heh u yt commentu Have long grass.. this is what the Police State you live under's response is. Probably the Long Grass SWAT team unit

What is a Code Case? | Austin Code Department
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F6yWyMNY4f8


jakoze oni to promotuji jakoze jo v duchu, ze by na nekoho mohl spadnout barak.
takhle jdou imho vzdy na lidi... pres neco rozumnyho... no jasne... prece nechceme aby nekoho zabila omitka... nebo dvere.. kdyby treba dvere mely rozbitou kliku nebo okno neslo otevrit, people can die!

takze inspektori kodu musi prosetrit , jestli je vsechno v cajku. a pokud chcete, muzete nekoho udat.

podobnou vec protlacili v CR pred par lety pod rouskou , ze musi urad (bez soudniho povoleni ke vstupu) mit moznost proverit, ze tam nepalite v krbu neco nevhodneho. opet jakoby rozumna vec, ale a) tohle muze zjistit klidne dron se senzory z komina b) tohle je zasadni naruseni ustavnich prav na vlastni pozemku..... to, co maji v Austinu, je zjevne o tri prdele dal...

--

jinak ad tu lure pointy... velky reset je hodne promotovanej, jakoze lidem da nove koncetiny, hluchy budou moct slyset, implantovane cipy vam budou otvirat dvere, muzete platit.. nemusite cekat ve fronte
ale tu druhou stranu v promotion clovek neuvidi.. co to bude znamenat do dusledku, kdyz se to pojme jako vzdy. nastroj k zotroceni.. k nejdokonalejsimu , ktere kdy lidstvo vynalezlo. pritom stacila jen troska fanatismu.

Rict si predpripravenou otazku "Nektere domy prece ale opravdu ohrozuji kolemjdouci!" nebo "Ty jsi proti tomu, aby invalidi mohli chodit!"

U COVID vakciny je to i ten spor s neskonalou snahou lidstva vyresit vsechny nemoci... mRNA technologie, co muze lecit i rakovinu. a celou radu dalsich nemoci... "ON je proti mRNA!" zneuctil tim samotneho Boha vedy a ten nas mozna ztresta nejaky tornadem nebo hurikanem. Na tehle urovni je soucasna veda :)
Celej ten koncept Gaia je od zacatku propagovanej soubezne

Beyond Anthropocentrism: UN General Assembly acknowledges Earth Jurisprudence - Gaia Foundation
https://www.gaiafoundation.org/beyond-anthropocentrism-un-general-assembly-acknowledges-earth-jurisprudence/

Called for by the UN General Assembly itself, the dialogue is an important recognition from the UN that the anthropocentric worldview that underpins our exploitative, injust economic, legal and governance systems, is the ultimate source of the multiple ecological, social and economic crises we now face.

James Lovelock talks about his Gaia hypothesis and climate change in 2014 interview – video | Environment | The Guardian
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/video/2022/jul/27/james-lovelock-talks-about-his-gaia-hypothesis-and-climate-change-in-2014-interview-video

James Lovelock: Gaia theory creator on coronavirus and turning 101 - BBC News
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/science-environment-53644147

British scientist James Lovelock says population growth means something like the virus is "almost inevitable".

https://courses.seas.harvard.edu/climate/eli/Courses/EPS281r/Sources/Gaia/Gaia-hypothesis-wikipedia.pdf

Gaia evolves through a cybernetic feedback system operated unconsciously by the biota, leading to broad
stabilization of the conditions of habitability in a full homeostasis. Many processes in the Earth's surface essential for
the conditions of life depend on the interaction of living forms, especially microorganisms, with inorganic elements.
These processes establish a global control system that regulates Earth's surface temperature, atmosphere composition
and ocean salinity, powered by the global thermodynamic desequilibrium state of the Earth system

Gaia hypothesis - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis

Criticism
After initially receiving little attention from scientists (from 1969 until 1977), thereafter for a period the initial Gaia hypothesis was criticized by a number of scientists, including Ford Doolittle,[54] Richard Dawkins[55] and Stephen Jay Gould.[48] Lovelock has said that because his hypothesis is named after a Greek goddess, and championed by many non-scientists,[42] the Gaia hypothesis was interpreted as a neo-Pagan religion. Many scientists in particular also criticized the approach taken in his popular book Gaia, a New Look at Life on Earth for being teleological—a belief that things are purposeful and aimed towards a goal. Responding to this critique in 1990, Lovelock stated, "Nowhere in our writings do we express the idea that planetary self-regulation is purposeful, or involves foresight or planning by the biota".

Stephen Jay Gould criticized Gaia as being "a metaphor, not a mechanism."[56] He wanted to know the actual mechanisms by which self-regulating homeostasis was achieved. In his defense of Gaia, David Abram argues that Gould overlooked the fact that "mechanism", itself, is a metaphor — albeit an exceedingly common and often unrecognized metaphor — one which leads us to consider natural and living systems as though they were machines organized and built from outside (rather than as autopoietic or self-organizing phenomena). Mechanical metaphors, according to Abram, lead us to overlook the active or agent quality of living entities, while the organismic metaphors of the Gaia hypothesis accentuate the active agency of both the biota and the biosphere as a whole.[57][58] With regard to causality in Gaia, Lovelock argues that no single mechanism is responsible, that the connections between the various known mechanisms may never be known, that this is accepted in other fields of biology and ecology as a matter of course, and that specific hostility is reserved for his own hypothesis for other reasons.[59]

Aside from clarifying his language and understanding of what is meant by a life form, Lovelock himself ascribes most of the criticism to a lack of understanding of non-linear mathematics by his critics, and a linearizing form of greedy reductionism in which all events have to be immediately ascribed to specific causes before the fact. He also states that most of his critics are biologists but that his hypothesis includes experiments in fields outside biology, and that some self-regulating phenomena may not be mathematically explainable.[59]

Natural selection and evolution
Lovelock has suggested that global biological feedback mechanisms could evolve by natural selection, stating that organisms that improve their environment for their survival do better than those that damage their environment. However, in the early 1980s, W. Ford Doolittle and Richard Dawkins separately argued against this aspect of Gaia. Doolittle argued that nothing in the genome of individual organisms could provide the feedback mechanisms proposed by Lovelock, and therefore the Gaia hypothesis proposed no plausible mechanism and was unscientific.[54] Dawkins meanwhile stated that for organisms to act in concert would require foresight and planning, which is contrary to the current scientific understanding of evolution.[55] Like Doolittle, he also rejected the possibility that feedback loops could stabilize the system.

Lynn Margulis, a microbiologist who collaborated with Lovelock in supporting the Gaia hypothesis, argued in 1999 that "Darwin's grand vision was not wrong, only incomplete. In accentuating the direct competition between individuals for resources as the primary selection mechanism, Darwin (and especially his followers) created the impression that the environment was simply a static arena". She wrote that the composition of the Earth's atmosphere, hydrosphere, and lithosphere are regulated around "set points" as in homeostasis, but those set points change with time.[60]

Evolutionary biologist W. D. Hamilton called the concept of Gaia Copernican, adding that it would take another Newton to explain how Gaian self-regulation takes place through Darwinian natural selection.[33][better source needed] More recently Ford Doolittle building on his and Inkpen's ITSNTS (It's The Song Not The Singer) proposal[61] proposed that differential persistence can play a similar role to differential reproduction in evolution by natural selections, thereby providing a possible reconciliation between the theory of natural selection and the Gaia hypothesis.[62]

Criticism in the 21st century
The Gaia hypothesis continues to be broadly skeptically received by the scientific community. For instance, arguments both for and against it were laid out in the journal Climatic Change in 2002 and 2003. A significant argument raised against it are the many examples where life has had a detrimental or destabilising effect on the environment rather than acting to regulate it.[7][8] Several recent books have criticised the Gaia hypothesis, expressing views ranging from "... the Gaia hypothesis lacks unambiguous observational support and has significant theoretical difficulties"[63] to "Suspended uncomfortably between tainted metaphor, fact, and false science, I prefer to leave Gaia firmly in the background"[9] to "The Gaia hypothesis is supported neither by evolutionary theory nor by the empirical evidence of the geological record".[64] The CLAW hypothesis,[18] initially suggested as a potential example of direct Gaian feedback, has subsequently been found to be less credible as understanding of cloud condensation nuclei has improved.[65] In 2009 the Medea hypothesis was proposed: that life has highly detrimental (biocidal) impacts on planetary conditions, in direct opposition to the Gaia hypothesis.[66]

In a 2013 book-length evaluation of the Gaia hypothesis considering modern evidence from across the various relevant disciplines, Toby Tyrrell concluded that: "I believe Gaia is a dead end*. Its study has, however, generated many new and thought provoking questions. While rejecting Gaia, we can at the same time appreciate Lovelock's originality and breadth of vision, and recognize that his audacious concept has helped to stimulate many new ideas about the Earth, and to champion a holistic approach to studying it".[67] Elsewhere he presents his conclusion "The Gaia hypothesis is not an accurate picture of how our world works".[68] This statement needs to be understood as referring to the "strong" and "moderate" forms of Gaia—that the biota obeys a principle that works to make Earth optimal (strength 5) or favourable for life (strength 4) or that it works as a homeostatic mechanism (strength 3). The latter is the "weakest" form of Gaia that Lovelock has advocated. Tyrrell rejects it. However, he finds that the two weaker forms of Gaia—Coeveolutionary Gaia and Influential Gaia, which assert that there are close links between the evolution of life and the environment and that biology affects the physical and chemical environment—are both credible, but that it is not useful to use the term "Gaia" in this sense and that those two forms were already accepted and explained by the processes of natural selection and adaptation.[69]

// jake to bude prekvapeni, az zjistime, ze pohanska stara okultni vira je v samotnem ustredi vedeckeho konsensu?

Common Austin Code Violations | AustinTexas.gov
https://www.austintexas.gov/department/common-austin-code-violations

Here are tips to help inspect your property:
Inside
Doors – are all doors working properly and in good repair? Make sure there’s no damage to the door jambs, hardware, weather stripping, or protective treatment.

Windows – are all window panes in place and unbroken? Are the window locks working? Windows should be weather tight with no breezes or moisture coming through. If used as an emergency exit, make sure it can open and is unobstructed.

Walls, floors, & ceilings – are they in good condition? Make sure there are no cracks, holes, gaps, trip hazards, or damage to these surfaces.

Electrical – Check your light switches and outlets to see if they are working and in good repair. Make sure there is no exposed or damaged wiring.

Sink, toilet, tub, & shower – are the faucets and fixtures working correctly? Is there sufficient water pressure? Check that the water gets hot enough – it should be able to reach 110 degrees Fahrenheit after three minutes of running.

Appliances & cabinets – are they damaged, inoperable, or missing parts?

HVAC system – can it heat the room to at least 68 degrees Fahrenheit? Make sure the exhaust pipe is properly connected and the area is kept clear.

Fire protection – Are the smoke and carbon monoxide alarms working? Make sure there is a working alarm in your bedroom and at least one alarm in the common area.

Water heater – Is there sufficient water pressure? Make sure that water can get up to 110 degrees Fahrenheit (after three minutes of running) and keep the area clear.

Infestation – Look for signs of rodents, bed bugs, roaches, fleas, bees, or other pests.



Outside
Stairway – are the treads in good repair and secure? Check for trip hazards and an appropriate stair riser (or step height) on the stairs.

Balcony, deck, porch, patio, & landing – are the walking surfaces in good repair, smooth, and undamaged? Make sure support systems are anchored and functional.

Handrails & guardrails – are they in good repair and secure? Check that the rails are not cracked, loose, missing, incorrectly spaced, or lacking protective treatment.

Walls – are they in good condition? Make sure there is no damage and they have the proper trim, protective treatment, and remain weather tight to protect the inside.

Electrical fixtures – are they in good repair? Make sure any wiring is covered up.

Plumbing – is there a backflow preventer installed on the hose bib? Is there leaking? Check the clean-out covers and piping.

Roof – is the roof covering, soffit, and fascia all intact and in good repair? Make sure there are no leaks in the rain gutters or downspouts.

Fences, walls, sidewalks, parking surfaces & carports – Are they in good repair and undamaged? Check for potholes, trip hazards, and uneven walking surfaces.

Trash – Is there trash and rubbish around the property, overflowing dumpsters? Check if there is old furniture, tires, or junk outside of the dumpster.

Join Austin Code Explorers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yjNMhSSKQyY


Man fired shots at Austin Code enforcement over lawn care, home on fire, APD says
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svs-vhbK874

Covid: The Trojan Horse For The Climate Change Con
https://www.bitchute.com/video/LZfqQDo0HO55/

ROSS CLARK: How absurd you may be banned from selling your own home if you don't meet eco rules | Daily Mail Online
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9438933/ROSS-CLARK-absurd-banned-selling-home-dont-meet-eco-rules.html

Homeowners will have to cover the required re-modification costs of up to £18,000 themselves — after ministers scrapped grant schemes.

But shockingly, if you find yourself unable to afford these green-energy improvements, you could be forbidden from selling your home — or even banned from re-mortgaging it, possibly leading to your home being repossessed.

// dokazete si predstavit, ze by se neceho takoveho dotkla media treba aspon 20 m tyci? :)
tohle pritom neni nic noveho.. podobne uz to slo v nekterych mistech ve svete... pred min. 10 lety treba v Austinu, Texas.

myslenka, ze veskere nemovitosti budou zabaveny, je uz zjevne starsi... proste zatepleni domu, oken, ... desitky pozadavku.. a pribyvajici kazdym tydnem... a pokuta 1000$ za kazdy den ilegalniho uzivani domu bez splneni tehle pozadavku. ci tak nejak.. nepamatuju si presne detaily zakona, jaka je ta castka, ale byla nemala... a pocitala se za kazdy bod nesplneni "eko" pozadavku... takze nutno vynasobit poctem precinum vuci klima bohu.

s takovym systemem by slo krasne zbavit celou populaci jejich nemovitosti, protoze kdo by chtel neco takove vubec drzet, kdyz vlastnictvi muze jit vlastne do ztraty? hipici se samopaly si jiste vyjuchnou.. ale je nam asi jasne, o co tu jde? :)