Cow Roast Lock, Tring

Soon to be a distant memory if the WEF get their way.
The name will be changed to Bug Roast.

With Cow Roast anudder name for it?

Photographically, it's rather BOARing.

I'd forgotten all about this lock and memories came flooding back!

A similar shot taken in 2018, which is better overall but can't be taken today because the tree, right, now gets in the way:

A jolly scene, quite oblivious to the dangers of steak-holder capitalism.

Like me. I don't worry as long as I get my share of beef stock.

Try Buggo cubes instead. They give a meal gender neutral appeal.

Seriously, though, I've just heard that Haarlem has become the first city in the world to ban meat adverts in public, on the false assumption that meat contributes to 'climate crisis'.

All part of our wicked king's Great Reset.

Next time take an axe!

1. So that rules out the Haarlem Pigtrotters then.

2. It isn't; it does. Rainforests are being destroyed to create pasture for cattle, which emit large quantities of Methane, far more damaging to the environment than Carbon Dioxide.

3. He isn't, and I wouldn't be so rude as to say that "king" here should have a capital "K".

It isn't axiomatic. It just needs a bank to send a branch manager.

2a. European farms and cattle (and farmers' lives) are being destroyed to suit the WEF agenda and hasten the Great Reset, where we will all be digital serfs.

2b. Carbon dioxide is not damaging to the environment, and cows don't affect climate either.

3. A capital 'K' is not needed in this context, where I referred to him by noun and not by name, and used the term facetiously.

P.S. I forgot to mention that forests are getting chopped down to create biomass, which is transported across the world in diesel-powered ships, to fuel so-called-green electric cars.

:o)))

2a. The WEF agenda is for our and the planet's sake. European farms and farmers can survive and thrive cultivating less environmentally-damaging things than agro-industrial numbers of cows.

2b. The jury is out on that; CO2 is not directly harmful, but does contribute to global warming. Yes, in excessive numbers cows do, because forests are destroyed to create pasture for them. This, a generation ago, was rainforest:

There are no such things as green cars. Electric cars not pollute the air in urban areas, and to a (very) limited degree can be powered by wind or solar energy, but that is all.

The WEF agenda is definitely not for OUR sake! They are a global elite, who want to rule the world, and we will be their serfs (digitally controlled, without the need for jackboots).

The planet is not in danger, and cows are not damaging the atmosphere
(whatever they might be doing to land space in other countries).

CO2 is not harmful, and is not making any significant difference to the climate.
In fact, we could benefit from more of it.

There is no climate crisis or imminent climate catastrophe, and this is all a scam to usher in global communism ruled by the technocracy. Covid was used in a similar way: getting us to submit to a grossly exaggerated threat. They will smash our economies, reduce us to poverty, and then present themselves as the solution. That's how communism operates.

I would add that the very people who urge us to 'save the planet' have a propensity for flying around in private jets and helicopters. Bill Gates is apparently the largest landowner in the US, owning at least 242,000 acres and an awful lot of cows. In fact, 'hamburgers' are his favourite food. So don't get too carried away with the green nonsense, because they clearly don't believe it themselves.

Superb shot! Stay well!

Admired in: www.ipernity.com/group/tolerance

We all live on one planet, and wherever its land or forest is destroyed, it's destroyed for everyone.

We need MORE CO2 then, to help the trees grow.

But you do realise, I hope, that you will not be allowed to wander in these rewilded lands?
The countryside will be a no-go area, whilst you remain confined to your 'smart city' pod
and enjoy owning nothing and being happy.

Yes, more CO2 does help trees grow, but not when they're being burnt or cut down or killed by drought. And although there's evidence that with the higher CO2 level of recent decades, green parts of the globe have grown greener, there's also strong scientific evidence for their contributing to climate change, and the latter is causing drought and fire.

There is no scientific evidence for any significant climate change. It's all a grand hoax, swallowed by MSM readers like yourself. Droughts and fires have occurred throughout history, and some of them may be related to weather cycles, but there is no good reason to suppose there is any major change in the climate, still less that this supposed climate change is caused by CO2 emissions or that it can be countered by not eating beef or by not driving your car to beauty spots to take photographs.

You have far more to fear from the nightmare world envisaged for us by the WEF.

If could also be a grand hoax that it's a grand hoax, and it's been revealed that some influential deniers of man-made climate change have personal financial interests in fossil-fuel extraction and use.

The fact is that climate is too complex for present-day climate science to understand fully or to make reliable predictions about, or to say what effect human activity has on it. That is why I myself reserve judgement and adopt no dogmatic position on the issue.

But what is indisputable fact is that (e.g. in Brazil) rainforest is being destroyed deliberately to provide additional cattle grazing.

And I could be a flat-earth denier because my daddy owns an airline. One has only to look at the records to see that what they say is happening isn't happening. But they will twist the ways they present the figures, to make them seem to show what they want them to show, the same as they played around with the covid figures.

I would also point out that forest fires are good for forests.

But chopping them down to provide 'clean energy' is not so good.
Better to use the coal in the ground.

Bruce Forsyth's father owned an airline. He was a garage proprietor.

So Brucie was a flat-earth denier too, was he?

I know the earth isn't flat when I look at the horizon on my sea pics.
www.ipernity.com/doc/isisbridge/50781596/in/album/1069240

Something which I found less appealing about HM The Queen was her obsession with horses and dogs, particularly the (nasty, snapping and horrible) Corgis with which she permanently surrounded herself, which bit anyone unfortunate enough to tread on one, and I pity the Palace staff who had to clean up after them.

Agreed. I've never been keen on corgis, and I cannot see the point of having so many dogs.
I think you form a better relationship if you just have one, or two at the most.

You need to expand your horizons.

Even though he had to spent weeks cooped up with them, Noah got on well with his family, because the Ark was a good relationship.

I never saw HM as a mother figure, or the world's grandmother, as some people do, but I cried buckets after the sad news, because I see her as a last link to the glorious fifties, the pretty lady with the diamond tiara that I remember from my childhood. Shame that her son turned out such a quisling.

As glorious as the 50's were in many ways, I wouldn't really like to live in them now. For a start, with the medical treatment available then, I'd probably be dead.

Agreed, but I was thinking of the Englishness of it all, rather than the state of science.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdW5hB6W52M

Yes, the Englishness, the unspoiled towns and villages, the wildflowers and the birds, the quiet roads, the elms, the hedgerows and the unmodernised cottages are all sadly missed, but there's a lot which isn't, like the daily grind for subsistence wages, the primitive technology, the dogshitty pavements, the bluebottles, the smog-blackened buildings, the cigarettes and dog ends, the family and boarding houses with one lavatory only and no shower, the shiny toilet paper, the greasy hair and greasy people with smelly breath and bad teeth, and much else. I'd love to have a time machine so I could have all my outings, holidays and take my pictures in the fifties, but afterwards I'd want to come home to the the present day.

I have a memory of being taken to Chessington Zoo when I was three and a half. I don't recall any of the animals, but I remember waiting at the bus stop to go home. The fields were lit with the golden light of early evening, and I could see the main road stretching into the distance. It was completely empty.

But what does a Scot like he know about Englishness?