Climate Change

cantagril

Senior member
2,034 457
....I found an example of useful sub-titling which explains some of the arcane terminology that David Attenborough uses when rambling on about yet another completely useless and inedible creature* that's going extinct:

Attenborough_thoughts.jpg

* "useless and inedible" ....hmmm, sounds a dead-ringer for Homo not-so-Sapiens :)
 
  • Love
Reactions: Atilla

Pat494

Legendary member
13,400 1,314
I feel compelled to stick up for David Attenborough. Imho he is a gentleman and a scholar
 

cantagril

Senior member
2,034 457
Tweet

Intersting...but if you read the OSS article from start to finish here: http://ossfoundation.us/projects/environment/global-warming/myths/31000-scientists-say-no-convincing-evidence it deals with the differences of opinion between those working within the domain of climate science and those without.

The Heartland Foundation seems to be somewhat politically based and biased:

"The Heartland Institute is one of the world’s leading free-market think tanks. It is a national nonprofit research and education organization based in Arlington Heights, Illinois. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems." (my Bold)

The conclusion of the OSS paper is " 97% of working climate scientists say the temperature is rising, and human activity is a significant contributing factor."

Their own ethos : ".... is focused on facilitating research and solution development pertaining to multidisciplinary work in key areas of human endeavor that pertain to our sustainable capacity, and the living systems of Earth."

Effing scientists eh? - what do they know?

Whereas the Heartland article's objective is completely transparent, it would seem to me that the OSS headline was aimed solely at getting people to read the first para rather than actually bother to plough through the whole thing....which takes almost a minute and a half!! What do they think we are? Scientists?? A Tweet is about all I can manage on a good day. If 280 characters is enough for the POTUS then surely it should be possible to dumb down this red herring to something digestible by the masses.....
 
Last edited:

cantagril

Senior member
2,034 457
It's the same as the manufactured myth that fat is bad for you, manufactured by the grain industry to sell.....more grain, and it's worked.
Whilst I would agree that the binary approach adopted by those either trying to lose weight or to make money from them ( i.e Fat is Good or Fat is Bad) is somewhere between complete and utter bolleaux, there is nonetheless a vast body of evidence to suggest that a fat-laden diet ain't going to do you much good in the long-run.

At the risk of seeming a tad un-politically correct, I would further single out Trans-fat as being particularly harmful.

Eating is a bit like Trading - if you do it sensibly it's enjoyable and beneficial and if you don't, all that happens is you die sooner - we all have a choice:p
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Atilla

Signalcalc

Senior member
2,887 592
Whilst I would agree that the binary approach adopted by those either trying to lose weight or to make money from them ( i.e Fat is Good or Fat is Bad) is somewhere between complete and utter bolleaux, there is nonetheless a vast body of evidence to suggest that a fat-laden diet ain't going to do you much good in the long-run.

At the risk of seeming a tad un-politically correct, I would further single out Trans-fat as being particularly harmful.

Eating is a bit like Trading - if you do it sensibly it's enjoyable and beneficial and if you don't, all that happens is you die sooner - we all have a choice:p
I didn’t state that a fat laden diet is good for you, slight twisting of my initial post there.

Transfat was an invention of the food processing industry to make processed meals more palatable and profitable and since turned out to be dangerous, it’s not the kind of fat I was referring to.

I didn’t explicitly go into the details of what kind of fat has been demonised because the message post war has always been ‘all fat’ is bad for you. You now see the mainstream slowly coming around to the idea that there are healthy fats that should be included within ones diet and not ‘all fats’ are bad for you.

I could always start a separate thread on the subject if there is enough interest
 

cantagril

Senior member
2,034 457
I could always start a separate thread on the subject if there is enough interest
Hell yes! Why not Fat AND Venezuela? They'll be fighting to be let into the thread!
 

cantagril

Senior member
2,034 457
I didn’t state that a fat laden diet is good for you, slight twisting of my initial post there.

Quite right, you didn't. You said "..the manufactured myth that fat is bad for you" and my point in reply to that was precisely that most people with the odd neurone or two have come to the conclusion that things are somewhat more nuanced....and that is essentially what you said eventually.

Transfat was an invention of the food processing industry to make processed meals more palatable and profitable and since turned out to be dangerous, it’s not the kind of fat I was referring to.

I didn’t explicitly go into the details of what kind of fat has been demonised because the message post war has always been ‘all fat’ is bad for you.

Yerst, but as you didn't expand on your chosen flavour of fat, I was only able to reply to what was in front of me


You now see the mainstream slowly coming around to the idea that there are healthy fats that should be included within ones diet and not ‘all fats’ are bad for you.

I see that we are in complete agreement! May I offer you a celebratory chip and dripping butty?
 
  • Love
Reactions: Signalcalc

wackypete2

Legendary member
10,173 2,030
The conclusion of the OSS paper is " 97% of working climate scientists say the temperature is rising, and human activity is a significant contributing factor."
Meteorologists are climate scientists. What percentage of them can accurately forecast tomorrow's weather? Don't believe everything you hear. Climate has been drastically changing since the world began.

Peter
 

cantagril

Senior member
2,034 457
Meteorologists are climate scientists. What percentage of them can accurately forecast tomorrow's weather? Don't believe everything you hear. Climate has been drastically changing since the world began.

Peter
Touché mon brave...but...(there always is one)...the point of both articles appeared to be that "scientists" did not believe that the world to be warming up nor that part of that warming is our responsibility...or fault, if one considers said warming to be sub-optimal for our future. I agree wholeheartedly with the thesis that experts often aren't, but curmudgeonly cynic that I may be, Inevertheless I lean toward giving above marginal credence to the 97%.

For your delectation Pete... and anyone either too young to remember or for oldster fans who remember Michael Fish's finest hour - see attached vdeo:


As an aside, I slept through the whole thing and - there being no public transport - ended up walking from Notting Hill to the prop shop where I was working at the time. The only two people who fronted that day were me and the boss; we spent most of the day ringing round clients for margin. Happy days.
 
Last edited: