A truly great communicator, we need more like him.
David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
61–70 of 172 posts
Re: David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
#62Top man, lives up on Richmond Hill and absolutely loves it - when asked about his travels and adventures and where he would choose to live, he replied, "I already live there" Fairly well-known locally is that my favourite bookshop, The Open Book in Richmond, stocks signed copies of all his books. They used to be signed directly on the page, but since he got to the mid-to-late nineties in age, tons of hardbacks are to…
Whilst we're doing random anecdotes that vaguely link to him, my late grandfather remembered David from his Wyggeston days as a good rugby player, which is a funny way to imagine him. Apparently he had the voice even then, but not so much to say about the world.
Re: David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
#63He was just mentioned on today's Lateral podcast with Tom Scott.
Apparently, he's the reason tennis balls are yellow.
I guess they were traditionally white but when they started broadcasting matches on TV it was too hard to see the ball.
David who was at the BBC at the time suggested they use yellow balls instead so they would come through on camera. Ever since then tennis balls have been yellow.
Re: David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most impactful elements of modern agriculture are entirely animal-based. Full-stop. You in fact rightfully but incompletely recognize : artificial fertilizers (for giant mono-crop fields of soybeans to feed to cows and pigs [0]), replacing forests (to clear room for soybean fields and pasture for cows and pigs [1][2]), and runoff of these fertilizers and manure into waterways. The parent comment is right - if we…
If it was a competition in who did more harm the distinction may be relevant but in terms of saving the environment and turning back the ecosystem back to a sustainable one, the distinction between animal based or non-animal based is mostly irrelevant. Modern agriculture are not sustainable for the environment. The fossil fuels that are pulled from the earth and put on fields are not sustainable, and the amount of ru…
> in terms of saving the environment and turning back the ecosystem back to a sustainable one, the distinction between animal based or non-animal based is mostly irrelevant
this is simply false - did you follow any of the citations? you’re welcome to find something to support your position but as they say: if it can be asserted without evidence, it can be dismissed without evidence.
Re: David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
#65[flagged]
A lot, especially in organismal biology / field biology. We even name things after him, like carnivorous plants (Nepenthes attenboroughii), the whole genus Sirdavida, a hawkweed (Hieracium attenboroughianum), ... more than 50 taxa in all.
The unfortunate thing is that the area of biology he has drawn people to is difficult to make a living in. Jobs are few, there is intense compettion for them, they don't pay well, and there is often little job security. In some ways it is the Art History of a STEM discipline.
Re: David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
The most impactful elements of modern agriculture are entirely animal-based. Full-stop. You in fact rightfully but incompletely recognize : artificial fertilizers (for giant mono-crop fields of soybeans to feed to cows and pigs [0]), replacing forests (to clear room for soybean fields and pasture for cows and pigs [1][2]), and runoff of these fertilizers and manure into waterways. The parent comment is right - if we…
If it was a competition in who did more harm the distinction may be relevant but in terms of saving the environment and turning back the ecosystem back to a sustainable one, the distinction between animal based or non-animal based is mostly irrelevant. Modern agriculture are not sustainable for the environment. The fossil fuels that are pulled from the earth and put on fields are not sustainable, and the amount of ru…
No one is saying fields of corn and soybean wouldn't exist, but we would have far less of them without animal agriculture. You are creating a false dichotomy of "sustainable"/"not sustainable" the reality is human societies would be much more sustainable without animal agriculture. More sustainable does in fact result in less extinctions/ecosystem impact and reduced climate change.
Maybe I'm wrong but reading your comment it feels like you are letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, and you use your conclusion that we will never be sustainable as your excuse to continue to eat animals.
Re: David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
#67He was just mentioned on today's Lateral podcast with Tom Scott. Apparently, he's the reason tennis balls are yellow. I guess they were traditionally white but when they started broadcasting matches on TV it was too hard to see the ball. David who was at the BBC at the time suggested they use yellow balls instead so they would come through on camera. Ever since then tennis balls have been yellow.
Mind blown. Thanks for sharing!
Re: David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
#68The sad thing is Attenborough has lived to see the destruction of nature he loved so much. His constant warnings have gone mostly unheard. In some ways I think excellent nature programming like his own Nature is doing a disservice by making it seem like there's lots of wild nature left. I wish humans would come together to re-wild more of the earth. Restoring wild nature and cutting emissions is the only way to reall…
Well to make matters worse remember we're about to add another ~2 billion humans (Quark DS9 voice) peaking at around 10 in the 2080s. Most of the growth will be in Africa, not exactly the most lawful place in the world so it looks kind of bleak for the environment and animals there. Those 2 billion will all want a nice home and a smartphone, computer, TV, car etc… Earth Overshoot Day https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ear…
Hopefully by 2080 the value of solar plus storage (or something even better) makes things like coal uneconomic.
Re: David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's more like - why should I tighten my belt today when the celebrities, politicians and corporations making a big fuss about climate change are still flying around in private jets, buying up coastal property, eating steaks and are responsible for the vast majority of greenhouse gas emissions?
What kind of argument even is that? What's next - "why should I care about hurting you when there's so many sociopaths out there that clearly don't"?
The people spreading fear about environmental collapse and claiming to be terrified of it, are displaying behaviors that contradict their claims. The people saying the ocean is rising and going to swallow communities while buying mansions on the coast and flying around in private jets, are either displaying extreme cognitive dissonance or aren't really that concerned with the environment collapsing. If it were one or two individuals displaying this behavior I'd blame cognitive dissonance, but it's pretty much every high-profile politician / celebrity.
Re: David Attenborough's 100th Birthday
#70[flagged]
I wasn’t pulled toward the field of study, but came away with a great appreciation and wonder for nature. My parents recorded many of his documentaries on Betamax tapes in the 1980s and my brother and I watched all of them many times in our formative years. Happy birthday to a truly great human.