I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼

#Decentralise #WakeUp #RememberWhoYouAre #PeopleAreStupid #BeyondHelp. #AwakeNotWoke #RESIST #FightTheCCP #FreeHongKong #SaveTaiwan

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

The Guardian is the most absorbing of newspapers......That’s why the bedwetters love it!

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@lukecaverns I’m in Dorset mate!

[Darshak Rana ⚡️ @thedarshakrana]

The most dangerous equation ever written suggests reality is a lie running on code.

Melvin Vopson published his second law of infodynamics in AIP Advances in 2022, demonstrating that information entropy in isolated systems decreases or stabilizes over time, running directly opposite to physical entropy. The universe trends toward disorder in matter but toward compression in information. That asymmetry doesn’t exist in any purely natural system ever observed. It exists in every efficiently designed computational system ever built.

The numbers get stranger. Vopson calculated that a single bit of information at room temperature carries a mass of approximately 2.9 multiplied by 10 to the power of negative 38 kilograms. The observable universe contains an estimated 6 multiplied by 10 to the power of 80 bits of information. Information isn’t metaphorical in his framework. It’s physically embedded in the fabric of reality as a fundamental constituent alongside matter and energy.
John Wheeler, one of the most decorated physicists of the 20th century, spent decades arguing “It from Bit.” Every particle, every field, every dimension derives its existence from binary information states.

The physical world emerges from yes or no answers at the quantum level. Most people dismissed it as philosophical rambling from an old man. Wheeler was describing an operating system.

The holographic principle developed by ’t Hooft and Susskind adds the architectural proof. Maximum information content of any region of space scales with its surface area, not its volume. Reality stores itself on its own outer boundary. That is the signature of a compressed file, not an infinite physical cosmos growing organically from nothing.
Vopson then proposed an actual laboratory experiment in 2023. Colliding a particle with its antiparticle and precisely measuring information released during annihilation could confirm whether information is fundamental to existence or merely derivative. The technology to run this experiment already exists. The funding doesn’t.

A universe that compresses itself, encodes onto boundaries, renders only what’s observed, and carries measurable information mass isn’t behaving like nature.
It’s behaving like software written by something that didn’t want to waste memory.

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@havingagiraf @BishopDewar @brian92422389 Words within words, some things don’t need to be said to be heard.

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

If you reach the point where you looking around and asking yourself “what happened? Everything’s changed” then it’s already too late.
I’m not a Christian but I have Christian values and appreciate the Christian culture that this great country has evolved from and should maintain

[Bishop Ceirion H. Dewar FSHC @BishopDewar]

As a Bishop, I cannot stay silent. I have today drafted and sent an open letter to His Majesty King Charles III, the text of which reads as follows:

To:
His Majesty, Charles III,
King of the United Kingdom and the Realms,
Supreme Governor of the Church of England,
Bearer of the ancient title Defender of the Faith.

Your Majesty,

I write to you neither as a politician nor as a commentator, but as one of your loyal subjects who, as a bishop of Christ’s Church, cannot remain silent while the Christian foundations of this kingdom are steadily dismantled.

Sir, there are moments in the life of a nation when silence becomes a form of betrayal. If I refused to speak to Your Majesty now, this would be such a moment.

For more than a thousand years the Crown of this realm has stood in solemn covenant with the Christian faith.

The laws of this land were shaped by it.
The liberties of our people were nurtured by it.
The conscience of our civilisation was formed by it.

From the abbeys of medieval England to the parish churches of our villages, from the preaching of the Reformers to the missionary zeal that carried the Gospel to the ends of the earth, the Christian faith has not merely influenced Britain — it has defined her.

Yet today that inheritance is being quietly but deliberately eroded. Across the institutions of this nation there is a growing hostility toward the faith that built them.

Christian belief is mocked in the public square. Christian morality is dismissed as intolerance. Christian institutions are pressured to surrender doctrine in order to conform to the ideology of the age.

Within the very Church that bears the name of England, voices have arisen that appear more eager to mirror the spirit of the age than to proclaim the eternal truth of the Gospel.

Meanwhile, beyond the walls of our churches, powerful political movements openly speak of removing Christianity from its historic place within the life of this nation.

What would once have been whispered is now proclaimed openly: that Britain must become a post-Christian state.

It is in this context that I write to you, Your Majesty. For the British Crown does not stand apart from this crisis.

The Sovereign of this realm bears a title that is not merely historic but sacred in its origin and meaning: Defender of the Faith. Those words are not decorative. They are a charge.

They speak of a monarch whose duty is not merely to preside over the ceremonies of the Church, but to stand as a guardian of the Christian inheritance of the nation.

Yet many among your subjects now ask, with increasing anxiety: “Who will defend that inheritance today?”

They see a nation drifting from its foundations. And they ask whether the Crown will remain silent while that inheritance is dismantled.

Your Majesty, may I be so bold as to observe that your coronation oath was not a poetic formality. It was a solemn vow made before Almighty God to maintain and preserve the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law.

Those words bind the conscience of the sovereign. They remind the Crown that its authority is not merely constitutional but moral. The monarch is not merely a symbol of national continuity, but a custodian of the spiritual inheritance that shaped this realm.

History records moments when kings and emperors were confronted by the Church and reminded that their authority was accountable before God. In the fourth century Ambrose of Milan stood before the Emperor Theodosius I and reminded him that even the ruler of an empire must bow before the moral law of Christ.

That tradition of prophetic witness has never disappeared. Nor should it. For when rulers forget the foundations upon which their authority rests, the Church must speak — not with hostility, but with holy clarity.

And so, I write to say this, Your Majesty: The Christian character of this nation is under profound and accelerating assault.

If the Crown does not stand visibly and courageously in defence of that inheritance, history will record that the guardians of Britain’s institutions watched in silence as the foundations were removed.

The issue before us is not nostalgia. It is civilisation. Remove Christianity from the story of Britain and you do not create a neutral society — you create a moral vacuum. And history teaches us that moral vacuums are never left empty for long.

Your Majesty now stands at a crossroads that few monarchs in modern history have faced.

For the erosion of Britain’s Christian inheritance will not ultimately be judged by speeches made in Parliament or debates in the press. It will be judged by whether those entrusted with the guardianship of our ancient institutions chose to defend them — or merely preside over their quiet surrender.

You may preside over the quiet dissolution of Britain’s Christian identity. Or you may rise to the ancient responsibility entrusted to the Crown and speak with clarity about the faith that built this kingdom. The first path requires little courage. The second will require a great deal. But it is the path that history honours.

Your Majesty’s subjects are not asking for religious coercion. They are asking for leadership. They are asking that the sovereign who bears the title Defender of the Faith remember what that title means.

They are asking that the Crown hear the growing cry of anguish from Christians across this land who feel that the spiritual inheritance of their nation is being surrendered without resistance. And they are asking whether the Crown will stand with them.

For the faith that shaped Britain is not merely a cultural ornament. It is the wellspring from which our laws, our liberties, and our moral imagination have flowed. If it is cast aside, the nation will discover — too late — that it has severed itself from the very roots that sustained it.

Your Majesty, to many the Crown is a symbol of authority. But before God it is also a symbol of stewardship. And stewardship carries with it the duty to defend what has been entrusted.

May Almighty God grant Your Majesty the wisdom to discern this hour, and the courage to fulfil the sacred duty entrusted to the Crown.

Yours faithfully,

Bishop Ceirion H. Dewar FSHC
Missionary Bishop
Diocese of Providence
Confessing Anglican Church

@PhilHs10 @RevBrettMurphy @revwickland @BishopRobert1 @GBNews @TalkTV @danwootton @Jacob_Rees_Mogg @LozzaFox @BackBrexitBen @RupertLowe10 @KemiBadenoch @JohnCleese

[Raja Miah @recusant_raja]

They called us far right extremists when we exposed the rape gangs.

They demonised us as racists when we spoke out against the growing Islamist threat in this country and the creeping of Sharia law into public life.

And they called us conspiracy theorists when we exposed how the Pakistani biraderi exploit weaknesses in our democracy to manipulate elections.

On every single occasion, we have been proven right. On every occasion, they have tried and failed to silence us.

The question now is what happens with that vindication. The establishment cannot keep dismissing what ordinary people have seen with their own eyes, documented, and paid a personal price to expose.

Our names have been cleared. Our evidence is a matter of public record. Now we must attack and take the fight to them in a way they have never before experienced.

What is needed next is not more inquiries or carefully worded reviews, it is accountability. Real consequences, for real people, who looked the other way while children were abused and democracy was hollowed out from within.

The same people that protected the rape gangs are the ones involved in rigging elections. When I tell you that children were sold for votes, this is the method that was used.

We can fix this. We will fix this. We will take back what was ours and make sure a heavy price is paid by those responsible.

Stand with me.

————-

I’m Raja Miah MBE. For seven years, I led a campaign that exposed how senior Labour politicians helped protect Pakistani rape gangs and helped force a national inquiry.

You won’t see me on the BBC. You won’t read my work in the legacy press. That’s not an accident. I take this to a place from where there is no coming back.

I document everything in my newsletter. It’s 100% free to read. If this work matters to you, if you believe it must continue, I need your backing.

My work is free. No paywalls. No gatekeeping. No exclusions. Because the truth shouldn’t belong only to those who can afford it. If you can afford to do so, supporting me costs as little as 75p a week (£30 a year). Sign up here;
👉 https://t.co/56iWix5yC4

If you can’t commit to a regular subscription, a one-off contribution genuinely helps keep this alive:
👉 https://t.co/kvFfhHNJ03
👉 https://t.co/8Og0hDKfjy

We’re up against a machine, politicians, police, officials, and media, working together to shrink, sanitise, and bury the truth. This work survives because of you.

If you’ve ever shared my posts, learned something, or felt less alone reading them, stand with me. I need your help.

Raja 🙏

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@RoyRogers_HTMS Reminds me of death from above and lightning bolt.

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@Kekius_Sage The speed limit is the maximum processing power of the simulation.

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@JohnCleese It’s called “elite capture”

[James Lindsay, anti-Communist @ConceptualJames]

Recorded back in the 1960s, John Cleese (of Monty Python fame) made an excellent satirical commentary exposing the friend-enemy distinction as being at the heart of both far-left and rar-right extremism, inter alia, including its psychological appeal.

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@jeyeins @Tartarian14 I don’t think so. It’s not that I could be in every room of the house but when you find me it turns out that I’m in the kitchen. It’s that I AM in every room of the house until you look…and only then am I in the kitchen only.

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@TaleMasterTOV @Tartarian14 I like this.

[✨The Alchemist✨ @Tartarian14]

A question most physicists won’t touch because it ends careers:

The measurement problem isn’t unsolved.

It’s avoided.

We’ve had quantum mechanics for 100 years. We can calculate anything to 12 decimal places. We put it in your phone. We won a shelf of Nobels.

But we still cannot tell you what happens when you look at an electron.

Not “we don’t know the math.” The math is fine. We don’t know what the math means. And the dirty secret is….. most physicists have quietly agreed to stop asking.

“Shut up and calculate” isn’t a philosophy….. it’s trauma surfacing.

The real problem no one wants to say out loud?

Every interpretation of quantum mechanics….. Copenhagen, Many-Worlds, pilot wave, all of them….. is metaphysics wearing a lab coat. None of them are experimentally distinguishable.

They’re not science.

They’re competing creation myths with equations attached.

And the thing that makes physicists break out in hives?

The one variable they can’t remove from the equation?

The observer.

Consciousness itself remains the uninvited guest at the table that no formalism can seat or dismiss.

Von Neumann put it in the math in 1932. Wigner took it seriously.

Everyone since has been trying to make it go away. It won’t.
The universe apparently doesn’t care about your materialist comfort zone.
You don’t have to go full “consciousness creates reality” to admit this is a scandal. You just have to notice that the most successful theory in the history of science has a hole in its foundation the size of what is real….. and we’ve been wallpapering over it with decoherence handwaving for decades.

Decoherence explains why you don’t see superpositions. It does NOT explain why one outcome occurs. That’s not my opinion. That’s Zurek’s.

So here’s a challenge should you choose to accept it:

Why are we comfortable building quantum computers on a theory we can’t interpret?

And what does it say about science that the question itself is considered unprofessional?

The measurement problem isn’t hard because the math is hard. It’s hard because the answer might be weirder than materialism can survive.

[Zia Yusuf @ZiaYusufUK]

This may be the most disgusting thing Starmer has ever done 👇

[Andrew Neil @afneil]

My monologue on what the new world order means for Britain, from @TimesRadio today:

For those of you who’ve not yet copped that we’re at a watershed in global politics I suggest you have a read of Mark Carney’s speech in Davos yesterday. It’s not often a Canadian prime minister charts a seminal change in world politics. But Carney, a former governor of the Bank of England, has. 

This is the key passage:

“Over the past two decades, a series of crises in finance, health, energy, and geopolitics have laid bare the risks of extreme global integration. And as a result, many countries are drawing the same conclusions—that they must develop greater strategic autonomy: in energy, food, critical minerals, in finance and supply chains. And this impulse is understandable. A country that can’t feed itself, fuel itself or defend itself has few options. When the rules no longer protect you, you must protect yourself.”

Coming from a fully-paid up member of the liberal global elite, this is dynamite. Carney says the era of global integration is over and that what he calls ‘middle powers’, like Canada and the UK, who benefitted from it and got used to working through global institutions — like the WTO, the UN, COP, NATO, the EU — need to realise the game is up. 

If you can’t feed, fuel and defend yourself in this new world of rupture you’re finished. So these are his priorities for Canada. He’s junked a lot of his net zero baggage to increase Canada’s energy security. He’s moving from multilateral to bilateral deals he thinks will benefit Canada, most recently with China. And he’s doubling spending on defence. 

The British government should take stock. Carney’s world of rupture has been brought about by Donald Trump’s wrecking ball approach to the rules-based world order that has served us so well these past 80 years. 

It’s played into the hands of the autocrats of Moscow, Beijing and elsewhere who want to replace that world order with a system far more attuned to their interests. Trump is obliging them. 

Food. Fuel. Defence. These are Carney’s watchwords for a scary new world in which middle powers need to seek strategic autonomy when old alliances and multinational institutions no longer work. They should guide British policy too. 

We need to be able to feed ourselves better. To be able to count on cheap, secure sources of energy. And to be able to defend ourselves from multiple and growing threats. At the moment the Starmer government is doing none of the above. 

Instead it is lumbering business with the most expensive energy costs in the world and households with the second or third most expensive domestic energy in the world. 

It is pursuing a multi-billion pound dash to net zero while adding only a few crumbs to the defence budget. 

And it’s covering good farming land with solar panels. 

It would be hard to think of a set of policies less designed to give us the strategic autonomy Carney thinks middle powers must strive for. 

Britain needs a step change in its energy, food and defence policies. The billions earmarked for net zero need to be diverted to rearming the nation. 

We need an energy policy that couples secure supplies with lower prices so that we can start to rebuild some of our heavy industry, essential to defence. 

And we need a farm policy that champions growing food once more rather than prioritising various fashionable environmental wheezes. 

None of this is likely to happen under the Starmer government. The PM has no vision or aptitude for such a strategy. His party is a prisoner to old 20th century ways of thinking, as is much of British politics on the left and right. 

But unless the Carney challenge is recognised and policy changed in radical ways to meet it, we risk not only further economic decline in the rest of this decade but growing vulnerability to the evil intent of our enemies. And without America at our back to protect us.

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@ClimateWarrior7 I shall immediately be commencing a hunger strike in solidarity with the poor cows whom you indirectly exploited in order to get that cheese.

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@DaleVince Do you have a view on non-stun slaughter that has miraculously escaped being banned?

[Milan Mazurek @MilanMazurek]

🔥 I will fight the European Commission until the end! 💪

[I See You: All Of You.🐰 🦔 🇬🇧🇭🇰🇹🇼 @finalthrows]

@jeremycorbyn I am so very confused. Does one not just eat food when it’s both available and needed and if you choose not to then that’s either a personal choice or a mental illness?