[Bill N]

This should be compulsory viewing.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000mn4n

 

[Trevor Larkum]

Because no-one needs optimism?

 

[Bill N]

Because no-one needs optimism?

I think it’s probably a good thing for people who are striving to fix the problem to be optimistic, but not for people who either don’t believe there is a problem or aren’t striving to fix it.

 

[mrdr_ev]

It was pretty terrifying. Even the positive bit at the end was like a drop in the ocean (woo we got rid of CFCs, cos they found there was something cheaper that didn't destroy the ozone layer, and it only took 40 years) compared to the sheer scale of buggered that the rest of the program portrayed.

 

[Bill N]

It was pretty terrifying.

Indeed - a good thing I think as people (myself included) need to be jolted into doing more and making more changes more urgently.

 

[donald]

I think it’s probably a good thing for people who are striving to fix the problem to be optimistic, but not for people who either don’t believe there is a problem or aren’t striving to fix it.

Some redundancy in that condition?

How could someone strive to fix a problem they don't believe exists?

 

[donald]

This should be compulsory viewing.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000mn4n

The BBC don't think it is compulsory viewing ... they have a firewall in front of it. What does it say?

 

[Bill N]

The BBC don't think it is compulsory viewing ... they have a firewall in front of it. What does it say?

That’s odd - the link works okay for me.

This is the blurb:

"With a million species at risk of extinction, Sir David Attenborough explores how this crisis of biodiversity has consequences for us all, threatening food and water security, undermining our ability to control our climate and even putting us at greater risk of pandemic diseases.

Extinction is now happening up to 100 times faster than the natural evolutionary rate, but the issue is about more than the loss of individual species. Everything in the natural world is connected in networks that support the whole of life on earth, including us, and we are losing many of the benefits that nature provides to us. The loss of insects is threatening the pollination of crops, while the loss of biodiversity in the soil also threatens plants growth. Plants underpin many of the things that we need, and yet one in four is now threatened with extinction.

Last year, a UN report identified the key drivers of biodiversity loss, including overfishing, climate change and pollution. But the single biggest driver of biodiversity loss is the destruction of natural habitats. Seventy-five per cent of Earth's land surface (where not covered by ice) has been changed by humans, much of it for agriculture, and as consumers we may unwittingly be contributing towards the loss of species through what we buy in the supermarket.

Our destructive relationship with the natural world isn’t just putting the ecosystems that we rely on at risk. Human activities like the trade in animals and the destruction of habitats drive the emergence of diseases. Disease ecologists believe that if we continue on this pathway, this year’s pandemic will not be a one-off event."

 

[Bill N]

I think it’s probably a good thing for people who are striving to fix the problem to be optimistic, but not for people who either don’t believe there is a problem or aren’t striving to fix it.

Some redundancy in that condition?

How could someone strive to fix a problem they don't believe exists?

It’s good for people to be optimistic if they are trying to fix it (and hence believe it exists).

It’s not good for people to be optimistic if:

- they don’t believe it (and hence aren’t trying to fix it)

OR

- they do believe it but aren’t trying to fix it.

 

[Mr_G]

The BBC don't think it is compulsory viewing ... they have a firewall in front of it. What does it say?

Do you have a TV licence?

 

[Bill N]

For anyone not able to watch iPlayer for whatever reason...

 

[donald]

Do you have a TV licence?

Nope.

 

[donald]

It’s good for people to be optimistic if they are trying to fix it (and hence believe it exists).

It’s not good for people to be optimistic if:

- they don’t believe it (and hence aren’t trying to fix it)

OR

- they do believe it but aren’t trying to fix it.

You've missed two whole categories out there which are;
1)

• don't 'believe' in it (linked to (2) ), but
• still making measures in their lives that would combat it if it were true

2)
where one can accept a risk probability and mitigate its possibilities without believing the risk will actually manifest

and a 3rd option which is a partial, undecided, combination of (1) & (2).

 

[donald]

For anyone not able to watch iPlayer for whatever reason...

What's at the end?

 

[Bill N]

The YouTube link is missing 5 mins from the end for some reason. Anyway, practically eveyone in the UK can just watch the iPlayer version just fine.

 

[Bill N]

Full video:

Extinction: The Facts @BBCExtinction

Extinction: The Facts, by David Attenborough (full documentary)

www.pscp.tv

 

[Bill N]

It’s good for people to be optimistic if they are trying to fix it (and hence believe it exists).

It’s not good for people to be optimistic if:

- they don’t believe it (and hence aren’t trying to fix it)

OR

- they do believe it but aren’t trying to fix it.

You've missed two whole categories out there which are;
1)

• don't 'believe' in it (linked to (2) ), but
• still making measures in their lives that would combat it if it were true

2)
where one can accept a risk probability and mitigate its possibilities without believing the risk will actually manifest

and a 3rd option which is a partial, undecided, combination of (1) & (2).

Really not sure what your point is.

 

[donald]

Really not sure what your point is.

Whatever your point was in drawing up the categories of people.

 

[Bill N]

Groan - just watch the programme if you like, people.

or don’t

whatever

 

[Orrery]

The BBC don't think it is compulsory viewing ... they have a firewall in front of it. What does it say?

The government, I'm afraid. There was some edict to the BBC a couple of years ago, that they have to monetise content that isn't already funded by the licence fee. So, if you don't pay the licence fee then they have to introduce charging or ads.