Skip to content

The Philosophy of The Beach

Free-flowing thoughts:

On the beach, I sense the futility of life. Nothing helps me understand my inner-being better than being here. It is where the safety of the land meets the hidden depths of the sea. Oceans of exploration, taking risks and finding new beginnings. My conscious mind is seemingly sane – the unconscious mind troubled.

Blue sky or massive storm represent calm or anger. The wind and its hidden abrasive sand are harsh sentiments within conversations. The sun blinds or enlightens. A sea of hidden dangers: Sky, water, sand, wind and sun symbolise humanity’s attitudes and personalities. Why are so many addicted to water? Water and emotions: tears of happiness or joy. Does a diver’s inner-being return to the safety of the womb? Does a sailors yacht represent freedom? What words are hidden in the rumbling waves? ‘We will bring you home and take you away’.

I think how little we know of life’s mysteries. Nothing is needed to be happy. As we age, we know less than children, the magic of imagination is easily lost.

My mind wanders: I make a recording it also free flows: the choice is to limit the editing:

A title is evasive – I’ll settle on “Beach Philosophy”

Alice and Bella played all day:

I watch Bella and Alice play: they do not need money or property. Their happiness is within imagination and stories about sea serpents and mermaids.

Friendship

The construction of sandcastles and mermaid palaces is evidence of the girl’s creative minds. Kids should be guided to know that peace, happiness and working together opens the gates to a fulfilling life. And of course, I realise, they already know this truth, it is the illusion of adulthood, which destroys reality.

Tools of The Happiness Trade

See You Soon

Let’s Get Out of Here

Thousand Words – Or Thirty Minute Essay – No editing the article is written in free-flow – Grammar Nazis can jump the lemming cliff 👺

Let’s Get Out Of Here – Follow the Inner Being

One of my favourite writers is Samantha Crystalcats. She use’s words like knives to cut through a tough meat satire or spread Jersey double cream on a strawberry scone love story. I love talking to Sam about writing. She puts my thought’s into perspective, and this seems to open my mind to greater creative possibilities.

Samantha visited the shop with her son, the actor Alex Marlowe. While Liz and Alex were chatting about crystals, birthdays and university: I took the opportunity to mention I’d removed most of my titles from Kindle. I answered the question ‘why?’ with the truth: ‘Samantha they are crap’, and that ended the conversation on culling the Kindle library.

Keep Away From The Crowds

I asked her opinion:

“Sam, I’m writing a book about my thoughts on sixty years of life. It’s as nasty as mugger with a rusty cut-throat razor. Full of fucks and bastards and as caustic as a soda bath. But do you know? It is the best thing I’ve typed for years’.

Samantha observed: ‘You know when something is good, Ian. As we age, we discover the intuition is a good guide; it’s the advantage of accumulated years. I find accumulated wisdom helps us see the idiots and not care about their opinion or acts: I want to be left alone to do as I please. Write as you like, in the way you choose.’

‘Yes, but it contains ten’s of expletives. And I worry about the readers’.

‘You are not listening to my answer; you wouldn’t be writing in this style unless your creative self wanted to express something from the heart. How do you know you’ll not appeal to a new and more interesting audience? Why not write as you like and in the way you choose?’

Samantha reinforced the first rule of creating artistic work: we must follow the inner self, the output must be an interpretation of our thoughts. There is no doubt in her message: writing or creating from other people’s perspective produces stale work. My friend is right; one has to write from the true-self. Adapting one’s thoughts to please other people will not work.

My notebook is my thought net. One evening the jottings were focussed on success. So deep went the meditations and note-taking I was still awake at three. A realisation was every time I’d made decent money and enjoyed success; my attitude was mean and unforgiving. In fact, during prosperous times, I couldn’t give a fuck about anyone’s opinion. I followed my intuition, even if the conscious mind said ‘no’ I went with the creative idea.

I now see as time slipped by, I’d compromised my creative mind, personality and inner-being and attempted to fit in with social protocols. As a result, my inner-being became unhappy and discordant. Drink and anger became the mask. Those I knew lived with the hell of my weakness and frustrations. In the end, everything collapsed. Is the conclusion it’s better to follow gut feeling than the opinion of others? I’d say from my perspective; the answer is ‘Yes’.

Furthermore, I’m convinced if the inner-being is unhappy, it will sabotage everything we do. It will encourage failure and destruction of relationships, doing anything to free itself from living within situations it hates. Unhappy relationship? Do some people have an affair: Unhappy at work? Fuck it up. Are you dissatisfied with life? Drink and eat yourself to death. There is a memory of a psychiatrist friend telling me most addicts are committing acceptable suicide. And there could be truth in the idea.

Freedom’s an Empty Cage

It seems to me self discovery is an essential aspect to living a happy and successful life. Another point of happiness is by choosing carefully those chosen as friends and companions. Understanding relationships with people can only work if we understand or know ourselves. I work better with like-minded people

I’d be a poor friend to a drug dealer or addict. There would be no use in me attending a party given by religious sects. Dialogue with a spiritual guru or a disciple will come to nought. Talk to me about media, writing, organising special events, photography and video production, and my inner creative being comes alive. Talk about public events and shows and community-based organisations, and my being becomes a honey bee, gathering ideas to take to a hive of ideas.

I’m convinced individuals who understand their life purpose. And learn the methods needed to attain the goal will be happy. It may take years to fulfil the inner need but climbing the mountain is always more complicated than standing at the summit. And only when the mountain is conquered do we see how arduous the journey. I have always loved photography and creativity; today, these tools are ninety-nine per cent of my income.

When I am putting together a 13000-word show guide for an event we are organising, the skills involved are writing and collating the document. I will print one-thousand guides and take great satisfaction in seeing people reading it during the show. Before the shows, we have produced videos and tens of articles about our Well Being Shows. And I know visitors come through the doors because of my endeavour.

At the event, I will take hundreds of photographs, audio record and video tens of interviews. In the following weeks, this media will be used to promote our future shows. I like to think my creative mind has accomplished a great awareness of the business we have created. Most important is if my inner-being is asked ‘are you happy?’ The inner reply is a feeling of wellbeing and accomplishment.

Shameful BBC – Let Down

BBC – Ian Timothy

Like many people, I am dismayed by the decision of the BBC to take away the television licence fee concession for people who are over seventy-five. It is no surprise the turnaround is recognised as an act of greed and selfishness. The corporation’s viewpoint is they cannot afford to subsidise the aged population of this country.

However, two years ago, the BBC applied to the government for an increase in the television licence fee. In return for the price hike, the BBC agreed to cover the over seventy-five licence concession previously paid by the public purse. The reality of the BBC’s move is they have broken a contractual agreement with the British population. How so? Well, the government represents the population.

In this instance, we see other issues which have not been considered. For example, they ignore an essential aspect of the situation. It is that the population is increasing and many more families are buying the enforced television licence. And although age expectancy is rising, this is not in proportion to the increase in new television subscriptions.

Last week saw outrage due to the BBC’s selfish decision. We read people’s comments, and two points of concern prevail. One) the amount of money so-called celebrities earn from the British public’s contribution to the corporation’s finances. Two) the announcement of twenty-five thousand-pound salary jumps for many of the executives. 

We must hope the BBC bows to public pressure and reverses this act of contempt for the British people. From my perspective, I see this greed as an indication of wealth, ignoring the reality of having to watch every penny of our income. 

To some degree, we must blame ourselves for this sorry state of affairs. There is too much idolising of celebrity. And an excess of reliance on television for entertainment. In effect, the BBC has its customers over a barrel. One of their arguments this week was that people are prepared to pay for satellite viewing and the BBC licence represents excellent value for money.

Is this accurate? Not by my way of thinking. The difference is in the word choice. We have the opportunity to watch Sky Television and pay for as much or as little as desired. And although the BBC have competition from the other channels. The unfair advantage for the BBC is viewers are forced to pay for all of the services: they cannot cherry-pick their preference.

For fairness, let’s look at the BBC’s case: here is the contra-argument:

The estimated cost of subsidising the over seventy-fives is £745m, a fifth of the BBC’s budget by 2021/22. And continuing to fund free TV licences for all over-75s would have resulted in “unprecedented closures”. The broadcaster indicates that BBC Two, BBC Four, the BBC News Channel, the BBC Scotland channel, Radio 5live, and several local radio stations would all have been at risk if the subsidy had continued.

The question to consider is should the over seventy-fives enjoy a free licence or should the BBC close down these services? It is possible the answer lies in reviewing the viewing or listening figures for the whole of the corporation and removing the chaff from the wheat. The BBC has become an over-bloated slug: The BBC’s national coverage of the news is sufficient. The tens of BBC local radio stations are competing with similar numbers of commercial radio stations. Why not allow commercial enterprises to thrive? 

There is also an argument for closing The World Service a ‘hang-over’ from the so-called British Empire. The reasoning here is the BBC is now acknowledged as having a political bias. And the old days of London offering fair and balanced news is over. And who is really interested in a story from an outdated establishment? We can use the internet for British and World news when travelling abroad.

How can the excess of wages to celebrities be justified? Multi-Millionaire footballers being paid millions each year and similar overblown salaries to the likes of Evans, Ross and Ball. The justification is they attract viewers and listeners. But there is a problem with this argument and one which many seem to ignore.

The BBC is a corporation formed initially to provide entertainment and information for the British people. In the mandate, there is an enforced payment for a licence fee. It is this revenue which pays for the service. Indeed the collection of this revenue is so aggressive it is believed 12% of all small court claims are licence fee-related. Surely it is the corporation’s responsibility to work within the income? And this means providing a service. It does not encompass competing with other media broadcasting businesses. 

Another issue is the problem of the disclosure. The BBC resists full disclosure of wages and expenses: as an example, the cost of servicing the Glastonbury festival. An excuse of breach of human rights is used for non-disclosure of this information. The corporation is also careful not to include the tens of millions of income received from selling and syndicating productions. Some of the old television series continues to generate incredible revenue for the corporation. Another additional revenue is the syndication of coverage of sports events. However, this is not mentioned in defence of enforcing the over seventy-five licence payments. The corporation only focusses on the licence revenue NOT the whole of the corporation’s returns. Readers will do well to reflect on this aspect with care. For example, BBC Worldwide Ltd earned the BBC 250 million in 2018. As a separate business, this is not entered into BBC Ltd profit or revenue.

In conclusion: 

Readers should research the total revenue attained by the BBC various outside ventures. Adding the corporation’s profits from other branches changes the actual figures. This non-disclosure is a reflection of contempt the BBC executives have for the British public. The BBC has forgotten its mandate and considers itself as above the consensus of the people it serves. It is not a business, and it is a service with a mandate to serve the people. If the enforcement of its income advantages the BBC by law, its executives should realise this protection establishes they are bound to the people it serves.

The British people are continually let down by governments and public bodies which serve them. Mandates, pre-election manifestos, referendum outcome, are three examples of letdowns and turnaround without consultation. An obvious contempt of the people who pay for their wages is beyond doubt. 

A final thought:

One wonders if the government’s allowing the BBC to ignore the agreement when the licence fee was increased (That of the BBC covering the cost of the over seventy-five years old licence concession.) is a reward for the apparent bias of BBC’s coverage of the news?

Here I will leave you to test your ability to utilise open-minded thinking.

Ian Timothy

Misunderstood

I’m sure we all encounter situations where our intention is misunderstood. We see something one way, and a friend or someone you know sees a different side.

As I become older, my tolerance diminishes. No longer will I argue the point and unless there is a good reason for me to look at the other viewpoint: my perspective is: “Don’t like it? Let’s call it a day”.

It is interesting to find people of a similar age seem to ask the same attitude. I’m not going to see another sixty years and believe me, and I don’t like this idea one jot. In certainty, reflecting on my life experience, the conclusion is I wasted the first thirty years. This fact is a sobering reflection many of my friends also entertain in the early hours of the morning.

For those of you who are in the early to mid-thirties, the suggestion is in fifteen years you’ll be fifty and ten years later knocking on the door of retirement. Make sure you understand every day you waste will be one of regret in days to come.

The recording is twenty minutes long and unedited! I like the idea of ‘Raw Thought’s’ indeed I’ve almost changed the name of this weblog to that name. We live in a beautiful world and never has there been more opportunity to express intimate feelings.

One of my favourite places is the beach, Anderby Creek on the east coast. It is a vast expanse of sand and sea and wind. During the recording, you’ll hear the wind and drops of rain tapping on my umbrella. Enderby is a special place: Liz says the recording seems to capture the atmosphere.

See You Soon

Boxer!

Slow Speed? Go For It!

Last week I had a chance meeting with Raymond Ford, the American featherweight boxer. He was in England to fight at the Motorpoint. He convincingly won his bout, and we hope to see him again in the UK.

I became engrossed in conversation with Dave. He had travelled from Camden, New York with the boxer,  he was at the market eating Nottingham’s traditional food ‘Mushy Peas and Mint Sauce’. It was not long before I asked the magic question: ‘Can I take your photograph?

Ray and Dave

The camera in the bag was a Nikkormat the lens a Nikkor 50mm f1.4: So I opened up the aperture to 1.4 and set the shutter to 1/15th of a second. Four frames taken on Fomapan 100 yielded two reasonable negatives. (Film developed in Rodinal 50+1 for 12.5 minutes).

Never be afraid to use slow speeds and wide apertures. The images can be rewarding. These two frames are not the sharpest. Although, six by nine-inch prints would look just fine. The subject outweighs the ultimate detail. No cropping as usual and the choice was to frame the image reasonably loosely because of the limited depth of focus.

Ray and Dave

There is a hard lesson learned here; my thoughts must have been sleeping at home. Why did I only take the four frames? And why didn’t I take individual portraits of Ray and Dave? No Answer other than brain block stupidity. Usually there is no reticence when using film: I’d use a whole cassette on a flower if the subject was worthy.

It would not have mattered if I’d taken thirty-six or seventy-two frames. The opportunity was lost. A hard lesson learned, and one never forgotten. Film costs nothing compared to the memories it records. I know this adage: why didn’t I follow it with the session?

Nikkormat 50mm f1.4

Interestingly my favoured Nikkor 50mm is the f2.0 H. I put the f1.4 on the body by pure chance. The Nikkormat is a superb camera: I own four, and only one has a meter issue. The cameras work faultlessly even though they are nudging fifty years old.

Pentax S1a – 50mm f2.0

I prefer my Pentax S1a’s above any other camera. But all have needed servicing by Eric at Pentax repairs. I select the Nikkormat’s in rotation as I do with my other cameras. If you desire to keep your cameras working, you need to use them often. It is recommended you run your camera through their shutter speed range once a week. Use ‘em or lose ‘em.

See You Soon

Weekend With Alice and Tristan

Kids are special and exhausting. Liz and I were tasked with looking after Alice and Tristan for the day. It was not long before the recorder was put to use:

Alice Listening to Her Recording

The first recording is with Alice she talks about losing her milk teeth. The microphone noise is Tristan getting in on the interview.

The second recording is Alice and Tristan playing the various musical instruments acquired over the last few years. My feeling is there is a way to go before they hit the big time. However, we all have to start somewhere and the earlier the better.

Alice and Tristan Play Music

The day flew by and although great fun: The two kids are exhausting to look after. No wonder Becky (their mum) is so healthy!

See You Soon

Depth of Focus

In the last article, I wrote about depth in focus. And the limitation was the Canon 5000’s auto exposure. And Yes! There is a way of setting the shutter speed to adjust or fix the aperture on the Canon however, the series of articles about the Canon is centred on using it as a novice’s photo-instrument. Remember the idea is to see if less than £100-00’s worth of kit can reward the photographer.

In this article, the intention is to explain that by using a wide aperture, the photographer keeps the background out of focus. This isolates the subject in the image. All of the images were taken with a Nikkormat FTn and Nikkor 50mm f1.4. The film is FomaPan 100 – developed in Rodinal 1+50 at 20° for 12 minutes and 30 seconds. The lens is well used and would benefit from a service. It has plenty of dust and some fungus.

More important is the camera settings: most are at f1.4 and the bike images are f2.0. The portraits are mostly 1/30th the Alice images are 1/15th and of course all hand-held. I would invite all photographers to take a chance with slow shutter speeds and wide apertures.  All images are straight scans with no sharpening or tweaking.

Click on The Images to Enlarge

Alice f1.4 – 1/15th Second

Market Images f1.4 – 1/30th Second

Bike Images f2.0 – 1/500th Second

Wide apertures and slow shutter speeds do work although, you have to be brave. The techniques are to make sure the camera is tight onto your face. Gently press the shutter button and DO NOT take your eye away from the eyepiece until the mirror has returned and you can see the image again.

Practice with care and you’ll be amazed at the results. I never use artificial light or flash and would use a one-second exposure even if it resulted in some blurring. Incidentally, the perceived resolution of a lens has much to do with contrast and light. The Nikkor lens used for these images has a reputation of not being sharp wide open. Truth to tell is the reviewers probably do not work hard enough to focus the lens. The technique is to move the focus ring ‘in and out’ of focus while looking at the subject. After a few seconds, the eye becomes accustomed to the area of sharpness. If you are new to manual focus cameras try this method as well. Technique is what makes the photographer: Composition is what makes the photograph.

See You Soon

Photo Project – Article Three

Sharp Focus Verses Composition – The standard Canon 5000 and 40mm STM lens is used for the sequence of bike images. Remember the objective of this project is to discover if a hundred pounds worth of analogue equipment will reward the photographer. To my mind composition outweighs ultimate sharpness and quality. If the image is interesting, it will hold the viewer far longer than a cut-throat sharp picture of a cardboard box.

I’m not interested in the ‘my lens is sharper than your’s’ mindset. The feeling is, justification comes to play in the statement. Let’s be clear, if you have paid a thousand pounds for your lens, the need is to believe the lens is ten times as good as a ‘user’ purchased for a hundred pounds.

It is not possible for a single lens to be ten times better than any high performer. And if the photographer is unable to focus correctly, the expensive lens has no advantage. So, we return to the idea composition is of greater importance than sharpness.

Sharpness has no concern for the real photographer. Wide apertures give a shallow depth of focus. There are little foreground and background sharpness when using a wide aperture. As the aperture closes, the extent of the in-focus area increases and isolation of a subject diminishes. The nearer the lens to the subject the shallower the depth of focus. If you look at these images, you’ll discover there are areas of sharpness and the other regions which are blurred. Although, the limitation of the auto exposure does give a smaller aperture than I would have preferred.

The way to focus with autofocus is to place the central focus area on the part of the image you need to isolate: focus and hold the shutter button while recomposing the image to your minds-eye’s composition. See if you can work out where my point of focus is in these images.

Autofocus is good, but manual focus helps better with compositional areas of focus. Only when using an SLR, can you compose and then critically focus on your chosen field without MOVING the camera. When using a standard or short telephoto lens with wide apertures, you may be off with your focus. Look through the images and see where the focal point is for the composition.

The negatives are sharp and would provide excellent six by nine-inch prints. All images are straight out of the scanner with NO adjustments. Many people will comment “‘it is only when you are enlarging to 12 by 16 will you find the resolution of the lens”. There is merit in their claim. However, the accurate reply is how many 12 by 16 images have you in your portfolio? And if I needed a 12 by 16 or 16 by 20 print, my choice of the camera would be medium format.

First Image: Ian Timothy
Short Photo Essay – The ‘Whole’ Picture

The inference here is close up images have great impact. And although the separate frames are indeed sharp: the information has more interest than the resolution of the photograph.

Gears: Ian Timothy
Aspect of the Bike – Gear Cluster
Gear Lever: Ian Timothy
Gear Shifter
Handlebars and Shifter: Ian Timothy
Handle Bars and Shifter
Bike Seat: Ian Timothy
Detailed Image of Leather Seat

When recording an ‘object’ photograph the whole picture and then a few composite parts of the subject. And remember: Although sharpness is a factor considered as important. Composition and information gain more attention from the reviewer of the images.

The film used is FomaPan 100 developed in Rodinal at 50:1 dilution: Time – nine minutes: Temperature 20 degrees C.

See you soon

Protest Numbers!

On Sunday 24th of March, a group of protestors marched against the plan for the UK to leave Europe. The organisers stated one million people attended the march. I wonder if this is possible and toy with the numbers. 

Think about the logistics of moving a million people: 

Bus:

Fifty people travel on a bus – 20 buses are needed to transport 1000 people. To move a million people, the requirement is 20,000 buses. 

Car:

Four people travelling in a vehicle 250,000 vehicles are required to transport one million people. 

Train:

One hundred people to a train carriage 10,000 train carriages!

Lets split the requirement three ways:

Seven thousand five hundred buses, 85,000 cars and 3000 train carriages used to transport a million people into the city of London for the Brexit Protest. 

What if all the people were from London? How did they travel, tube, bus, or on foot? 

Next, we will consider the size of a group of one million people:

One hundred people wide equal a train of people 10,000 people long. If the depth of a human one-third of a meter (very generous ) and the line is tummy to back, The path of one million people would be nine kilometres long!

Break this into four lines of people:

For a million people 100 across, walking tummy to back four 2.25 km lines are need to see the figures being claimed.

Nice having fun with numbers! 

Now! You may think I’m trying to knock protest! Far from it! 

I’m just looking at the logistics of the claim. If you divide the numbers by four (25000 people), you’ll still need 5000 buses or 6500 cars or 2500 train carriages. or 2000 buses + 2500 cars + 800 train carriages. No extra trains were running into London on the 24th. Furthermore, a question requires consideration: Is there sufficient parking in London for 2000 buses?

I will put the figure at 200 thousand:

Maybe 100K came from London and 100K from outside London – To move 100 thousand people 2000 buses or 25000 cars or a thousand train carriages are required:- Spread the burden three ways – 800 buses – 8000 vehicles and 300 train carriages.

Something is amiss!

I receive a reply questioning the figures:

“You sound very good with the old mathematics? Just one flaw in your logic Ian – you do recognise that there’s no-one who lives in London, don’t you? It’s a ghost town with zero residents. 

Using my words – “Maybe 100K came from London and 100K from outside London” – maybe 1000k came from even within the bounds of London and no-one travelled from outside? Maybe creates Mayhem if taken as fact.

However, consider the following population of London currently, and see why it’s not that difficult to get a million there” 

→ Evidence is provided that 8.9 million people live in the surrounding area of London.

A second reply is Received:

Sorry, you took the first sentence in the wrong manner in which it was said. I was trying to set up the argument which followed in that many of the people in London who wanted to demonstrate would have not had much of an issue in getting transport there. 

If London were not populated, then everyone would have had to come from outside. But, London is not populated, and therefore we can expect a vast majority of those who turned out to actually be able to travel without as problem. 

End of reply:

There were other replies to my post: One suggested critical thinking was the answer to finding a solution. And my words are inaccurate: Because my thinking was inaccurate.

Is my thinking wholly inaccurate? Review the figures, especially the size of the crowd.

Will critical thinking take the idea further?

Critical thinking is not the solution per se. Critical thinking is a process which teaches us how to think. It is not a solution it helps us discover answers. The simple premise of critical thinking is: a series of facts are offered, and a counter-argument is provided. The counter-argument is reviewed. A critical thinker learns to use the process in a fair and unbiased way. Not only this there must be no personal opinion of people involved. This is hard to learn and a hurdle for many to overcome.

To comment critical thinking will prove my words incorrect is questionable. An analogy is: learning to read music will enable an individual to play the piano. Critical thinking is a process not an answer. The implication is my generalisations are inaccurate: Is this true?

One aspect of shoddy thinking is called ‘Critical Bias”- This is a process where one element of an argument is used to support the whole of the debate. In the example of the protest. My first observation references the logistics of moving a million people. And the second observation attempts to form a visualisation of a group of one million people.

The reply to my post is summed up here:

“I was trying to set up the argument which followed in that many of the people in London who wanted to demonstrate would have not had much of an issue in getting transport there.”

The reply has merit – although it does not establish if the number of protestors was indeed one million people. It suggests that one million people could get to the protest area with ease. Therefore the reply implies the figure indicated by the organisers is sound.  This is an example of conformational bias. 

Observing images of the march and reviewing the area and roads used in the march suggests otherwise. The figure of 300-400 thousand offered by Professor Keith Hall seems feasible. You will have to draw your conclusions after looking at the comparisons.

How could this be achieved? 

There is a need to see if a visual idea of one million people can be conceived. The reply to my original post infers that if it can be proven the protestors can arrive at the march, the figure of one million is accurate.  An analogy would be “a bath can hold seventy-five litres of water – Therefore because it can hold this quantity, it is always filled”.

The hypnosis is flawed if the number is lower than claimed. In my original post, I concluded 200 thousand might be feasible. The assessment of Professor Keith Hill suggests between 300 – 400 thousand. Here is his assessment of the crowd figures:

Could the image of a million people be realised?

Of course, it is possible to use a known figure or crowd and compare it to the area of the march. Glastonbury festival is a good example: The area of the land is known, the number of fans is known, and there is an accurate figure for fans attending a performance in a specific area. 

Glastonbury is the largest greenfield festival in the world, requiring extensive infrastructure in terms of security, transport, water, and electricity supply.

Organised by: Glastonbury Festivals Ltd

Genre: Music festival

Attendance: 135,000 (2019);

These figures are accurate. Here we will review one specific area: The Pyramid Stage.

The capacity for this stage and the area on the map is 120 thousand people.

The parameter of the festival grounds is superimposed over a map of London. And a box representing the Pyramid stage and arena is also placed in the plan. I have made the area serving the Pyramid stage smaller than the actual size on the Glastonbury map.

The area where the march took place is given generous proportions. If the organiser’s figure is correct, the protestors would have to fill the marked out space to prove the claim. Eight Pyramid arena areas would contain one million people.

Actual ROAD Route of March – The protestors marched on the roads:

The graphic is presented – The reader of this article is tasked with deciding if there could be one million marchers in this area on Sunday 24th March 2019.

Review the images with care.

Jon Talks – Haunted Borley Rectory

Harry Price

Lunch time chat with Jon and the subject turns to ghosts:

Jon says:

“Ian do you know anything about Harry Price and Borley Rectory?”

We grab the microphone and make the recording:

 

 

Borley Rectory

%d bloggers like this: