Naked Science Forum
General Discussion & Feedback => Just Chat! => Topic started by: Thotmose the 3rd on 09/10/2015 19:45:36
-
The Naked Scientists – and this forum – are funded by "non-departmental, government bodies" of the British government. So it is, therefore, a fair question to ask here--is this thing good or bad for Britain?
This forum is unique among government-sponsored international science podcasts.
The Australian Broadcasting Company's "The Science Program" has no such forum. Therefore fatuous Australian gas bags cannot embarrass Australia in one.
The Canadian Broadcasting Company's "Quirks and Quarks" has no such forum. Therefore fatuous Canadian gas bags cannot embarrass Canada in one.
In America, neither the Public Radio International "Science Friday" nor "This Week in Science" have such a forum. Therefore fatuous American gas bags cannot embarrass America in one.
The Deutsche Welle's "Spectrum" has no such forum. Therefore fatuous German gas bags cannot embarrass Germany in one.
Therefore – since the Naked Scientists do have a forum – do fatuous British gas bags embarrass Britain in it?
All of these science programs use professional broadcasting talents to present their face to the world. The Naked Scientists have Dr. Chris Smith and Dr. Kat Arney - who do well. BBC 's "Inside Science" has Adam Rutherford and sometimes Helen Czerski - and they do well. The BBC's "Science in Action" has Jack Stewart - who does well. This forum has a bunch of "Hero Members" who remind many listeners how badly Britain sucks eggs.
This forum prides itself upon following "British Manners". Such manners are not held in high regard by much of the world's population. For example, Much of the world remains aware of British actions in Basra and the continued suppression of the Chilcot report. (Would I use the words "revolted" and "disgusted"? -- Perhaps.) Therefore, how beneficial to Britain are the "manners" of these fatuous gas bag "Hero Members" who operate freely to suppress any dissent to their chicken manure in this forum, --really?
If the British Government had the brains to get out of it's own way, it would drop the funding of this lamentably atrocious demonstration of what stinks in British society like yesterday's bran muffin.
And if you doubt that this forum is run by fatuous gas bags, clueless ninnys, and ridiculous Colonel Blimps, then come back in 72 hours and see if this is still here.
-
It is Britain's contribution to world mental health. Apparently it gives morons from around the world a sense of selfimportance. I support it as an act of charity to those less intellectually endowed across the sea.
-
Quod Erat Demonstrndum
If you want to support "charity", here is a URL for a British food bank chain which has a much better use for the government money than that used to support this little club for "hero members". Britain's poor cannot eat the "sense of selfimportance [sic]" so generously doled out to them by such beneficent "hero members" as this.
Winter is coming.
http://www.trusselltrust.org/foodbank-projects
-
In 2013, 14.3 percent of households (17.5 million households, approximately one in seven), were food insecure (Coleman-Jensen 2014b, p. 1). This is down slightly from 14.9 percent food insecure in 2008 and 2009 which was the highest number recorded since these statistics have been kept (Coleman-Jensen 2014b, p.1 ).
In 2013, 5.6 percent of U.S. households (6.8 million households) had very low food security. In this more severe range of food insecurity, the food intake of some household members was reduced and normal eating patterns were disrupted at times during the year due to limited resources (Coleman-Jensen 2014b, p.1) .
Children were food insecure at times during the year in 9.9 percent of households with children. These 3.8 million households were unable at times during the year to provide adequate, nutritious food for their children While children are usually shielded by their parents, who go hungry themselves, from the disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake that characterize very low food security, both children and adults experienced instances of very low food security in 0.9 percent of households with children (360,000 households) in 2013 (Coleman-Jensen 2014b, p. 2).
The median [a type of average] food-secure household spent 30 percent more on food than the median food-insecure household of the same size and household composition including food purchased with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits (formerly the Food Stamp Program) (Coleman-Jensen 2014b, p. 2).
Rates of food insecurity were substantially higher than the national average for households with incomes near or below the Federal poverty line, households with children headed by single women or single men, and Black and Hispanic households (Coleman-Jensen 2014b, p. 2).
Background: The United States changed the name of its definitions in 2006 that eliminated references to hunger, keeping various categories of food insecurity. This did not represent a change in what was measured. Very low food insecurity (described as food insecurity with hunger prior to 2006) means that, at times during the year, the food intake of household members was reduced and their normal eating patterns were disrupted because the household lacked money and other resources for food. This means that people were hungry (in the sense of "the uneasy or painful sensation caused by want of food" [Oxford English Dictionary 1971] for days each year.
God help America.
-
Immediately following the invasion of Kuwait, I clearly recall Bush # 1 saying that he would have to think about what to do. The next day Margaret Thatcher came and had lunch with him.
Bush # 1 came out of that Thatcher Lunch calling for immediate mobilization to "save" the house of Saud from "the Iraqi threat".
That Thatcher "lunch" engendered the bodies leaping from the world trade center flames , 57,614 American dead and wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, untold innocent civilian casualties and trillions of dollars wasted. All because Margaret Thatcher got America to fight Britain's war for it.
True or not, that is what springs to the American mind when an insolent twit says in this forum. "God help America."
I say again. Is that good for Britain? Do you really need to show the raddled face beneath Britain's mask like this with your government money?
I looked on the web site for that British food bank. They tell of people having to beg a tin of soup from the neighbors so they could feed their 18 month old kid. Does this forum need to beg in the streets?
I say again, Is this what you want to buy here -- a bully pulpit for this too common kind of insufferably insulting British jingoism?
What right do I have to come here and tell you this? The blood of 57,614 Americans - in this century alone - has paid for it.
Careful with yer soup there, I wouldn't want you to burn your tongue.
-
I clearly recall Bush # 1 saying that he would have to think about what to do. The next day Margaret Thatcher came and had lunch with him.
God help America.
-
The Australian Broadcasting Company's "The Science Program" has no such forum. Therefore fatuous Australian gas bags cannot embarrass Australia in one.
I know the ABC is concerned about it. Their "Future Tense" podcast describes moderating comments on public forums as a "wicked" problem (http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/futuretense/online-comments---a-22wicked22-problem/6564910).
Anonymous contributors (unfortunately, some of them "fatuous gas bags") feel free to dispense with all civility - so do you block all public discussion, or do you force all contributors to use their real names?
It is a courageous organization that commits the resources (or recruits volunteers) to moderate a public discussion board. The Naked Scientists has taken the latter approach at this time.
It would be unfortunate if the misdeeds of the few destroyed a valuable communications channel for the majority.
-
I just listened to an interview on Science Friday with Sherry Turkle (http://www.sciencefriday.com/segment/10/09/2015/sherry-turkle-reclaiming-conversation.html).
She described today's text-base online interactions as creating a "crisis of empathy", where people can be very hurtful, consciously or unconsciously.
Whether hiding behind a veil of anonymity, or just shielded by the sterile monochrome text, people are never forced to confront the emotional impacts of their juvenile behavior - and even when there is an apology, there is rarely heartfelt remorse.
-
I know the ABC is concerned about it. Their "Future Tense" podcast describes moderating comments on public forums as a "wicked" problem (http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/futuretense/online-comments---a-22wicked22-problem/6564910).
ABC has an unmoderated science forum, CanadaContent has a moderated one and the Canadian Association of Science Centres is setting one up.
Although examples of pompous gas bags are never far away, TNS attracted me because on the whole contributors are generally civilised in thier posts.
I don't know what the demographics are, but my impression is that at least 90% of the posters here originate in the US. Generally they are judged by the quality of their posts rather than their age, ethnic background or gender.
-
Oh no, not him again under a sock puppet account. To the question asker, this is a science forum not a political forum, get a grip my friend nobody cares who funds this forum or why they fund it, there is no conspiracy theory or wrongful doings of this forum unlike the american forums who ban me for as little as one post.
America loves plagiarism, do not come trying to level a British forum with your antics I will tell you straight.
This forum gives me the freedom of speech in new theories, they do not threaten to ban me for opinions, they are the best forum on the internet of a science nature.
-
Oh no, not him again under a sock puppet account.
Sounds like you've met before, different name same stereotyping.
This forum gives me the freedom of speech in new theories, they do not threaten to ban me for opinions, they are the best forum on the internet of a science nature.
However, you do push folk's patience to the limit at times [;)]
Keep up the good work - in New Theories of course.
-
I looked on the web site for that British food bank. They tell of people having to beg a tin of soup from the neighbors so they could feed their 18 month old kid.
The Feeding America nationwide network of food banks secures and distributes more than 3 billion meals each year to communities throughout the United States
Yep, bigger and better, every time. God help America.
-
I have noticed a strong anti british slant from certain members and I would be amazed if this isnt a sockpuppet.
Great Britain has plenty of problems, this forum, however, cannot be a major factor for or against.
The reason food banks are in so much use these days? Because the lazy scum have found out about them... I have one across the road for me and I see the numbers of people stood outside smoking their cigarettes (2 days food for their family per pack!) who later I see them going into the local curry house for a curry and lots of beer.. or spending their 'job seekers' allowance on cheap wine and lager in the local tesco's.. and then revving about in brand new cars..
60% of those attending this local one to me are of this type.. there are people on benefits that have more holidays than i have and both me and my wife work full time.
Forgive me if I have 0 sympathy for the scroungers of this world and do not cry heart tears for the use of food banks
-
What a typical display of having bought into the middle class attitude, sold to you by individuals who'd rather you were annoyed at the poor scrounging your money off you than the rich!
I daresay these scroungers you witness are merely emulating the behaviour of bankers, screeching around in their status symbol cars, bought with the huge bonus they personally received, and living the fat cat life, despite the fact of the banks having had to have been severely bailed out by your very own tax payers money!!!
Scroungers and food banks? Looking around at what's going on in the world and 'this ' is what you find to complain about?
Are you aware that there is a brain scan type that is synonymous to psychotic serial killers? The next most common place to locate persons of such brain scan type is within the board room at CO level and above?
Really Project Sailor, I think you should re-examine your outlook and recognise that you are guilty of gullibly swallowing an attitude that has been sold to you by people who want to distract you from their own activities and short comings. It's a common ploy that plays on your underlying base survival instincts, in that it's always easier to pick on the person beneath your station than risk annoying those that you rely on above! Grow up!
-
I actually agree wit you timey.. believe it or not.. I am equally angry at the something for nothing culture as I am with the everything for nothing upper management of all businesses (and countries).
What irritates me is the fact I am forced to support them both. we all are.
There's nothing we can do about the bankers though.. I shop locally, avoid major brands at every chance.. but due to the modern world it is practically impossible to stop your money being hoovered up into the bankers greedy hands..
But I really loathe the fact I am meant to feel guilty all the time that I am supporting people who have better lives than i do, and have to listen to handwringing politicians and social 'do gooders' demanding that a bigger share of the pie goes to those 60% (based on my own observations) that do not need (or many times deserve) it. If it were ONLY those that really need it I wouldn't have a problem, but then neither would us all since life would be so much more comfortable for us all.
Reform as always starts from the bottom!
-
Ok, noted. ;)
But... Reform starts by the people at the bottom reforming those at the top. This being because waiting for the people at the top to reform the people at the bottom will be like "Waiting for Godo." (This being a play, in explanation for those ignorant of the fact) The only means for the top to reform the bottom is for the people at the top to take a drastic cut in lifestyle. It's never going to happen!
-
p.s. The middle classes are the only people in a position to initiate such a reform, this being why the rich allow you your little luxuries, but then strangle you with a tax system, that they then sell to you as being the fault of the poor, when it's not.
It is essential to step back from the detail in order to see the bigger picture!
-
Also... Hang on a moment here!
Food banks. As I understand it, one can only claim one food bank parcel per month, and to claim this food parcel one must produce a notary signed by a doctor or a policeman that confirms you are eligible and in need.
ProjectSailor, if you are seeing the same individuals claiming food bank parcels more than once a month, then there are dishonest doctors or policemen involved in this scenario!!!
-
Did you know ProjectSailor, that in order to temporarily house one homeless person, due to some unholy alliance between the councils and private landlords, to do so costs the tax payer in excess of £600 a week.
I'd eat my hat if I could not house a homeless person via cheap out of season deals at book a spa dot com. for less money than this!
It would make a great documentary... A social security recipient is allowed to take one two week holiday a year. Imagine... TV crew shows up at council approved privately owned hovel to whisk away the resident to a series of 2 or 3 day cheap offer spa deals, inclusive of room with bath and toilet facilities, use of swimming pool, sauna, a free beauty/massage treatment and 3 healthy meals per day! Given the budget of £1200 for the two weeks, I reckon we could, with job interviews in mind, kit out said homeless person with a whole new wardrobe with the monies saved.
Delivering said homeless person back to privately owned, council approved hovel, sporting shared bath and toilet facilities, and a day or so filming the life of the homeless person in their own environment, the stark reality of where these tax payments are not being scrounged by the homeless person, but by the profiteering private landlord and complicit council policies should be glaringly obvious!!!
-
...."Waiting for Godo." (This being a play, in explanation for those ignorant of the fact)...
'Ere, is ee finkin whot us is too fik to read wiki, eh?
Come the revolution......
-
Lol, Colin. Actually I ran asunder with that one elsewhere, whereas someone thought I was saying "waiting for god" which then led to a very strange conversation, and one that I wouldn't want to repeat. So in case anyone was thinking of getting into it, the answer is "no comment"!
-
Lol, Colin. Actually I ran asunder with that one elsewhere, whereas someone thought I was saying "waiting for god" which then led to a very strange conversation, and one that I wouldn't want to repeat. So in case anyone was thinking of getting into it, the answer is "no comment"!
Ok, let yer off then.
Actually I watch a lot of plays, Eastenders, friends, bay watch, I'm quite cultured really! Almost bourgeoisie.
-
Immediately following the invasion of Kuwait, I clearly recall Bush # 1 saying that he would have to think about what to do. The next day Margaret Thatcher came and had lunch with him.
Bush # 1 came out of that Thatcher Lunch calling for immediate mobilization to "save" the house of Saud from "the Iraqi threat".
That Thatcher "lunch" engendered the bodies leaping from the world trade center flames , 57,614 American dead and wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan, untold innocent civilian casualties and trillions of dollars wasted. All because Margaret Thatcher got America to fight Britain's war for it.
True or not, that is what springs to the American mind when an insolent twit says in this forum. "God help America."
I say again. Is that good for Britain? Do you really need to show the raddled face beneath Britain's mask like this with your government money?
I looked on the web site for that British food bank. They tell of people having to beg a tin of soup from the neighbors so they could feed their 18 month old kid. Does this forum need to beg in the streets?
I say again, Is this what you want to buy here -- a bully pulpit for this too common kind of insufferably insulting British jingoism?
What right do I have to come here and tell you this? The blood of 57,614 Americans - in this century alone - has paid for it.
Careful with yer soup there, I wouldn't want you to burn your tongue.
Well Britian did actually pay for the entire first Iraq war, every single penny of it, most British tax payers dont know that, but Britian did.
Still I am slightly confused is this Thread about, this Forum or wars past?