I am a believer in logic and reasoning. I believe in things that can be scientifically tested and proven by independent non-biased parties. Things, in short, most unlike homeopathy.

Homeopathy is an alternative "remedy" system from the 18th century based on the bizarre conjecture that to dilute something to virtually nothing will increase its effectiveness. It relies on such nonsense as water having a "memory" so that it can "remember" what has been added to it even after it has been diluted so many times that it can no longer have any trace of the intentional ingredient.

Until recently, if you mentioned homeopathy to me, my mind would have conjured up an image of a dusty old shop with small windows in lonely back street. I certainly did not imagine that homeopathy was on sale bright and cheerful in every high street in the country!

Homeopathy for sale at Boots

Thanks to the 10:23 campaign i have learnt a lot more about homeopathy. This saturday, 30th january, at 10:23 hundreds of demonstrators will "overdose" on homeopathy remedies outside branches of Boots across England. This is in order to show that homeopathy does not work, and to raise awareness of what it really is.

I hope that the demonstration will put pressure on Boots to stop selling this nonsense. Homeopathy is not something that a reputable chemist should be indulging in. Paul Bennett, the professional standards director at Boots has even admitted that there is no evidence that homeopathy works. Paul Bennett cites "consumer choice" as an appropriate reason to sell and profit from the little pills.

Interestingly enough, some homeopaths are in support of the 10:23 campaign. They say that homeopathy needs to treat the person as a whole, and is to be given with consultation of a "trained" homeopath! Either way, we're in agreement that this stuff should not be available over the counter on the high street!

If you want to add your support to the cause, whichever side you're on, go to www.1023.org.uk where you'll find plenty of resources and more information.

Please don't be turned off by the title. This is not the argument that we have come to expect from the Christian church. This is the most sensible thing i have ever read regarding homosexuality and Christianity.

godmademegay.com/Letter.htm

Next time i hear anybody saying that being gay is an abomination, or against God's will, or forbidden in the Bible, i am going to send them here and pray that their heart is softened.

It's a very long letter, and i didn't read all of it in full detail, but i was very impressed by the compassionate spirit of the message.

Thank you to Kevin Sonney for bringing this to my attention.

Resumo: Mi diskutas la problemon de la eksponenciala kreskado de la mondloĝantaro. Mi estis hodiaŭ matene ĉe la kunveno por agado sur klimatŝanĝo.

This morning i went to the Winchester Action on Climate Change meeting. It was really very good; well-attended, with exciting ideas and news about greening projects in Winchester. One idea which particularly intrigued me is the plan to buy a farm in Winchester and get volunteers to help work on the farm, produce food and sell it. It sounds really exciting, especially as it is so difficult to get an allotment around here.

Later on i went to look at the Facebook I Am Green application, and was delighted that i can now tick "I do not commute; I live close to work/school" – hooray! :D

There is an item that has generated a bit of discussion: "I (will) have no more than 1 child, or I will adopt additional children".

Someone called Júlia Babos made a comment:

What?! Having more than one child would be a green crime? I highly disagree.

Gray Little also disagreed:

Ya I'm with Julia I'd like to think that I'm living a pretty green lifestyle but i want a large family when I'm older, this in contrast I's basically saying that having more than one child is a crime against the earth, I disagree completely to such a statement, and would appreciate if someone sent me information pertaining to its reasoning.

Well, i happen to know a little bit about this, so i made a comment in reply:

@Júlia – it doesn't say you can't have more than one child – but it is asking us to consider adopting children. The world's population is growing exponentially, unsustainably.

Until the 1800s there were always under a billion people on the planet. It took 130 years to get to 2 billion, 30 years to get to 3 billion in 1960.

1974 (14 years later) 4 billion.
1987 (13 years later) 5 billion.
1999 (12 years later) 6 billion.

I believe it's around about 6.7 billion now, and this massive growth is due to our dependence upon oil to fuel mass production of food. The amount of sunlight that falls on the ground in a typical year is enough to support about 1 billion people. Therefore the impending oil crisis is also going to be a population crisis.

Read "The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight" by Thom Hartmann. And to anyone who is thinking about having a child, consider adopting an orphan instead.

I realise that my argument is completely one-sided and i am sure there are many more sides to this debate. I would like to hear more opinions. What are the advantages of having more children and continuing to expand the world's population? Is the oil argument soon going to be moot because nuclear fusion will provide a clean, limitless source of energy for us? What are your views?

Resumo: La retejo Twitter rifuzas preni agadon kontraŭ ofenda kondukto. Tiu ĉi estas komplete malakcepteble.

To all who use Twitter: you need to be aware of this:

Twitter refuses to uphold Terms of Service

This story is shocking in the extreme. After months of ongoing bullying, harassment, foul language, hate speech, smearing of a person's identity, Twitter had this to say:

"We’ve reviewed the matter and decided it’s not in our best interest to get involved."

This is absolutely shocking and Twitter need to change their tune fast. This kind of behaviour is absolutely unacceptable and there is no question that the abusive user needs to be banned from Twitter and all their hateful comments purged. Twitter are scared of a legal battle, but their Terms of Service clearly state:

"You must not abuse, harass, threaten, impersonate or intimidate other Twitter users [...] Violation of any of these agreements will result in the termination of your Twitter.com account."

As an internet community we have a moral responsibility not to let anyone get away with this kind of behaviour. I write this in support of the victim, but also for the good of the Twitter community as a whole. If one person can get away with it, people will soon learn that Twitter is a place where they can be as abusive as they like with no repercussions. This needs to be stopped as soon as possible.

Digg it, Stumble it, blog it … do whatever it takes. If Twitter will not deal with this, then we as a community most certainly will.

Update: Follow @wesupportariel and help take action on this! Oh, i love a good bit of activism!!

I feel like a Life Review is in order. But i'll keep it short. [Edit] no i didn't! It's kinda long!

(more…)

Thank goodness someone was selling the ribbons today! It is better than last year when i couldn't find a ribbon anywhere! This morning i remembered that it is World Aids Day tomorrow, and at lunch time i saw people out selling the ribbons. I also saw a lot of people wearing them, which made me happy.

AIDS is serious. World Aids Day matters.