The President of Ukraine Owns A suit, Doesn’t He?

An American entrepreneur and one time Senate candidate was criticised for asking why Volodymyr Zelensky didn’t wear a suit, then doubled down by accusing the embattled Ukrainian president of wearing make-up.

Peter Schiff, 58, who once ran as a Republican for the seat of the US Senator from Connecticut twelves years ago made the remarks soon after Volodymyr Zelensky appeared before the US Senate in his now trademark khaki green T-shirt.

Peter Schiff, who’s the CEO of Euro Pacific Capital bank tweeted that he understood times were difficult, but that doesn’t the President of Ukraine own a suit?

He said that he didn’t have much respect for existing members of the US Congress either, but he still wouldn’t address them sporting a T-shirt and that he wouldn’t want to disrespect the institution or the United States.

One tweeter calling themselves Quoth the Raven replied to Peter Schiff by saying he’d just made one of the worst all-time takes. Quoth the Raven continued that the man was in the centre of a war zone dodging artillery and that he was not going to be rolling around his garment rack with him.

But Peter Schiff was unbowed and replied again by saying he was not in combat on a battlefield. Someone powered his face. Not a hair was out of place, and he was clean-shaven with a trimmed beard. He chose to wear the T-shirt, but he could have easily have picked something less casual.

Numerous other tweeters chose to blast Peter Schiff over his comments, hundreds of whom used far less polite vocabulary.

Jon Cooper, former National Finance Chair of Draft Biden 2016, wrote that he couldn’t believe that the tweet hadn’t been deleted and that Peter Schiff was a complete A—Gap.

The guy is not only in a war zone, where he wouldn’t be able to get a suit pressed and dry cleaned, but even if it were achievable, it was favourable for people to see him as one of them sharing the struggle.

Peter Schiff doubled down on his tweet, later on, responding to Jonathan saying that he wouldn’t have had to press a suit and that he was sure he had a clean suit hanging in the same closet as his T-shirts, and that even if there were no suits available, maybe a long-sleeved shirt with a collar.

Amy Task, an analyst at CBS Sports, was part of the majority who condemned Peter Schiff, sharing that Volodymyr Zelensky was fighting to protect the lives of others, and he was putting his life at risk to do so. That he could have left but he didn’t and that speaks volumes about the man that he is, and that it speaks volumes about the sort of man Peter Schiff is.

Perhaps Peter Schiff should trade places with the president of Ukraine. Volodymyr Zelensky is fighting a war, and he’s trying to save his country, not look pretty, and which one would you trust most, the one in the T-shirt or the one in the suit?

Let’s face it, rich people are so out of touch with reality it’s scary, and really, what idiot wears a suit while trying to save their country, oh that would be Peter Schiff.

The rich and privileged don’t get the effects of the war, but perhaps that’s because they’re so busy starting them? And Peter Schiff is one of those people who it doesn’t affect because he’s probably never got his hands dirty in his life unless he’s playing with himself and then he probably uses a tissue to masturbate!

Los Angeles DUI Suspect Dies Screaming ‘I Can’t Breathe’ On Terrifying Final Moments

A California father’s harrowing last moments have emerged in harrowing police footage showing him scream ‘I can’t breathe’ while dying as he was held face down on the ground so officers could extract a blood sample.

Edward Bronstein, 38, died on March 31, 2020, less than two months before George Floyd was killed by police in Minnesota, after an altercation during his arrest on suspicion of driving under the influence.

He was pulled over for a DUI, but taken to a police station after refusing to give a blood sample, which his family says was due to a fear of needles.

Edward Bronstein started screaming with fear after being pinned to the ground face down shortly afterwards, and died shortly afterwards, with efforts to revive him proving unsuccessful.

The California Highway Patrol had fought to keep the video from going public after the man’s family sued over excessive use of force and civil rights violations, but a federal court judge ordered its release.

An 18-minute video of the detention, taken by a California Highway Patrol sergeant in Pasadena, shows a handcuffed Edward Bronstein, a father to two daughters, rowing with police as they directed him to a mat on the floor of the Altadena station garage and forced him to his knees to take a blood sample he’d refused to give.

He initially argues but starts shrieking with fear after being thrown to the ground face down.

Edward Bronstein can then be heard saying that he would do the blood test willingly as two officers hover over him, and a man can be heard warning him not to resist taking a court-ordered blood sample to determine his intoxication level.

The officer tells him that he could just provide it and still, he didn’t consent and that he was the one bringing the fight, not them.

Edward Bronstein says to an officer that he was not fighting as the officer kept his hand on his shoulder.

The patrolman then says that he should have a seat and provide his arm, otherwise he was going to go face down on the mat and that they were going to keep on going.

Edward Bronstein’s family said that he had a fear of needles.

Officers then swarm Edward Bronstein and haul his legs out from under him, causing him to writhe around on the ground, and five officers can be seen kneeling on him as he yells that he would do it willingly.

The officer says that it was too late and that they’d not even poked him yet and that he should just relax, but then Edward Bronstein starts yelling that he can’t breathe.

Finally, Edward Bronstein stops moving and officers draw blood from his lifeless body.

A second video, more than 12 minutes long, shows the officer’s and paramedics’ unsuccessful attempts to revive Edward Bronstein.

I would guess this is a major lawsuit for sure. However, there will be nothing gained politically, nor will it be exploited, and you probably won’t see this on America’s corporate media.

The most significant thing here that everyone missed is why didn’t the officers do a breathalyzer test instead, it would have been much easier than using a needle.

But nobody in America cares about this because police brutality is favoured, and nothing will come of this because they have double standards in their justice system, and it seems that now, officers are allowed to go around with syringes and needles, asking offenders for blood samples on the street, and for those people out there that might say that Edward Bronstein should have listened to the officers, well the officers could have equally listened to Mr Bronstein when he said that he couldn’t breathe.

Of course, you shouldn’t drink and drive, and when you break the law you shouldn’t resist arrest, but then when being apprehended you don’t think that you’re going to end up with a death sentence, and that’s before you’ve even been to court.

These officers thought that the only thing that they could do to see if Edward Bronstein was intoxicated was to take his blood when a simple breathalyzer test would have sufficed, and now a man has died for absolutely nothing.

Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe And Anoosheh Ashoori On Their Way Back To The United Kingdom

Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe will return to her husband and seven-year-old daughter Gabriella, who plans to show her mother her new toys.

Richard Ratcliffe said that it was going to be the beginning of a new life.

Mr Ashoori’s family said they could now rebuild the foundations of their family with their cornerstone back in place.

In a statement, they hailed his release and return to the United Kingdom after five long years before thanking those who laboured to bring him home.

A second man, Morad Tahbaz, who has Iranian, UK and US nationality, has been freed from prison but is not yet allowed to leave Iran.

Speaking in the House of Commons, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss paid tribute to the amazing willpower and perseverance shown by Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe, Mr Ashoori, Mr Tahbaz and their families, saying the sufferings they endured must never happen again.

Liz Truss said ministers would keep working to ensure Mr Tahbaz’s freedom.

The government has said it also settled a deficit of nearly £400 million owed to Iran from the 1970s, with the fund’s ring-fenced exclusively for humanitarian pursuits.

Speaking in the Commons, Tulip Siddiq, Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s MP said she welcomed home Nazanin after six long years, and can now say to her daughter Gabriella that this time mummy was really coming home.

Paying tribute to Mr Ratcliffe, who watched from the public gallery with Gabriella. Tulip Siddiq said he’d really set the bar high for husbands in his efforts to ensure his wife’s release.

Cuddling his daughter, Gabriella, Mr Ratcliffe told journalists they would really believe the news when they saw ‘mummy’.

He said he wanted to thank people up and down the country for supporting his campaign for her release, which included a hunger strike last October.

He said that it had been such a cruel experience in some ways, but it had also been an exposure to such a level of kindness and care, and he said that this would be a chapter in their lives, but that there were many more chapters to come.

Speaking after hearing MPs speak in the House of Commons, he told the Press Association the family would be away for a couple of days convalescing, doctors and check-ups and so on.

He said on returning to their home, the first thing his wife wanted to do was sit down on the sofa, make a cup of tea, and just be in the living room together, and that he looked forward to pottering around the neighbourhood and being normal again.

So, why has Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe been released now?

The fundamental explanation is that London-Tehran ties are better than they’ve been before, and the International Revolutionary Guard and Iran’s judiciary no longer feel they need Mrs Zaghari-Ratcliffe for leverage in relations with the United Kingdom.

She was just a diplomatic pawn held prisoner by the Iranian authorities to put pressure on London.

If Tehran wanted to make nice, they would treat her well, give her access to medical assistance, possibly increase the frequency of visits, maybe even allow her a temporary release from prison, but if Tehran wanted to wield pressure on London, then her conditions might deteriorate or privileges might be removed.

The UK paying the historic £400 million debt for tanks sold but not delivered will have made a tremendous difference, and for years, the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) proclaimed the two issues weren’t connected, but in practice, the Iranians made them one and the same problem.

REMOVED John Bercow’s Private Secretary From His Official Portrait

Members of a Commons committee face a tough decision about the future of a portrait of former Speaker John Bercow after an independent panel found that he bullied staff

A Commons committee has a difficult decision over what to do with a portrait of former Speaker John Bercow after he was found by an independent panel to have bullied staff and been blameworthy of abuse of power and authority.

John Bercow has been banned from Parliament for life. However, the picture is still hanging in the ‘Corner Room’ of Speaker’s House.

John Bercow has been found guilty of 21 claims relating to his behaviour as Speaker from 2009 to 2019.

The Mail On Sunday revealed that one possibility being considered by the Commons Works of Art Committee is to undo John Bercow’s approach when he commissioned the painting in 2010.

He’d agreed that Kate Emms, his private secretary and the first woman in the role, should be portrayed alongside him by painter Brendan Kelly. However, after Kate Emms resigned and made many allegations of bullying and harassment against John Bercow, the then Speaker allegedly insisted she was removed from the painting.

When the portrait was unveiled, at a cost to taxpayers of £37,000, Kate Emms had mysteriously disappeared from the canvas, and John Bercow is said to have demanded that she be painted over with her replacement, Peter Barratt.

It was claimed to a newspaper outlet that insiders had suggested there were many more acts aside from the upheld bullying claims and said they called John Bercow a psycho behind his back.

Another official claimed John Bercow had shouted at Black Rod, Lt Gen David Leakey: ‘Get out of my fing office, you fing little toff.’

Former coworkers told of his fist banging, spit flying rages that were made worse if people cried in front of him.

One said: ‘We used to call him ‘Psycho’ behind his back,’ while another added, ‘He’s a narcissist… in total denial.’

After the portrait was unveiled, the artist said he’d endeavoured to capture the day to day reality of the Speaker.

Other options for the committee, according to a source close to current Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle, include consigning the picture of the discredited ex-Speaker to a basement backroom, adding an illustrative trigger warning sign or slapping a badge of shame on the frame.

Another solution was to restore Emms to her original place, a relatively straightforward procedure since the top layer of an oil painting can be stripped back.

One MP said: ‘We should return Kate to the portrait. That would be the ultimate revenge.’

And that it was a difficult decision which will be reached this week.

John Bercow evidently has little man’s disease, an inferiority complex, spiteful mouth, and small of mind and stature, and he’s undoubtedly vertically challenged, and if anyone should be removed from the picture, it should be John Bercow himself because he’s an extremely hateful little man with narcissistic tendencies, and thank goodness he wasn’t clever enough to achieve some sort of power over foreign policy.

John Bercow should have been booted out ages ago because he’d definitely gone over his sell-by date and his role as Speaker was rotten and had gone rancid.

There were numerous people who knew he was a bully, so how did he manage to remain in his position for so long? And he might have been smug then, but he’s certainly not smug now!

Of course, he was a real legend, but only in his own mind, and how the mighty fall, and what goes around, comes around, and this man has what is called Napoleon Complex because he’s a bossy and belligerent man which he uses to overcompensate for being physically short, and I’m surprised he didn’t receive a smack in the face.

Michael Gove Says Millions Of Britons Are Open To Accepting Ukrainian Refugees

Under the ‘Homes for Ukraine’ program, sponsors who provide rent-free accommodation for at least six months will receive a monthly fee, regardless of how many refugees they take in.

Michael Gove has suggested that millions of Britons could be ready to host Ukrainian refugees with a £350 a month government ‘thank you’ as he said the first arrivals should be next week.

The Cabinet minister pointed to surveys revealing that as many as one in 10 people were willing to put up people escaping from the Russian invasion, but Michael Gove who recently divorced, revealed he wasn’t yet sure whether he personally would be able to contribute. Sir Keir Starmer confirmed that he’s planning to be a host.

Michael Gove

The comments came as Michael Gove revealed that 3,000 visas have now been granted for Ukrainian refugees, with the new sponsored route due to launch this week.

Under the ‘Homes for Ukraine’ scheme, sponsors who provide accommodation rent-free for a minimum of six months will receive a monthly fee of £350 from the government, however many refugees they take.

Individuals, charities, community groups and businesses will all be eligible to bring those escaping the Russian attack of Ukraine to safety.

Sponsored refugees will be granted three years’ leave to stay in the United Kingdom and be allowed to work and access public services.

Michael Gove said the United Kingdom stands behind Ukraine in their darkest hour and encouraged people to join the national effort to support refugees.

He said he hoped tens of thousands of people will be accommodated in Britain as part of the new scheme as Europe buckles under the weight of its biggest humanitarian crisis since the Second World War.

He said that people can register their interest on Monday and matching will be taking place from Friday and that he would hope that in a week’s time they’ll see the first people coming here under the scheme.

But asked whether he personally would be willing to host refugees, Michael Gove told Sky’s Sophy Ridge on Sunday that he was in the process of seeking to see what he could do.

Michael Gove stressed there will be money available for local authorities to support new arrivals and that there would be just over £10,000 per person available to local authorities.

Then there would be extra payments for those children who are of school age and who need to be accommodated within the educational system.

A United Nations official said that more than 2.3 million people have escaped the conflict in Ukraine and another 1.9 million have been displaced within the country.

Does this mean that every MP with a second, third and fourth home et cetera is going to use them to help with the Ukrainian Refugee crisis?

It’s fantastic that people want to help, but let’s be realistic about this, how on earth is the NHS, schools et cetera going to cope with the additional millions of people?

Can the UK actually afford this sum of money when they still have Afghans in hotels waiting to get housed, and the amount of money must be astronomical?

Perhaps Boris Johnson could invite them all over to Westminster, just tell them to bring a bottle!

And how many refugees is Michael Gove going to take in? But it doesn’t really matter because nobody is being forced to do it, or will MPs be exempt because of data protection reasons because they work from home and handle constituents’ details?

Let’s face it we have no idea of the background of these people, so why would we have them in our homes?

And a year ago we weren’t even allowed to socialise with people we actually knew, including family members, and now they’re asking us to have strangers into our home that we probably won’t even be able to communicate with.

Thin Air Creates Diamonds

By pulling CO2 from the atmosphere, Aether has created diamonds made from the air.

It may seem like a thing of fantasy, but a luxury jewellery startup has created diamonds that are made of thin air.

Aether pulls carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air to make its lab-grown gems, which are physically and chemically identical to those that are mined.

The company bills them as carbon-negative diamonds by claiming to extract 20 tonnes of CO2 from the air for every one-carat diamond sold

It bills them as carbon-negative diamonds by claiming to remove 20 tonnes of CO2 from the air for every one-carat diamond sold.

That’s what earned Aether the B Corp Certification as the first and only diamond producer with that title.

Its gems are unlike other lab-grown diamonds because these are created from petrochemicals like methane.

Aether is now planning to use $18 million (£13.75 million) in funding to ramp up the production of its diamonds, including a wholesale programme that has just been launched.

Ryan Shearman told Forbes that he became immediately intrigued when he heard about this new direct capture technology created by a company in Switzerland that strips harmful CO2 out of the air, and he wondered if they could take all this abundant, harmful carbon that’s warming the world and turn it into a beautiful form of carbon that warms the heart – diamonds.

He said that they were addressing the lab-grown market in a new way since there’s some level of emissions and environmental impact from the fossil fuel production used for lab growth and that it gets down to both mined, and lab-grown diamonds taking sides about which harms the environment less. Aether turns that paradigm on its head and that we would be benefiting the planet.

The company uses a reactor to remove CO2 from the air.

Its clever technology then follows the hydrocarbon synthesis, which means that captured CO2 is synthesised into the hydrocarbon feedstock needed for growing diamonds in a chemical vapour deposition reactor.

The next step is diamond growth, where the hydrocarbon raw material is fed into specialised chemical vapour deposition reactors that are powered by 100 per cent clean energy.

Once the diamond crystals are completely developed, experts cut, polish, and add the final touches to the gems.

Aether hasn’t revealed any cost details of its four-step diamond making method, but it does save 127 gallons of fresh water which is typically used per mined carat, along with not wasting so much energy because the gems require only half the energy consumption of mined diamonds.

Shearman said Aether was proud to be the architect of the world’s first gem-quality diamonds from the atmosphere.

These gems are evidently not fake diamonds, they’re just grown in a lab, and seemingly identical to mined diamonds – the same way an IVF baby would be grown in a lab, but we wouldn’t call it a fake baby. Although, of course, babies aren’t diamonds.

Some people want natural diamonds, some don’t care. The same way that some people want to eat 100 per cent organic food and others don’t care if it’s modified.

However, these man-made gems are worthless because they’re not rare and will be controlled to inflate the value, but then is a mined diamond a man-made belief that it’s actually worth something because it comes from the ground?

Diamonds seem to be deliberately controlled to sell them as being rare, although they’re plentiful all around the world in so many different countries, but hype sells, and it sells because people want a nice quality rock as long as the cost is within reason, but many diamonds are not worth the overpriced sticker tag that is merely various degrees of carbon.

However, with crime being what it is, who wants to be sporting such an expensive diamond? It’s far too dangerous and there are fakes out there that just look like the same thing, that’s if you don’t look at it too closely. But the truth is it’s not worth wearing a natural diamond because criminals are on the prowl all the time.

How Secure Are Your Passwords?

We all think hackers won’t crack our own passwords, even if they’re easy ones with only a few characters, but just how easy is it for someone to break into an online login?

According to new research, anything with six characters, regardless of whether numbers or symbols are included, can be cracked instantly.

The same goes for anything that’s seven or eight characters but made up of just numbers or lower case letters, but the news doesn’t get much better for any eight-character combination.

In fact, they can all be guessed in approximately 39 minutes according to US cybersecurity company Hive Systems, which is based in Richmond, Virginia.

On the flip side, the way to ensure that your password isn’t cracked for some 438 trillion years is to use 18 characters made up of numbers, upper and lower case letters and symbols.

Of course, that would take you quite a while to input every time.

And research suggests that a more manageable 11 character password featuring the same alternative features would be cracked in about 34 years.

Hive Systems made a colour coded table for 2022, demonstrating how safe user passwords actually are.

The company said its data was based on how long it would take a consumer budget hacker to crack your password hash using a desktop computer with a top tier graphics card, and that if you use the same password on numerous sites, you’re in for a bad time.

The firm also discussed hashing, a technique that protects stolen passwords, and how hackers get around the one-way algorithm.

In the context of passwords, a hash is a scrambled arrangement of text that’s reproducible if you know what hash software was used.

For example, if the word ‘password’ is hashed using MD5 software the output would be 5f4dcc3b5aa765d61d8327deb882cf99.

Passwords you use on websites are held in servers as hashed instead of in plain text like ‘password’ so that if someone views them, in theory, they won’t know the actual password.

In the given example for ‘password’, the hacker would only see 5f4dcc3b5aa765d61d8327deb882cf99.

It’s impossible to reverse this hash to produce the word ‘password’, but what hackers do is make a list of all the combinations of characters on your keyboard so they can then begin hashing them, but finding matches between this list and the hashes from the pilfered passwords, hackers can figure out the user’s real password, which in turn lets them access to your logins for various websites.

In the end, people end up having so many passwords, usernames, verification codes, and some people would never remember them, so many have them written down in a book, especially those that are in their 60’s and 70’s and aren’t immortal, and then, of course, you have the phone where you phone and have to give passwords for that, or verification questions such as your hometown, first dogs name, mum’s maiden name and school.

Quite honestly this is all getting beyond ridiculous, especially when companies want us to all go paperless, which makes using a bank or utility company so difficult to use. There were the days of the cheque book but now everything’s online.

Now they’re saying that your password can be hacked in an hour, which is absolute garbage. The reality is that most only allow three tries before they force a 30-second pause for another attempt, which means that a brute force attack isn’t going to be completed in an hour. I’m not saying that it can’t be done at all, but it would take much longer than that.

Genetically Modified Male Mosquitoes Will Be Released In California And Florida

Billions of genetically engineered male mosquitos will be released in California and Florida over the next two years, as part of a mission to kill off biting females.

Oxitec, based in Oxford UK, is a biological pest control development firm, that’s produced the edited version of the flying insects to fight mosquito-borne diseases like Dengue, yellow fever and Zika.

Male Aedes aegypti mosquitos don’t bite humans, but females do, and so the genetic modification causes females to die off shortly after being born.

The project has been cleared by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the first wave is expected to be released this year, although it isn’t clear exactly when this will happen, as it needs state regulatory approval in Florida and California.

It isn’t likely to be a problem in Florida, as the state played host to a trial last year that saw millions of the same type of Oxitec mosquitos released in the Florida Keys.

Not everyone supports the idea, including Friends of the Earth, which describes it as a destructive move that’s dangerous for public health.

The EPA cleared the technology, giving Oxitec an experimental use permit that permits them to release 2.4 billion edited mosquitoes between 2022 and 2024.

In total two billion will be released in California, and another 400 million in Florida, where millions are already circulating through the mosquito population.

The male insects have been genetically altered to express the protein tTAV-OX5034, which results in the death of any newly born females.

The species, Aedes aegypti, isn’t native to either California or Florida but has started to become an intrusive nuisance, bringing multiple human diseases.

It’s been known to spread Dengue fever, chikungunya, Zika and yellow fever.

The idea behind the modification was to kill off any female offspring before they reach adulthood and are able to go out and bite humans, spreading these diseases.

This would also work to decrease the population of the intrusive species, further hindering disease transmission, although that’s still theoretical.

The altered species have been put through numerous trials and tests, to ensure the modification won’t harm ecosystems or humans.

Dr Robert Gould, President of San Francisco Bay Physicians for Social Responsibility, said that once emitted into the environment, genetically engineered mosquitoes couldn’t be recalled, and that rather than forging ahead with an unregulated open-air genetic experiment, they’d need precautionary action, transparent data and proper risk assessments.

But how can we possibly know all the consequences of this action?

We can understand the logic and as humans, we have one constant that never alters, and that is that no human is perfect, and we should never allow ourselves to believe that any vaccine, cure or solution was intended for every human, and that scientists should never risk overconfidence in themselves when making a cure, that it could if overlooked cause a human being to die or be seriously ill, and to create something is great, but never overlook that it’s not flawless and that they could be risking human life because nobody should lack common sense, particularly scientists because nobody is perfect and errors can and will be made.

And is it actually our role to gender identify mosquitoes?

In certain parts of the US, people are continually swatting mosquitoes, sometimes killing hundreds at night in their living room, and they’d daren’t have the windows open, but they just come through the doors anyhow, and people swat them all, regardless of gender.

We shouldn’t be meddling with nature, and after COVID I wouldn’t imagine that many people want anything that’s modified being released on them.

PIG GRUNTS Are Translated Into Emotions By Scientists

Scientists say they’ve translated pig grunts into emotions for the first time, in a possible breakthrough for monitoring animal wellbeing.

Researchers trained an artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm with 7,414 recordings of pig noises, collected throughout the life phases of 411 pigs, including slaughter.

The algorithm could potentially be used to create an app for pig farmers that see whether the animals are happy just from the noise they’re making.

The research was led by the University of Copenhagen, the ETH Zurich and France’s National Research Institute for Agriculture, Food and Environment (INRAE).

Study author Dr Elodie Briefer at the University of Copenhagen said that they’ve taught the algorithm to decode pig grunts. Now they need someone who wants to develop the algorithm into an app that farmers can use to improve the welfare of their animals.

Researchers say the algorithm can decode whether a particular pig is experiencing a positive emotion (happy or excited), a negative one (scared or stressed) or somewhere in between.

The recordings were gathered from both commercial and experimental scenarios, either associated with positive or negative emotion, from birth until death.

Positive situations include, for instance, those when piglets nurse from their mothers or when they’re united with their family after being separated.

The emotionally negative situations included missed nursing, short social seclusion, piglet fights, piglet crushing by the mother, castration and handling and waiting in the slaughterhouse.

In experimental stables, the researchers also created different mock scenarios for the pigs, designed to produce more nuanced emotions in the centre of the spectrum.

These included an arena with toys or food and a corresponding arena without any stimuli.

The researchers also placed new and unfamiliar things in the arena for the pigs to interact with.

Along the way, the pig’s calls, behaviour and heart rates were monitored and recorded when possible.

The researchers then examined the audio recordings to determine the positive situations and emotions from the negative ones.

As already revealed in earlier research, there are more high-frequency calls from pigs such as screams and squeals in negative situations.

At the same time, low-frequency calls such as barks and grunts occurred both in cases where the pigs experienced positive or negative emotions.

With an even more detailed study of the sound files, the team found a new pattern that revealed what the pigs experienced in specific situations in even greater detail.

I would guess that translating these cries at the abattoir would surely send chills down your spine, but then I suppose you have to harden your heart because you can’t let your feelings get between us and the bacon you’re eating, but then hardening your heart to the natural world and the animal’s plight keeps you blinkered and morally primitive.

Can you picture driving up alongside a pig transportation lorry, looking at the pigs with their little snouts sticking out, not knowing they were going to their impending death, quite distasteful when you think about it?

Although they probably know that something bad is going to happen to them because animals only feel fear in the moment because they have no sense of tomorrow.

We should really consider this as we later cook pork chops for our tea!

And God help those scientists that translate the squealing those poor animals emit at the slaughterhouses just before they’re killed, it certainly won’t be fit for publication, and I certainly don’t think that being a farmer being able to talk to pigs would make slaughtering any easier, especially if you were telling them to be quiet before they were killed.

It’s A Virgin Birth!

Fatherless mice have been created in the lab using only unfertilised mouse eggs, in a move that could one day pave the way for creating one parent babies.

Virgin births, also known as parthenogenesis, have previously been seen naturally in birds, lizards, snakes, sharks, rays and other fish, but now scientists in China say they’ve achieved parthenogenesis in mice without any male genetic DNA.

Earlier endeavours in mammals have mostly been unsuccessful because of genomic imprinting, a process in which the parent of origin determines which copy of a gene is active.

Yanchang Wei and colleagues at Shanghai Jiao Tong University revealed that parthenogenesis is possible in mammals through a targeted technique that edits DNA methylation marks, which are chemical modifications that can change gene activity without altering the underlying DNA sequence.

The authors used the epigenetic rewriting approach to seven imprinting control regions in mouse oocytes, successfully altering DNA methylation in one copy of the gene but not the other.

The researchers said that the transfer of modified embryos into foster female mice then resulted in the generation of viable full-term offspring.

They wrote in their paper that following parthenogenetic activation, those edited regions displayed maintenance of methylation as inherently established regions during early preimplantation development, and it was said that the transfer of altered parthenogenetic embryos into foster mothers resulted in significantly extended development and finally into the generation of viable full-term offspring and that the data showed that parthenogenesis could be accomplished by targeted epigenetic rewriting of multiple critical imprinting control regions.

However, only one live offspring survived to adulthood, accentuating the necessity for further investigation and improvement of the technique used in an endeavour to enhance its success rate.

However, the outcomes indicate that parthenogenesis could be achieved in mammals through the chemical DNA modifications used by scientists.

According to the authors, the feasibility of parthenogenesis in mammals opens up possible avenues to agriculture, research and medicine.

Parthenogenesis is a technique that effectively forms clones of the parent since the embryo acquires genetic material from only one individual, and one of the most typical methods for this form of reproduction is for the egg to be fertilised by a still immature egg cell that acts almost like a sperm.

Usually, parthenogenesis occurs in lower plants and invertebrate animals like ants, wasps, or bees. However, it’s been noticed in some species like reptiles, fish and even birds who would typically reproduce sexually.

Some people will probably find this horrifying because this is meddling with nature, and it appears to be wrong on every level, and why would they want to do this? And I hate to spoil the narrative but most women actually do like men and children do need fathers.

Although some women’s experiences of men have sometimes proved otherwise. Some women are going their separate ways and feel that it’s easier to go it alone, and is it really what we really need now, more fatherless children?

And just because scientists can do this, doesn’t mean that they should do it, but of course, feminists will love this.

They should be leaving those mice alone and they should be leaving humankind alone, the world doesn’t need any more kinky fuckery with our DNA, and then madness should stop right now before these mad scientists create havoc.

Two parent-children must have evolved for a reason, but things are evolving all the time, some with good consequences, others with bad consequences, and will this be the extinction of men?

This is almost like Jurassic Park, the movie. Scientists were so obsessed with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started