I will have to make a subsidiary thread, because the general knowledge of biodiversity and ecology is so poor, that the vast majority of people don't realize I am making profound, expert points.
1/🧵
I'll start with my point about species. Most are not familiar with this, as they have zero education about it, so they probably think I'm just trying to be controversial. There is no single definition of a species, and all break down at some point.
"There’s no exact figure for how many species live on Earth. As of 2024, more than 2.1 million species have been scientifically described and named, but this is likely to be nowhere near the true number living on the planet."
I'm using the same reference by the British Natural History Museum, because it is pretty definitive. There is no point in me giving more academic references, when what I am saying is already flying right over the top of people's heads.
4/
Let me explain a bit more. You will see figures, like 2.1 million known species. That is just a guess. You see, quite a few of these known species, are actually the same species described twice, or a subspecies or variant of the same species.
5/
I realize why this is flying right over everyone's heads and is being ignored by people. Our culture, is the most nature ignorant culture that has ever existed, and most of what people mistakenly believe, is false.
6/
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I am hoping @ChrisGPackham will understand this as a naturalist, and he has some understanding of ecology and biodiversity, because my important points about this assessment are being ignored.
My central point is these redacted parts are of little use to us.
1/🧵
I completely agree with @GreenRupertRead that these parts should never have been redacted. However, the idea that the full unredacted report, would help us better understand these threats, is profoundly mistaken, and the ITN report is misleading.
2/
I have been making the same warnings for decades, and they were actually based on the same science and references, as this assessment used.
My point, is we don't know enough about the way our human systems rely on natural systems, to confidently make such projections.
3/
In other words, it is almost impossible for a layperson to understand biodiversity intellectually, when they have fundamental misconceptions about the core concepts of biodiversity. Ecology, the interactions of these species, is even less understood.
2/
What is known about the most complex field of knowledge known to humanity, is a tiny fraction of what could be known, and most of it is probably unknowable on a level of complexity, impossible for us to comprehend.
3/
A long time ago, and repeatedly over many decades, I said if @TheGreenParty had an electoral breakthrough, the establishment, the media and political mainstream, would viciously turn on them. It was not hard to foresee, when you know the tawdry reality of the establishment. 1/3
The established order, isn't a group of people working together for the public good and the country. It is a tawdry, corrupt, powerful and wealth clique, in which the powerful and rich, cooperate to make themselves even richer and more powerful, at the cost of everyone else.
2/3
The first and most important rule of Rich and Power Club is that it exists only to further the aims of those in this clique. The second rule is that it doesn't exist, and the third is, if anyone breaks ranks or threatens the aims of this clique, then they must be crushed.
3/3
"Keir Starmer has probably made his standing in the Labour party worse with the response to the byelection defeat he gave in a short broadcast interview this morning."
Let's talk about Keir Starmer, and what he is and who he really represents.
It is very clear that Keir Starmer is utterly disingenuous, and what he falsely claims he stands for, is not what he is really about, at all. Whilst Starmer is acting very stupidly, he cannot be as stupid, as he makes out.
Nothing you see about Starmer is genuine or real.
2/
I will qualify what I say, by pointing to the most salient features of his disingenuity first. Starmer claims to be acting in the interests of Labour, clearly he isn't, he's utterly destroying the Labour Party, and aiding Reform.
3/
You'd have thought if this illegal behaviour, had been certainly observed, the volunteers would have alerted election officials at the time to what was happening.
Second, more care and time would have been taken to collate these observations, before contacting the media.
2/11
On the face of it, it seems odd that no attempt was made to report this to election officials as it was happening, and why it was immediately reported to the press as soon as the polls closed, when there were 22 polling stations.
3/11
"Pollster Lord Hayward was reacting to a report issued by Democracy Volunteers, which claimed to observe high levels of ‘family voting’ the Gorton and Denton by-election"
I smell a rat. Lord Hayward is a Conservative politician.
"However, Manchester City Council, which is overseeing the by-election, was critical of the organisation for not raising concerns earlier during the day."
These "Democracy Volunteers", never said a thing, during polling. But a ssoon as polls closed they ran to the press.
I had never even heard of "family voting" before this report, and it is very clear that they are primarily referring to Asian families. See this below, to make it clear that this is what this is about.