycled

5) The bag charge hits those who pollute less, cyclists and pedestrians who need more bags because they are actually carrying them over a distance rather than lifting them from their trolley to their heavily polluting car. All the car drivers are not complaining about the charge as they don't carry the bags any distance anyway.

6) A poor person doing a family shop may need 12-16 plastic bags in one shop to do the shopping as bags may need to be doubled and tripled and they don't hold much anyway. 80p added to a shopping budget means 80p less for food or any other necessities. The idiotic politicians, who often don't do their own shopping and have no idea about counting pennies, as they have high salaries paid by public taxes before setting themselves up in high paying jobs due to their government insider-info, are unaware that the "5p wont break the bank" is actually false. It is not 5p a year or even a week, but on every unit needed, every shopping trip and every transaction necessary. It can be a significant charge on the poor, or even on the rich man who didn't consider the bag charge who is out of cash.

7) A poor person may only have £1 on them for a few items...but now they need the bag or bags also to be paid for, this may mean they go home without shopping as they didn't have the money for the bags. Many people are so poor that they only have small change on them.

8) Pedestrians and cyclists now have to take up their carriage space or pockets with plastic carrier bags... This may deter them from eco-friendly travel, they might take bus, car, train or taxi instead.

9) People will have less money to spend on eco-friendly products.

10) Precious time is wasted messing around with packed bags and with additional bag-charge transactions, this is a drain on more resources and costs the economy more.