10,000 Hits – A “Thank You” to Readers.


Broken Liberty: Li-ber-ty, Istanbul Archaeolog...

Image via Wikipedia

After precisely 9 months, on the 31st Jan 2012, the 43rd hit of the day created the auspicious total of 10,000, for this TGRule site.

This will be the 330th published post, with a few more drafts in the ‘wings’.      53 pages have been published and approved comments total 538.

There are 21 dedicated ‘followers’, thank you.

So what? did I hear? Well, that is the question!  Most blogs of status have 10 to 1000 times or more hits and very active commentaries. Nevertheless, I am excited about this milestone. Although much of the material is not original to TGRule, there is a great deal of myself included, not only in the very choice of topics and articles, but in the opportunities for assessment,  comment, and political, social and technical statements as a post author.

An enormous amount has been learnt during this blogging process and I have gained many blogger friends. In particular my very good friends at TIP. Even the odd protagonist has been invaluable in creating  deep and meaningful debate.

Sites that have been particularly valuable to me  are ‘Chiefio‘, ‘WUWT‘, ‘Sott.net’, ‘COTO‘, ‘Natural News‘, but there have been many others which you will find linked in the sidebar groups.

Progress is being made, not just in connection with this site, but in general, with many of the areas of injustice and inhumanity which form the backbone of the “hobby horse” on which I/this blog teeters. The PEOPLE are beginning to understand!  Do these areas need listing?

AGW scam and its world power motivation.

The incredible waste of money, lives and mentalities that are casualties of the fake wars on terror and in the falsely claimed name of democracy.

Big Pharma attack on our health and well-being, what hypocrites!

Big Agra attack on our freedoms relating to food and water supplies and health.

Governments becoming puppets to the world financiers and armament manufacturers.

Citizens becoming mere collateral and slaves with extremely serious loss of civil liberties, including free speech.

The media which is the voice of the authoritarian powers.

The day by day stronger evidence that all these civil injustices are associated with the so-far succeeding attempt to create an overt, operational world government. One which civilization will come to find is very undesirable and/or will culminate in major military retaliation and revolutions.

So, thank you for the music, (sorry), to the readers, to the helpful blogs, for the comments, to my friends and to ‘wordpress‘ which makes publishing a breeze.

Hoping for the 100,000th hit while I am still able. Hoping to make a difference.

Ken McMurtrie

About Ken McMurtrie

Retired Electronics Engineer, most recently installing and maintaining medical X-Ray equipment. A mature age "student" of Life and Nature, an advocate of Truth, Justice and Humanity, promoting awareness of the injustices in the world.
This entry was posted in AGW, Civil Liberties, Conspiracies, Corruption, HEALTH, New World Order and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to 10,000 Hits – A “Thank You” to Readers.

  1. The kind person who clicked the ‘like’ button has interesting websites.
    One, http://planbox.wordpress.com/, featuring famous and beautiful churches has photos of great beauty.
    Another, dealing with health and wellness, http://healthinessbox.wordpress.com/, I have added to the sidebar links.
    Thanks!, Roger.

  2. Martin Lack says:

    Congratulations Ken. I am not far behind you (5000 hits in 5 months).

    John R Bolton, former US ambassador to the UN, is probably the most famous (or infamous) proponent of the myth that socialists around the world are trying to subvert national governance by exalting the power of the UN. However, this, just like all other conspiracy theories, does not withstand scrutiny. Just look at the trouble they have censuring Syria’s government for killing 5000 of its own people (and it is Communists who are blocking progress). Furthermore, those other organs of worldwide interference (such as the World Bank and World Trade Organization) have succeeded in making global free market economics an almost unquestionable modus operandi. Therefore, our problem is not some worldwide socialist conspiracy; our problem is human greed, arrogance, selfishness and pride (i.e. some would call it sin).

    The European Union (EU), however, is another matter. Here (or there!), I would be in agreement with you; as the EU is very clearly attempting – and succeeding – to over-ride national sovereignty: It is a classically over-sized, autocratic, corruption-riddled and socialist-dominated, supra-governmental institution that spends 40% of its enormous budget perpetuating African dependency on subsidised EU agricultural exports.

    I had meant to start by saying thank you for visiting my Falsifiable Theology site; and to assure you that I was not ignoring your comment (I have only just noticed it). However, I am no longer able to post comments on that site and have not bothered to find out why (or resolve the problem). Instead, I have invited people to submit comments on my blog, at:
    <a href="http://lackofenvironment.wordpress.com/history/"<my History page; or in response to
    The Ark of the Covenant and the temple of Dagon (9 Sept. 2011).

    Finally, if you have not read them, you might be interested to read my two most recent posts, starting with The problem with inverting reality; but especially today’s offering: Policy inaction – revisited.

    With very best wishes for a conspiracy theory-free future,

    Martin.

    • Hi Martin, pleased to receive your comment. Oh How I wish I had the time to do justice to your beliefs and posts.

      At this stage I will just say that it is interesting that we are in some sort of agreement about the EU sovereignty takeover.

      I find it a little puzzling that you cannot make the next jump in reality comprehension that links the UN and the financiers to the same goals in the middle east, and the rest of the world.

      I have so much going on I will need to come back to your other comments and also to check out your new web pages/posts.

      Meantime, please keep in touch. Your counter-balancing comments can only be good for me. They encourage me to have a closer look at my beliefs and provide alternatives that require scrutiny. Both are good for my thought processing.

      With best wishes for a truth-filled future, and our increased ability to comprehend reality as it is, as distinct from reality as it is projected or perceived.
      Ken.

      PS. Without getting seriously into it at this stage, I am wondering just what brain mechanism makes comprehension so variable, or even diametrically opposite. Is it a left brain vs right brain controlling influence? Is it a male vs female logic thing? Is it education? Is it nature vs nurture? Obviously all people are different, but it is curious that we can be SO different. Because I haven’t yet read your posts, I don’t know if you have already touched on , or gone down any of these paths. If you have, it will be rewarding for me to catch up.

      • Martin Lack says:

        As ever, Ken, you are nothing if not polite. However, with respect, I think the difference between us is ideological: You appear to have decided, as did the Cold War physicists (such as Robert Jastrow, Bill Nierenberg, Frederick Seitz, and S Fred Singer) that concern for the environment (I would say acknowledgment of the importance of nature) is the new enemy of human progress.

        Unfortunately, the greatest fallacy of The (17th to 18th century) Enlightenment was the crazy idea that humanity is superior to nature and can thus treat it with contempt. However, as Edward O Wilson once wryly observed, we are not the most important species on the planet; that honour goes to the fungi and bacteria that keep the whole Life on Earth show on the road…

  3. Hi Martin, Just a quick response. (Well it was meant to be!)
    Yes, the difference,or a difference, between us is certainly idealogical.But the question is why?
    We have the same information available, largely. Why do we have different ideals? Even if we have the same degree of respect for our fellow man, nature and its creatures, Perhaps a similar level of tertiary education.
    It is simple human character differences that might make us maybe prefer lawn bowls to motor sport, jazz to classical music, indoor to outdoor activities, city to country life, etc., but we are both seeing the same human behaviour and actions, the same data and observations, yet we are polarised in our perceptions of what we see and read.
    Anyway lets not get bogged down in philosophies.

    Taking your comments literally.
    “concern for the environment is the enemy of human progress”: I would like to think that my concern for the environment is just as strong as yours. But my concern for mankind/civilization, although it currently threatens the environment due to overpopulation, is such that the ideal of decimating the population (Dividing by 10) in order to save the environment, is abhorrent to me.
    I know that you do not agree that the carbon control plan will decimate the population, but it is on that basis that I form my opinion.
    What is meant by “human progress” here ideally would be “for the good of the vast majority”.
    If so, we need to be very sure that the proposed ‘saving of the environment’ is carried out without destroying the majority and saving it for the few!

    “humanity is superior to nature and can thus treat it with contempt”: I have no agreement with this philosophy! I would rather sacrifice ALL of mankind if that was the only solution, but to sacrifice the “peasants” so the “barons” can survive, might seem reasonable to some, but not to me and certainly not the peasants.

    This is my idealogy. Pollution is bad for the environment and mankind. Reducing pollution is good. There is insufficient compelling scientific evidence to substantiate CO2 controls on the basis that mankind’s future depends on such drastic measures. Reducing CO2 levels would be retrograde to mankind whose survival depends on plant growth.
    The CO2 controls proposed will not effectively control pollution, unless the fossil burning population is reduced to a fraction of its present level. This would occur as a result of the current plans.
    In the meantime, the global temperature will continue to trend in a natural manner, irrespective of the CO2 levels.
    The motivation for carbon controls is to facilitate world government controls, not climate changes supposedly threatening our planet.
    There is no point in arguing this, you will just have to accept that my mind is firmly brainwashed by the supporting evidence, just as yours is by the evidence you choose to support you.
    I may not live long enough for this to be proven beyond petty debate, but I bet you will. I suppose when the GT fails to trend upwards long term, your scientists will say they achieved this with their carbon control achievements, even though the CO2 level is likely to remain above 390 ppm.
    Sory Martin it is well past my bed time. Regards, Ken.

    • Martin Lack says:

      It certainly is. I hope I was not the cause of your insomnia?

      Many aspects of your comments intrigue me but, in response to the same-old “climate change is a false alarm” rubbish (signed by 15 has-beens and Richard Lindzen), shamelessly published in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) last week, I really think you need to read the rebuttal posted by real climate scientists; and/or the rebuttal signed by 255 scientists (which the WSJ shamefully refused to publish).

      You say we are educated to a similar level but, in addition to a Batchelors Degree in Geology, I have an MSc in Hydrogeology and an MA in Environmental Politics. So, can you please remind me, what Masters Degree(s) have you obtained?

      • It seems, Martin, that the rebuttals you mention are, as usual, rebuttals in the eye of the beholder, not ones with a great deal of substance.
        Re education: Your letter status does overwhelm mine (Dip.Comm.Eng RMTC) but I am wondering about the relevance?
        I am not quite the brain stormer I was when young, but had a measurable IQ close to 130.
        That aside, again these aspects are not paramount, as the facts are independent of our thoughts. However, our perception of them is relevant.
        Just what part of our make-up is related to perception is not quite clear to me.

        Do not worry, Martin, it will all become clear with time. Hopefully within my lifetime.

        An apology will be gracefully forthcoming if and when it is due. And as perceived to be by myself and ALL the other bloggers on ‘this side of the fence’
        Regards, Ken.

      • Martin Lack says:

        Well you have got me there, Ken. Although I was very fortunate to go to a very good Public (i.e. private!) School here in the UK (due in large part to very generous financial support from Australian relatives) – at which I think no-one in my year had an IQ of less than 100 – I am pretty sure mine was not over 130 (although we were never told individual results).

        Please accept my apologies for appealing to my own meager expertise; as what really frustrates me about your position is your willful refusal to accept the legitimacy of the vast majority of relevant, genuine experts. Over the last 24-hours, I have had a very lengthy discussion with an Engineer from Illinois named John Kosowski. However, although I do not think you need waste your time reviewing yesterday’s comments, I think my post today and both his comments and mine are pertinent to our discussion here. I hope you will make time to read them.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s