Author Topic: Episode #743  (Read 2545 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline werecow

  • Cryptobovinologist
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5012
  • mooh
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #120 on: October 09, 2019, 11:15:29 AM »
(click to show/hide)

Thanks for posting that. I don't understand a word of it, which shows that I never should have commented on the question in the first place. In the future I'll make an effort to avoid commenting on negative energy, negative mass, or dark energy until something comes up that I do understand. ;D

It's definitely still a bit technical, but let me try to translate it to human, with the caveat that I am also just a layman and know relatively little about this (someone correct me if I'm misinterpreting this):

(click to show/hide)
Mooohn!

Offline gebobs

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Me like hockey!
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #121 on: October 09, 2019, 11:21:22 AM »
It seems to me that people who feel strongly on a topic often unreasonably expect that discussion of any topic even tangentially related to their pet topic to address it. At best, they see it as a missed opportunity; at worst, they seem to take it as a betrayal or the deliberate suppression of important information.  In actuality, it's usually just that it wasn't the topic under discussion.

Concur.

I think Steven might have said something along the lines of "There's no reason to change the amount of meat you eat." Sure, he could have specified "with respect to the study etc. etc." but he's speaking off the cuff. Not everything that occurs to the audience is going to occur to them at the time no matter how frustrating it is for the audience that the conversation does not include them.

And so, we come to the forum to discuss which is fine, but it's overly critical to hold their feet to the fire because they didn't cover the entire breadth of what occurred to us as we were listening.

Offline jt512

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2611
    • jt512
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #122 on: October 09, 2019, 11:44:32 AM »
"...that the evidence of its negative health consequences were previously overstated."

Yet again: that is not what they said.
Ich verstehe nur Bahnhof.

Offline jt512

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2611
    • jt512
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #123 on: October 09, 2019, 11:47:58 AM »
It seems to me that people who feel strongly on a topic often unreasonably expect that discussion of any topic even tangentially related to their pet topic to address it. At best, they see it as a missed opportunity; at worst, they seem to take it as a betrayal or the deliberate suppression of important information.  In actuality, it's usually just that it wasn't the topic under discussion.

Concur.

I think Steven might have said something along the lines of "There's no reason to change the amount of meat you eat."

Except that is not what he even thinks. He said that that was one way to interpret the data, but under the precautionary principle, you still might want to reduce your meat consumption.  He reviewed the article skeptically, for Christ's sake.
Ich verstehe nur Bahnhof.

Offline Tim44

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 48
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #124 on: October 09, 2019, 01:17:13 PM »
More specifically, the subject was diet and nutritional advice and the science and reporting thereof.  The criticism seems to amount to, they start every story with a disclaimer regarding the related issues the story is not about.  Should ever discussion of the next break through in battery tech include a, "but we aren't addressing the recycling problem in this segment!"

Obviously all subjects don’t need a disclaimer.  On most other topics SGU is smart enough to bring up alternatives to and skepticism to false dichotomies and better alternatives.  Thier love for meat is definitely a skeptical blind spot they can work on.
Even in Steves main theory to eat a varied diet for good health, cultures world wide that eat no meat live longer healthier lives with less income.     

They are smart enough on other topics to discuss alternatives.  The headlines are so front and center on the environmental impacts of meat, it is at odds for them to be so irresponsible and flippant on this subject.  Now let’s go buy some more steaks, YAR matey.

Offline gebobs

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Me like hockey!
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #125 on: October 09, 2019, 03:36:31 PM »
It seems to me that people who feel strongly on a topic often unreasonably expect that discussion of any topic even tangentially related to their pet topic to address it. At best, they see it as a missed opportunity; at worst, they seem to take it as a betrayal or the deliberate suppression of important information.  In actuality, it's usually just that it wasn't the topic under discussion.

Concur.

I think Steven might have said something along the lines of "There's no reason to change the amount of meat you eat."

Except that is not what he even thinks. He said that that was one way to interpret the data, but under the precautionary principle, you still might want to reduce your meat consumption.  He reviewed the article skeptically, for Christ's sake.

I wrote immediately after that "Sure, he could have specified 'with respect to the study etc. etc.'"  What are you getting so upset about? I'm not the one getting up all up on my high horse because he didn't cover the article exactly to my particular liking.

Offline jt512

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2611
    • jt512
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #126 on: October 09, 2019, 03:40:40 PM »
It seems to me that people who feel strongly on a topic often unreasonably expect that discussion of any topic even tangentially related to their pet topic to address it. At best, they see it as a missed opportunity; at worst, they seem to take it as a betrayal or the deliberate suppression of important information.  In actuality, it's usually just that it wasn't the topic under discussion.

Concur.

I think Steven might have said something along the lines of "There's no reason to change the amount of meat you eat."

Except that is not what he even thinks. He said that that was one way to interpret the data, but under the precautionary principle, you still might want to reduce your meat consumption.  He reviewed the article skeptically, for Christ's sake.

I wrote immediately after that "Sure, he could have specified 'with respect to the study etc. etc.'"  What are you getting so upset about? I'm not the one getting up all up on my high horse because he didn't cover the article exactly to my particular liking.


I'm not upset.  I'm just correcting your misinformation.
Ich verstehe nur Bahnhof.

Online bachfiend

  • Not Any Kind of Moderator
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2070
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #127 on: October 09, 2019, 03:54:02 PM »
Americans pronounce it with three syllables - BAT-ter-ree.

How do you pronounce the crime of battery?

Since battery consist of someone being battered, I pronounce it similar to the root word, which, yes, means with three syllables. But it's a different word, so it makes sense to me that it can be pronounced differently.

It's literally the same word.

I pronounce the word "produce" differently depending on context. The verb meaning "manufacture something" - pruh-DOOS vs. the noun synonymous with "fruits and veggies" - "PRO-doos".

Literally the same word with the same root yet I would never pronounce one the other way.

Well, if you pronounce ‘produce’ the verb differently from ‘produce’ the noun, then you’re wrong:

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/produce

The only difference is that the verb declines (eg he produces, produced, etc), and the noun is collective and always singular (there’s never ‘produces,’ just ‘produce’).
Gebt ihr ihr ihr Buch zurück?

Offline gebobs

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Me like hockey!
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #128 on: October 09, 2019, 04:05:14 PM »
It seems to me that people who feel strongly on a topic often unreasonably expect that discussion of any topic even tangentially related to their pet topic to address it. At best, they see it as a missed opportunity; at worst, they seem to take it as a betrayal or the deliberate suppression of important information.  In actuality, it's usually just that it wasn't the topic under discussion.

Concur.

I think Steven might have said something along the lines of "There's no reason to change the amount of meat you eat."

Except that is not what he even thinks. He said that that was one way to interpret the data, but under the precautionary principle, you still might want to reduce your meat consumption.  He reviewed the article skeptically, for Christ's sake.

I wrote immediately after that "Sure, he could have specified 'with respect to the study etc. etc.'"  What are you getting so upset about? I'm not the one getting up all up on my high horse because he didn't cover the article exactly to my particular liking.


I'm not upset.  I'm just correcting your misinformation.

What misinformation? You quoted a portion of my post and I can only conclude you took it out of context, misunderstood my point, or otherwise our lines got crossed. I never said anything about what Steven actually believes (his beliefs being irrelevant to the point I was trying to make). I never said he covered it unskeptically ("for Christ's sake").

All I was trying to point out was the silliness of all the sanctimony around here regarding the SGU commiting the sin of not pointing out the impact of meat consumption on climate.

Offline Tassie Dave

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2390
  • Go Tiges
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #129 on: October 09, 2019, 04:08:03 PM »
Americans pronounce it with three syllables - BAT-ter-ree.

How do you pronounce the crime of battery?

Since battery consist of someone being battered, I pronounce it similar to the root word, which, yes, means with three syllables. But it's a different word, so it makes sense to me that it can be pronounced differently.

It's literally the same word.

I pronounce the word "produce" differently depending on context. The verb meaning "manufacture something" - pruh-DOOS vs. the noun synonymous with "fruits and veggies" - "PRO-doos".

Literally the same word with the same root yet I would never pronounce one the other way.

Well, if you pronounce ‘produce’ the verb differently from ‘produce’ the noun, then you’re wrong:

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/produce

The only difference is that the verb declines (eg he produces, produced, etc), and the noun is collective and always singular (there’s never ‘produces,’ just ‘produce’).

It's not wrong how others pronounce words. It's just different. That's what makes regional dialects/accents etc.
It would be boring if we all spoke english exactly the same  ???

I pronounce both those words differently as well.
Prod-Juice for the food you get from farms (Dairy Produce, veggies etc)
Pro-Juice for the verb

It seems you speak a more refined version of english.  ;) Which is acceptable, but less aussie  ;D
You probably even say Australia with 4 syllables and our capital with 3, where most of us drop 1 syllable off each.
Oz-Stray-Yah & Can-Bra

Offline gebobs

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 625
  • Me like hockey!
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #130 on: October 09, 2019, 04:10:56 PM »
Americans pronounce it with three syllables - BAT-ter-ree.

How do you pronounce the crime of battery?

Since battery consist of someone being battered, I pronounce it similar to the root word, which, yes, means with three syllables. But it's a different word, so it makes sense to me that it can be pronounced differently.

It's literally the same word.

I pronounce the word "produce" differently depending on context. The verb meaning "manufacture something" - pruh-DOOS vs. the noun synonymous with "fruits and veggies" - "PRO-doos".

Literally the same word with the same root yet I would never pronounce one the other way.

Well, if you pronounce ‘produce’ the verb differently from ‘produce’ the noun, then you’re wrong:

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/produce

The only difference is that the verb declines (eg he produces, produced, etc), and the noun is collective and always singular (there’s never ‘produces,’ just ‘produce’).

And pronouncing battery with two syllables is "wrong". It's regional dialect and such differences are myriad in a language like English. We all have our dialectical idiosyncrasies. Even the Queen.

Online daniel1948

  • Happy Man in a Boat
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9059
  • I'd rather be paddling
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #131 on: October 09, 2019, 04:17:32 PM »
Once they began singing the praises of meat and boasting about how they're going to now increase their consumption of it, that's when it became irresponsible to make no mention of reasons for reducing meat consumption.

I got the sense that it was a bit tongue in cheek. Do you really think they are going to radically change their eating habits based on a single published article? Let's all just take a deep breath or two.

No, I don't expect them to change their eating habits, especially when Steve said that the current state of the evidence does not warrant changes to people's diets. But I also didn't expect Jay (I think it was him) to say (even if it was intended as a joke) "So let's all eat lots more meat," as if the immediate health effects of eating meat were the only consideration.

Steve actually took a relatively reasonable approach. Some of the others, not so much.

And even if heath is your only concern, the big part played by the cow industry in the creation of drug-resistant bacteria is certainly relevant.

I don't criticize them for their diet. I criticize them for their cavalier attitude.
Daniel
----------------
"Anyone who has ever looked into the glazed eyes of a soldier dying on the battlefield will think long and hard before starting a war."
-- Otto von Bismarck

Offline 2397

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2948
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #132 on: October 09, 2019, 04:37:56 PM »
Indeed, it's not about any person or what they personally do in particular, it's about the message.

Who speaks shouldn't matter, vs. what is said, in most cases. Especially in online, partially anonymous discussions.

Online CarbShark

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 11955
Episode #743
« Reply #133 on: October 09, 2019, 04:51:46 PM »

And even if heath is your only concern, the big part played by the cow industry in the creation of drug-resistant bacteria is certainly relevant.

I agree with you on that. You can get beef and other meats from hormone-free and antibiotic-free sources. We do when it’s available. Also we prefer grass fed when available.

As an aside when I criticized the cattle industry for using antibiotics here on this forum I was compared to the food babe.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just someone who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline cbecke

  • Brand New
  • Posts: 6
    • Mr. Becke's Physics Classroom (Facebook)
Re: Episode #743
« Reply #134 on: October 09, 2019, 05:01:27 PM »
Americans pronounce it with three syllables - BAT-ter-ree.

How do you pronounce the crime of battery?

You can never accuse aussies of being consistent with their poor grammar.  ;)

The crime is 3 syllables, which makes sense as the verb form is to batter.

I’m going to Mel-burn next year for a day to attend the Victoria Opera staging of ‘Salome.’

Nope.  Speak for yourself.  Melbourne is pronounced with a vowel after the ‘b.’

You must be from one of them there western states where they speak proper.
People from Adelaide and Perth do tend to lean towards a more English version of strine. Some Adelaidians even sound British.

Eastern states do tend to be more lazy with their pronunciations. Tasmanians are among the worst

While on this topic, I have a problem with New Englanders pronouncing it "Mel-bin" or "Caans". Sure, that (or something to that effect) is what the locals may sound like, but would we expect folks from Melbourne or Cairns to show up in Manhattan and be expected to call it "New Yawk" like the locals might? There's something wrong with imitating the local accent for place names, IMHO.

Convince me I'm wrong.
"There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere."  - Isaac Asimov