The Old World (Part One)

I (#blogger #blog #somseason #YA #authors) have always been fascinated with history. It’s one of the reason’s I minored in Social Studies, where history is taught in Alberta. The article, What is the Difference Between History and the Past? states:

The past refers to all the events that have ever happened since the beginning of time until the present moment. History, on the other hand, is the interpretation of the past through the study of records and evidence left behind by previous generations. It is a process of interpreting evidence in a thoughtful and informed way, and it gives meaning, sense, and explanatory force to the past in the present. History is open to change and revision as new evidence is discovered and new interpretations are proposed.

This was my approach to teaching Social Studies classes. In the above quote, I especially like the sentence; “History is open to change and revision as new evidence is discovered and new interpretations are proposed.” In the past few months,  I have come across some thought provoking videos and articles, like the one I talked about in my last post, Is Canada Real? That video got me wondering: Is what I taught, and what our history books tell us, really true? Is it really reflecting the world’s past? It was Britain’s war time prime minister, Winston Churchill who allegedly said, “History is written by the victors,” and it was the author of 1984, George Orwell who said, “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.” Why would they say such things? Are we missing something? Think about the word history—”his story.” Is history just someone’s, or some group’s story? Is the history we’ve been taught a lie or at the very least altered truth?

I am fascinated with historical buildings. Take, for example, the Canada Permanent Building, located in downtown Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. You can see a picture of this building and learn about it in the articles, CANADA PERMANENT BUILDING and HistoricPlaces.ca .  I have driven by this building many times.  It is said to be built of sandstone and red brick and constructed in 1909. No mention of when construction actually began or finished, so one can only conclude that it was built in 12 months or less. What I find interesting is that this was during the time of dirt roads, and horse and carts, at least that is what we were told. A new smaller sized building was constructed at the local college where I live and it took over 2 years to construct and that’s with modern equipment. It’s bewilders me how a stone and brick building could be constructed in one year in the 1900s when it took over 2 years to construct a building with modern equipment today. Something doesn’t add up.

Another example is First Presbyterian Church, also located in Edmonton. I have walked past this beautiful building many times. You can learn about this building in the articles, FIRST PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH and Wikipedia’s First Presbyterian Church (Edmonton). This brick and sandstone church is said to be constructed in 1911 in the first article, but Wikipedia says the present building was completed in November 1912. The first article says the architect is Wilson and Herrald, but has n/a (non-applicable?) listed for the builder. Why such little information? The first article implies it was built in a year or less, which seems unlikely to me. Like I said above, how can a stone and brick building be constructed in just one year in the 1900s, during a time of horse and carts when it takes two or more years to construct a building of smaller size today with modern equipment?  I question that. Question everything folks!

Teaching Social Studies, I often taught about various empires like the Roman Empire, Chinese Empire, and the British Empire. Never in my 35 years of teaching have I ever come across the Tatarian Empire (also known as Great Tartary and Tartaria). I first learned of Tartaria about two years ago. There is a map of Tartaria located in the Library of Congress which is located in Washington D.C. That means it is real. Here is a link to the Map of the Great Tartary.  Discover Magazine’s article, What Is the Lost Empire Of Tartaria? says:

People who believe in the Tartarian Empire contend it was once a sophisticated, worldwide civilization with impressive architecture. Because such an empire is not mentioned in history books, conspiracy theorists claim it has been intentionally erased. 

Notice that Discover Magazine tries to discredit Tartaria calling it “The Tartarian Empire conspiracy theory.”  If you want to learn about Tartaria, you can read about it in the articles, Tartaria Mud Flood Reset: A Missing Legacy and Tartaria: Lost Timeline of a Global Empire. My question is: why has Tartarian history been kept from us? If you do your own research, you will find lots of articles calling it a conspiracy theory and myth, but is it? The first article says, “the Tartarians were masters of masonry, brickwork, steam punk style technology, universally free energy, and grand architecture.” It also says, “Churches, cathedrals, mosques, and other buildings of worship were originally aetheric power stations, water stations, and sound resonating acoustical healing centers.” Could this be why they kept knowledge of the Tartarians from us? Are they (whoever they are) trying to hide a history with advanced technologies from us? There are various videos to watch in the second article. Watch them, and draw your own conclusions.

What happened to Tartaria? Many say it was wiped out with a mud flood. To understand what I mean, watch this video titled: The Mud Flood Reset that Time Forgot!?

You can also refer to the article, Mud Flood, Dirt Rain, and the story of the Buried Buildings, which has lots of pictures. Many of the buildings from Tartaria still stand and have been repurposed; many cathedrals for example. Could the two buildings I talked about earlier be Tartarian buildings? It would explain why the histories of these building are so vague. Has our history been re-written and hidden from us? Could this be why those who question it are called crazy conspiracy theorists? Question everything people.

Have you ever wondered about the “Great Fires” of cities that happened? I can’t help but think about this with all the news about fires in Los Angeles, California, like this news article, Eaton and Palisades fires. It reminds me of Lahaina in Maui which burned in August of 2023.

The article, Top 10 Most Famous Fires in History, lists—looking at 1800 and 1900s—Boston 1872, Chicago 1871, San Francisco 1906, Peshtigo, Wisconsin 1871, Texas City, Texas 1947, Halifax, Nova Scotia 1917, and Tokyo, Japan 1923 as the most famous city fires. Wikipedia’s List of fires in Canada lists 15 Canadian city fires in the 1800s, and 8 in the 1900s, with some cities being listed more than once with fires in different years. In the USA, I counted 16 great city fires in Wikipedia’s Urban fires in the United States throughout 1700s to 1900s. Why did so many cities burn?

Let’s look at the Great Toronto fire of 1904. The Canadian Encyclopedia’s article, Great Fire of Toronto (1904) has pictures. What’s interesting is the pictures show, what looks like a war zone of brick and stone buildings. How can a fire destroy at least 98 stone buildings? Stone doesn’t burn. Let’s look at the Boston fire of 1872 as explained in the above mentioned article, Top 10 Most Famous Fires in History. This article says, “some 776 building and twenty people—being turned into charred cinders, making it one of the East Coast’s most devastating fires”. Wikipedia’s article, Great Boston Fire of 1872 says,  the fire began “in the basement of a commercial warehouse,” and that “many of the affected buildings were made of brick and stone, but with wooden framing.” It also says “the fire could spread from rooftop to rooftop, and across narrow streets.”  Now I have questions. How can 776 buildings be destroyed and only 20 people die? Why would wood framing be used for brick and stone buildings? Is wood strong enough to support brick and stone? I can’t imagine it is. Something doesn’t make sense. Question everything friends.

I have to wonder if the history we’ve been told is really our true history.  Have we been indoctrinated to believe someone’s fake story? Have we been programmed to believe a history that has been falsified, altered, or hidden? Why would someone do that? If that’s true, then we have been indirectly bullied (#bullying, #antibullying). English writer, Kate Atkinson once said, “Alternate history fascinates me, as it fascinates all novelists, because ‘What if?’ is the big thing.” What if our history is false or altered? George Orwell, author of 1984, said, “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their own understanding of their history,” and it was Napoleon Bonaparte who allegedly said, “History is a set of lies agreed upon.” Why would they say such things? Were they trying to tell us something?  It is time for us to do our own investigating instead of blindly believing what we’re told. I have more to say on this topic, and possible answers to my questions above, in Part Two.

The Lungs of the Earth are in Trouble

A commentary on the state of our planet

For the past week or so, I’ve seen several posts and news reports about the Amazon Forest burning. This is terrible, and  if you’re not alarmed, you should be. Why? According to National Geographic’s Amazon Facts, the Amazon Forest is often referred to as ‘the lungs of the Earth’ because of its rich vegetation that takes carbon dioxide (CO2) out of the air, and releases oxygen back in it. More than 20% of the world’s oxygen is produced by the Amazon, and some articles say up to 30%.

Amazon Rain Forest

Here are some facts about the Amazon, according to National Geographic. The Amazon is the world’s largest tropical rainforest, covering over 5.5 million square kilometres. It is so big, that the UK and Ireland would fit into it 17 times! It has an incredibly rich ecosystem – there are around 40,000 plant species, 1,300 bird species, 3,000 types of fish, 430 mammals and 2.5 million different insects. The Amazon is home to a whole host of fascinating – and deadly – creatures, including electric eels, flesh eating piranhas, poison dart frogs, jaguars, and some seriously venomous snakes.

Since the beginning of 2019, Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research (INPE) has reported 72,843 fires in the country, with more than half of these being seen in the Amazon region. This means more than one-and-a-half soccer fields of Amazon rainforest is being destroyed every minute of every day. An 80% increase in deforestation has occurred so far this year compared to last year, according to the institute. That is alarming to say the least.

So why is the rainforest burning? According to the CNN article, Here’s what we know about the fires in the Amazon rainforest, farmers and cattle ranchers have long used fire to clear land and make it ready for use, so they are likely behind the unusually large number fires burning in the Amazon today. This year’s fires fit with an established seasonal agricultural pattern, said CNN meteorologist Haley Brink. “It’s the best time to burn because the vegetation is dry. Farmers wait for the dry season and they start burning and clearing the areas so that their cattle can graze. And that’s what we’re suspecting is going on …”

Mongabay,  a nonprofit environmental science and conservation news platform, agrees saying 65-70% of the deforestation in the Amazon is caused by cattle ranching, 25-30 by agriculture, and 2-3% by logging.

Amazon on fire

UNILAD, a youth platform for breaking news, in its article, Brazil’s President Is Actively Trying To Destroy Amazon, claims Bolsonaro, Brazil’s controversial far-right president, appears to be sabotaging a conservation effort aiming to conserve 265 million square kilometers of the Amazon forest. Brazil’s president is not the only president putting our planet in jeopardy. National Geographic has a running list of how Trump, the current resident of the US White House, is harming the planet, all designed to increase corporate profit.

So I must ask: Is leaving a planet that is inhabitable for our children and grandchildren a priority, or is making money? Saving our planet, which is in crisis, should be the priority. Back in October of 2018, the New York Post ran a headline, Terrifying climate change warning: 12 years until we’re doomed. The headline speaks for itself. The United Nations says,

Climate Change is the defining issue of our time and we are at a defining moment. From shifting weather patterns that threaten food production, to rising sea levels that increase the risk of catastrophic flooding, the impacts of climate change are global in scope and unprecedented in scale. Without drastic action today, adapting to these impacts in the future will be more difficult and costly.

How does Climate Change relate to the Amazon Forest? The answer relates to Greenhouse Gases of which CO2 is one of the biggest ones. As the forest burns, it releases CO2 into the air, contributing to global warming. As more and more of the forest is destroyed, less and less of the CO2 is removed from our atmosphere since trees trap CO2 and release O2. Remember, as I mentioned earlier, more than 20%-maybe 30%-of the world’s oxygen is produced by the Amazon. If the Amazon Forest disappears, we will have 20% to 30% less O2 for us to breathe. That is frightening, folks!

The way I see it, the world’s biggest forest—the Amazon Forest—is being deforested so more meat can be provided for the planet since 65-70% of the deforestation in the Amazon is caused by cattle ranching. A growing trend toward veganism and vegetarianism is happening, in part because of this issue. Food Revolution Network, a site committed to healthy, ethical, and sustainable food for all reports

Veganism was a top search trend in Canada in 2017. And the preliminary draft of Canada’s new Food Guide, released in 2017 by the Canadian government, favors plant-based foods

There’s been a 600% increase in people identifying as vegans in the U.S in the last three years.According to a report by research firm GlobalData, only 1% of U.S. consumers claimed to be vegan in 2014. And in 2017, that number rose to 6%.

Am I advocating that everyone should become vegans or vegetarians? No, but we certainly can decrease our meat consumption to help the planet. My wife and I have made that choice, not only to save the planet, but also for health reasons. In the September 2019 Reader’s Digest magazine is an article entitled, Foods: “Good or Bad” Too Simplistic, describes a Harvard lead analysis of 36 trials where red-meat was replaced with plant-based proteins to study the effects of meat verses plant-based diets.  Their conclusion was that cardiovascular risk factors changed more favourably with those on a plant-based diet. It seems there is increased evidence that diets high in meat—especially red meat—are not healthy. There are lots of books and documentaries on this topic, so don’t take my word for it; do your own research.

Perhaps it is time for us in North America to decrease our meat consumption for the sake our planet and maybe for our health as well. According to World Atlas’ article, Top Meat Consuming Countries In The World,  the United States is the second largest consumer of meat on the planet consuming 200.6 pounds of meat per person per year. Australia is number one at 205 pounds per person annually. Canada is in ninth place on the list of high meat-consuming countries.

We can stick our head in the sand and pretend everything is fine, or we can do something. To save our planet, there are a few things you can do. You can demand that protecting the planet is priority over profit. Demand our governments leave a planet that is inhabitable for our children and grandchildren. We can also decrease our consumption of meat. And lastly, learn about the issues. Learn about Climate Change, deforestation, and other issues that planet Earth faces. Our grandchildren are counting on it, and our planet depends on it.