Purdom lies about Attenborough

All are welcome to this forum, which is for debating the teaching of creationism or intelligent design in schools. This forum can be boisterous, and you should not participate if easily offended.

Moderator: Moderators

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby Brian Jordan » Thu Jan 24, 2013 4:56 pm

cathy wrote:Isn't it also an issue of distribution? The affluent west is throwing away vast amounts of food and we have an obesity epidemic costing the NHS millions.
The other meaning of distribution too - logistics. Apparently a similar proportion of food is wasted/lost in the developing world, never getting to the consumer due to inefficient harvesting and handling, pests, rotting in storage etc.
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4215
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:03 pm

Brian Jordan wrote:
Roger Stanyard wrote:It's a tough one Alan. There are a lot of contradictory positions held here. I don't like to see people living in poverty and hunger but, at the same time, am deeply concerned about the ecological/environmental and social implications of increased food output. The concept of sustainability only partly addresses the issue.
AFAIK the "green revolution", when agricultural productivity rose massively, was followed by a rapid increase in world population. (Anyone play "foxes and rabbits" on the old BBC computer? Standard ecology.) So unfortunately a sort of Parkinson's Law applies - population increases to outstrip the food available. It's only a matter of time before all the rabbits are eaten and the foxes suffer accordingly, come what may, unless some other mechanism intervenes.


There's a matter of cause and effect when it comes to the green revolution. The green revolution largely left sub-Saharan Africa untouched yet that saw and is seeing about the fastest population growth of anywhere.

There's a rough and ready rule of thumb in economics that famine occurs when there is more than a 10% shortfall in food supply. In India and China, where the green revolution since the 1960s has had a huge impact, there haven't been any famines, suggesting demand for food has not out-stripped supply. Famines in those regions all date back to around the 1950s or earlier.

Most of the famines I am aware of that have occurred in my lifetime have been entirely man made - through war or civil war or just political incompetence and ideology. To name a few out of the top of my head- Bangladesh/East Pakistan., Biafra, Ethiopia, Sudan, Somalia.....

The second issue is there is not a fixed supply of food. Agricultural output is a function of demand as well as supply. If the price of bananas is high enough it will pay to grow them on top of Ben Nevis. A more complex issue is substitutability. At the moment the demand for meat is growing rapidly in China and India not because of population growth but because of growing incomes and wealth. Producing meat is inefficient in the sense that feed needed is ten times greater in calorific value than animal output so it uses vast amounts of grain or land than could otherwise be used for grain. In hard economic times consumers can switch away from meat to grain of some sort, leading to a huge increase of grain output as pasture is turned to arable use. Given that the price elasticity of both demand and supply of food is highly elastic, inevitably that leads to a rapid fall in overall food prices.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby Roger Stanyard » Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:11 pm

cathy wrote:
It's a tough one Alan. There are a lot of contradictory positions held here. I don't like to see people living in poverty and hunger but, at the same time, am deeply concerned about the ecological/environmental and social implications of increased food output. The concept of sustainability only partly addresses the issue.

Isn't it also an issue of distribution? The affluent west is throwing away vast amounts of food and we have an obesity epidemic costing the NHS millions.


One of the reasons why food is "wasted" is very vigorous food safety rules and regulations. See, for example, foot and mouth outbreaks in the UK or destroying cattle with TB. As far as I am aware, it is now almost impossible to recycle waste food by feeding it to pigs.
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby ukantic » Thu Jan 24, 2013 9:21 pm

Roger Stanyard wrote:
cathy wrote:
It's a tough one Alan. There are a lot of contradictory positions held here. I don't like to see people living in poverty and hunger but, at the same time, am deeply concerned about the ecological/environmental and social implications of increased food output. The concept of sustainability only partly addresses the issue.

Isn't it also an issue of distribution? The affluent west is throwing away vast amounts of food and we have an obesity epidemic costing the NHS millions.


One of the reasons why food is "wasted" is very vigorous food safety rules and regulations. See, for example, foot and mouth outbreaks in the UK or destroying cattle with TB. As far as I am aware, it is now almost impossible to recycle waste food by feeding it to pigs.


I know someone who keeps a few pigs. I am fairly sure that as long as the meat is for personal consumption then you can feed them what you like. For example, food scraps and out of date vegetables. You should only feed them cooked meat and never raw.
ukantic
 
Posts: 402
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby cathy » Fri Jan 25, 2013 5:24 pm

I know someone who keeps a few pigs. I am fairly sure that as long as the meat is for personal consumption then you can feed them what you like. For example, food scraps and out of date vegetables. You should only feed them cooked meat and never raw.

Don't think you can feed it to commercial pigs anymore tho. I'm sure our school dinners leavings were sent to the pigs. Poor pigs was all I could think.

Most of the famines I am aware of that have occurred in my lifetime have been entirely man made - through war or civil war or just political incompetence and ideology. To name a few out of the top of my head- Bangladesh/East Pakistan., Biafra, Ethiopia, Sudan, Somalia.....

And droughts? Man made as well.

We're being warned that food prices are set to rise due to the recent rain and its effects on future crops. Real or artificial prices inflation?
You need to throw something else into the equation: education, especially of women. Of course, stopping competitive breeding would help, too.


Todays radio had the news that now more than 50% of new babies are being born to women at least in their thirties - education being one of the cited reasons - and 2/3 fathers are over 30/40. I know I never intended having kids, just money and holidays :cry: . Tho I do love em now.

Not sure I've ever heard of competitive breeding? Of humans?
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby Brian Jordan » Fri Jan 25, 2013 6:41 pm

cathy wrote:Not sure I've ever heard of competitive breeding? Of humans?
Yes - one religion trying to out-breed another to achieve numerical superiority. I only came across the term the other week, but it seems appropriate.
"PPSIMMONS is an amorphous mass of stupid" - Rationalwiki
User avatar
Brian Jordan
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 4215
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:04 pm

Somebody has posted the following comment under Purdom's falsehood (around an hour ago so it may still be censored):

"Your purposeful misreading of David Attenborough and your assertion that all the comments above were tongue in cheek sets your prejudice nicely. Quite obviously Attenborough is using the term plague to describe the effects of overpopulation. Can I come up with an argument for population control? Yes - too many people will damage the earth and destroy most natural habitats, we could also see more human suffering as resources are stretched. This is a good argument for encouraging people to produce less children. No doubt some here will interpret it as meaning I want to kill people. You see we need to plan ahead and decide how to manage the world most effectively and decide what our priorities will be as far as preserving the natural world. Those of us who are not looking foreword to the world ending and being raptured tend to care about this stuff."

Two earlier comments by the same Mr Hinch (exchanging comments with another contributor) are still visible however:
"He is a better person than any here and his body of work will stack up nicely against a "DR" who has only published four times and has done nothing in the last decade. Your attacks on such a kind, decent and hardworking man sum you all up quite nicely. Glad I do not know any christians like you lot."
Followed by:
"Don't be silly, I am simply comparing the nasty comments by posters and the lack of work by the good Dr to the vast body of work done by David. Also he is a well known public figure, I do not recall ever hearing a statement made by him that could be considered unkind, yet look above your post at all the things that are said against him. These people think they can knock out a few words on facebook and put down a man of his stature? He would crush any of these people with his vast knowledge. But he is probably to nice."
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby Roger Stanyard » Fri Jan 25, 2013 7:50 pm

cathy wrote:Todays radio had the news that now more than 50% of new babies are being born to women at least in their thirties - education being one of the cited reasons - and 2/3 fathers are over 30/40.


IIRC the number of births from teenage mothers has fallen by half since the 1950s which rather makes a mockery of the right wing whinge about "teenage pregnancies",
Those who believe absurdities will commit atrocities - Voltaire
User avatar
Roger Stanyard
Forum Admin
 
Posts: 6162
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2006 4:59 pm

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Jan 26, 2013 11:33 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:Somebody has posted the following comment under Purdom's falsehood (around an hour ago so it may still be censored):

"Your purposeful misreading of David Attenborough and your assertion that all the comments above were tongue in cheek sets your prejudice nicely. Quite obviously Attenborough is using the term plague to describe the effects of overpopulation. Can I come up with an argument for population control? Yes - too many people will damage the earth and destroy most natural habitats, we could also see more human suffering as resources are stretched. This is a good argument for encouraging people to produce less children. No doubt some here will interpret it as meaning I want to kill people. You see we need to plan ahead and decide how to manage the world most effectively and decide what our priorities will be as far as preserving the natural world. Those of us who are not looking foreword to the world ending and being raptured tend to care about this stuff."

Two earlier comments by the same Mr Hinch (exchanging comments with another contributor) are still visible however:
"He is a better person than any here and his body of work will stack up nicely against a "DR" who has only published four times and has done nothing in the last decade. Your attacks on such a kind, decent and hardworking man sum you all up quite nicely. Glad I do not know any christians like you lot."
Followed by:
"Don't be silly, I am simply comparing the nasty comments by posters and the lack of work by the good Dr to the vast body of work done by David. Also he is a well known public figure, I do not recall ever hearing a statement made by him that could be considered unkind, yet look above your post at all the things that are said against him. These people think they can knock out a few words on facebook and put down a man of his stature? He would crush any of these people with his vast knowledge. But he is probably to nice."


YES, Mr Hinch's critical comments have been duly CENSORED (whereas those by Mr Snelson have not).
http://www.facebook.com/GeorgiaPurdom
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re:

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Feb 08, 2013 10:21 pm

http://www.facebook.com/GeorgiaPurdom?group_id=0
Lawrence Krauss in the Big Think video that is flagged (and whinged about by Purdom's followers):
"The purpose of education is not to validate ignorance but to overcome it" (at around 2 minutes 45 seconds).

Any response to this self-evident truism from Purdom? Sort of!
"This is also a prime example of the importance of understanding the difference between observational and historical science. Krauss denies this reality."

There are scientific truths that are past events and which cannot be directly observed. Lack of observation does not equate to falsification.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby Peter Henderson » Sat Feb 09, 2013 12:03 am

YES, Mr Hinch's critical comments have been duly CENSORED (whereas those by Mr Snelson have not).


Mr Hinch will not be allowed to comment any further. That's it I'm afraid. The policy of these "fan based" Facebook pages is that they are, er, only for fans.
Peter Henderson
 
Posts: 4350
Joined: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: Jordanstown, Co. Antrim, Northern Ireland

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby cathy » Sat Feb 09, 2013 11:26 am

YES, Mr Hinch's critical comments have been duly CENSORED (whereas those by Mr Snelson have not).

Mr Hinch will not be allowed to comment any further. That's it I'm afraid. The policy of these "fan based" Facebook pages is that they are, er, only for fans.

Quelle surpise. Can't have too many logical criticisms the punters might start to think.
cathy
 
Posts: 3665
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:51 pm
Location: Redditch

Purdom lies!

Postby a_haworthroberts » Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:13 pm

Or at least I'm assuming so (I haven't had a chance to view the video - I think it's just a short trailer not the whole movie - yet so cannot be certain that Dawkins and Krauss aren't spreading evil as claimed).

This is what she is saying at Facebook about the video:
"First it was The Avengers now it's The Unbelievers.
Unfortunately, the latter are not superheroes and they are not the good guys fighting against evil in the world. Instead they speak lies, deceive many, and spread evil".
http://www.christianpost.com/news/richa ... uts-90038/
http://www.richarddawkins.net/news_arti ... ce-krauss#

What is odd that if you tell the truth about scientific knowledge, this leads to people questioning the Bible and perhaps questioning the Christian faith - which many Christians regard as evil. So by telling the truth you 'spread evil'.

And by lying about science you do 'good'.

The YECs (like some hardline atheists) are become ever shriller.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Feb 15, 2013 1:04 am

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/02/13/p ... e-taliban/
Like the Taliban in their intolerance of education. But as far as I know, no YECs have shot kids because those kids ask to be properly educated.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Purdom lies about Attenborough

Postby a_haworthroberts » Wed Sep 11, 2013 9:49 pm

I see that Purdom and her frankly nasty supporters are lying about David Attenborough again:
https://www.facebook.com/GeorgiaPurdom
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/david-attenbor ... ml#H3kD4HP
(He's an evolutionist so he must be a closet eugenicist and Nazi as well don't you know...)
"From British naturalist Sir David Attenborough:
"We stopped natural selection as soon as we started being able to rear 95% - 99% of our babies that are born.
"We are the only species to have put a halt to natural selection, of its own free will, as it were."
So what is the solution? Although Attenborough didn't spell it out it's obvious- eugenics. If we don't give medical care for those that are diseased and deformed from birth (or even before) then we should start evolving again. Ideas have consequences."
Yet from Purdom's Yahoo link, Attenborough is only publically advocating that couples have small families. He is not advocating that some of the following should be implemented: genetic screening, promoting differential birth rates, marriage restrictions, segregation (both racial segregation and segregation of the mentally ill from the rest of the population), compulsory sterilization, forced abortions/forced pregnancies, genocide.

There's also a Radio Times feature btw (this link does not give the full version which I've not read though I noticed the RT cover today where it stated that Attenborough's favourite species was the human race):
http://www.radiotimes.com/news/2013-09- ... -stop-work
Attenborough thinks humans are still evolving culturally. I think his main concern for the future is over-population.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8834
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

PreviousNext

Return to Free For All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests

cron