Climate change apathy Ragnarok thread - The Bear and Badger

Brooks

Like I don't drive at all, I never buy poly-mix fabrics if I can avoid it (that shit never ages well anyway), my elec overheads aren't grotesque, so only the food thing is summat I could nail better.

Skerret

Funkstain wrote:

Listen it comes down to a very simple thing. There are people who's profession it is to study the globe's climate. They are all, down to a person or two, very worried about climate change, and they all, down to a person or two, agree that humans are playing a serious part in this. Looking at graphs is great. But I'm usually going to believe the experts, just like I usually believe a doctor. Or more accurately, just like I would usually believe the vast majority of doctors telling me the same thing. I do not understand what it is about climate science that makes armchair data experts of all of us. Interpreting data, analysing it, theorising changes - why trust you when I can trust the experts? Am I really being gullible? Why is there so much scepticism about these poor scientists in this, more than any other area? Ask yourself this.

Money?

Funkstain

Brooks tell me. Should I give up in here and swap ideas about minimising my footprint?

dynamiteReady

Well... Google have endorsed a side now.

Lets all go home... And put up solar panels.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/09/google-will-stop-supporting-climate-change-science-deniers-calls-them-liars/

Funkstain

Skerret wrote:

Funkstain wrote:

Listen it comes down to a very simple thing. There are people who's profession it is to study the globe's climate. They are all, down to a person or two, very worried about climate change, and they all, down to a person or two, agree that humans are playing a serious part in this. Looking at graphs is great. But I'm usually going to believe the experts, just like I usually believe a doctor. Or more accurately, just like I would usually believe the vast majority of doctors telling me the same thing. I do not understand what it is about climate science that makes armchair data experts of all of us. Interpreting data, analysing it, theorising changes - why trust you when I can trust the experts? Am I really being gullible? Why is there so much scepticism about these poor scientists in this, more than any other area? Ask yourself this.

Money?

So either all (or the vast majority) of these scientists are corrupt to an unforgivable degree, OR there are big money interests to protect by not following their advice. WHICH IS IT so hard to choose

Skerret

I'm going with option three, GOD

cockbeard

Really hard to sell a lightbulb to someone who thinks electricity is bad, let alone a smartphone, or letting an employer send money via copper (or glass) wires rather than putting cash in my hands

cockbeard

Skerret wrote:

I'm going with option three, GOD

See, Pascal again

monkey

Skerret wrote:

Listen it comes down to a very simple thing. There are people who's profession it is to study the globe's climate. They are all, down to a person or two, very worried about climate change, and they all, down to a person or two, agree that humans are playing a serious part in this. Looking at graphs is great. But I'm usually going to believe the experts, just like I usually believe a doctor. Or more accurately, just like I would usually believe the vast majority of doctors telling me the same thing. I do not understand what it is about climate science that makes armchair data experts of all of us. Interpreting data, analysing it, theorising changes - why trust you when I can trust the experts? Am I really being gullible? Why is there so much scepticism about these poor scientists in this, more than any other area? Ask yourself this.

Money?

It's the impact it has on social policy (or threatens to have). It guilt trips people. It's open to misinterpretation and high horsing which doesn't endear it to a lot of people. And, yeah, it threatens the income streams of the greedy.

Particle physics doesn't get the same amount of scrutiny, until a particle accelerator gets a lot of attention then it's all 'wasted money' and 'black hole machine' from the Clarksons of the world. It's the necessary intrusion into people's lives of the science that garners climatology special attention from dullards.

Brooks

I'm not eating fucking protein powder, made that error before. Looking at the nutrional readout for the brand you just recc'd, I'd need less than 200g to hit a high maintenance. I can guarandamntee that ain't going to fill me up.

Plus I consider pro-powders too esoteric to be useful. It needs to be pop-down-the-supermarket easy.

Funkstain

cockbeard wrote:

Really hard to sell a lightbulb to someone who thinks electricity is bad, let alone a smartphone, or letting an employer send money via copper (or glass) wires rather than putting cash in my hands

So this is where it gets interesting, and the root of so much "lay" resistance to the warnings.

Essentially, the proposed remedies almost all involve "quality of life" hits, if quality equates to cheapness plus convenience. No wonder they are so unpopular.

Lord_Griff

You need to make your own Brooks Brand Nutritional Gels mixed with the stuff that fills your tyre, post puncture, for that sated feeling.

Brooks

Which is what scares me - I really like conveniences and am fairly convinced all the good shit other humans do that I like are made possible by those conveniences.

Brooks

Having to start my entire own firm is the polar opposite of convenient.

Skerret

Brooks wrote:

I'm not eating fucking protein powder, made that error before.

This is not like whey protein if you're questioning digestibility. Also, just order in bulk online. You can get nutritionally complete stuff in powder form, see this: http://www.ezyprotein.com.au

Skerret

Of course ordering in bulk increases your footprint, so mayber not.

cockbeard

Welcome to the future, daily nutritional needs met by a pill, eat prawn crackers rest of day, or other empty food with holes

Lord_Griff

Delegate Brooks, delegate.

Brooks

Okay but again, it's not filling. Half a kilo of shrimp definitely is.

Skerret

So make shrimp gumbo and mix powder through. Beauty of plant based powders is they can be added to savoury stuff.

Skerret

You'd be surprised how filling it is. Nutritionally dense.

cockbeard

Funkstain wrote:

cockbeard wrote:

Really hard to sell a lightbulb to someone who thinks electricity is bad, let alone a smartphone, or letting an employer send money via copper (or glass) wires rather than putting cash in my hands

So this is where it gets interesting, and the root of so much "lay" resistance to the warnings. Essentially, the proposed remedies almost all involve "quality of life" hits, if quality equates to cheapness plus convenience. No wonder they are so unpopular.

The problem is what we perceive as quality of life. It's like that apocryphal tale of the american businessman advising the fisherman to take a few guys on, and after a few years growth he could be only working two hours a day

Lord_Griff

Skerret wrote:

Brooks wrote:

I'm not eating fucking protein powder, made that error before.

This is not like whey protein if you're questioning digestibility. Also, just order in bulk online. You can get nutritionally complete stuff in powder form, see this: http://www.ezyprotein.com.au

Why over whey?

Brooks

Make a meal? Survey says no. Most I'll do is dump contents into a bowl with salad.

Skerret

That'll be interesting.

Skerret

Lord_Griff wrote:

Skerret wrote:

Brooks wrote:

I'm not eating fucking protein powder, made that error before.

This is not like whey protein if you're questioning digestibility. Also, just order in bulk online. You can get nutritionally complete stuff in powder form, see this: http://www.ezyprotein.com.au

Why over whey?

Digestibility, absorption among other more esoteric shiz.

Brooks

Other problems - buying in bulk means, yeah, extra transportation. Also it's pretty inflexible, if I decide nope this tastes like ass I'm locked into a bulk purchase and have lost a bunch of money.

Satiety - tried powders before and they didn't adequately address this problem at all. Also the flavourings are consistently vile, and I drink a shitload of sugar-free soft beverages so I have some expertise on artificial flavourings.

Skerret

It's just one tenth less of an ivory backscratcher.

Lord_Griff

It takes 230 million years to orbit the centre of the galaxy which does coincide with a previous temp spike. Seriously guys, i am on to a winner:

Funkstain

Well this went down a different road

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories