A little early but ...

To Dutch and Flemish readers, een fijne Sinterklaas!
Sinterklaas (also called Sint-Nicolaas in Dutch and Saint Nicolas in French) is a holiday tradition in the Netherlands and Belgium, celebrated every year on Saint Nicholas' eve (December 5th) or, in Belgium, on the morning of December 6th. The feast celebrates the Saint Nicholas' name day the patron saint of, among other things, children.
It is also celebrated to a lesser extent in parts of France, as well as in Luxembourg, Switzerland, Germany and Austria. The traditions differ from country to country, even between Belgium and the Netherlands.
In the Netherlands, Saint Nicholas' Eve, (December 5) is the chief occasion for gift giving. The evening is called pakjesavond ("presents' evening").
Sinterklaas is the basis for the North American figure of Santa Claus. It was during the American War of Independence, that the inhabitants of New York City, a former Dutch colonial town (New Amsterdam) which had been swapped by the Dutch for other territories, reinvented their Sinterklaas tradition, as Saint Nicholas was a symbol of the city's non-English past. The name Santa Claus is derived from older Dutch Sinte Klaas.

The nonsense I was given as a child that “Santa” comes from the Spanish and “Clause” from the German and that the name “Santa Clause” had an inexplicably unknown source and at best a purely commercial source is shown to be absurd.

The fundamental error in environmentalism is three fold.

The fundamental error in environmentalism is three fold.

1) It is assumed that the so-called Law of Entropy actually is a dynamic of the universe that cannot be halted nor altered.
1)a) In fact, “they” assert that the law of entropy is absolute and even if alterable is not to be altered.
1)b) In fact, “they” assert that it is irrelevant that the so-called Law of Entropy is alterable and not a irreversible doom of physical systems but assert that the law of entropy should be morally the law of humanity.

2) It is assumed that the human ability to alter the universe is either impossible or irrelevant.
2)a) In fact, “they” assert that the universe should not be altered.
2)b) In fact, “they” assert that the very ability of humanity to alter the laws of the universe is immoral.

3) It is assumed that the reality principle is irrelevant.

[I am not even going to bother quoting chapter and verse on this as I have heard it from the environmentalists and their horses’ mouths for thirty years and I am not into writing a treatise here.]

I assert that humanity is the universe looking at itself and is the universe’s ability to know itself and that human ability to change the universe just is what humanity fundamentally is.