Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Interesting Stuff Thread

Options
1…181182184186187…219

Comments

  • Options
    #5492
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Shrap wrote: »
    What are the costs of developing, testing and breeding the GM spud in comparison to the cost (environmental and otherwise) of the spuds that currently require vast quantities of pesticide, fungicide, etc.? For something that may not improve matters long-term?
    I haven't read up on the GM spud -- hell, I don't even remember it existing to start with -- so can't comment on it. However, any time the whole GM shooting match starts up, it's usually worth bringing up the Golden Rice project which is a good example of what GM can do, when it's done properly:

    http://www.goldenrice.org/

    tl;dr summary - people who eat large amounts of rice run the risk of being deficient in Vitamin A, a deficiency which is estimated to be directly responsible for the deaths of perhaps a half a million children each year. Golden Rice is regular rice which has had genes inserted which synthesize Vitamin A (which is orange-colored, hence the "Golden Rice" name). Despite the rice being given away for free, despite fifteen-odd years of research failing to indicate any negative effects at all, and despite the fact that it could help save the lives of half a million kids annually, Golden Rice has met with strong and sustained opposition from anti-GM activists, most of whom are as unfamiliar with the problem as they are with the solution. It's very frustrating; a little bit like dealing with creationists or flat-earthers.


  • Options
    #5493
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    silverharp wrote: »
    other stuff that makes me a little wary is how fundamental foods like wheat have changed in the last 50 years which is now potentially more unhealthy for people due to the higher gluten content..
    50 years ago chicken was a fundamentally different food, being low fat and more like "game" than it is now. But this is due to selective breeding and intensive farming, not GM or scientific research. Its farmers giving the consumer what they want. Its not some scary unforeseen consequence of trusting in Dr GM Frankenstein.


  • Options
    #5494
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    robindch wrote: »
    I haven't read up on the GM spud -- hell, I don't even remember it existing to start with -- so can't comment on it. However, any time the whole GM shooting match starts up, it's usually worth bringing up the Golden Rice project which is a good example of what GM can do, when it's done properly:

    http://www.goldenrice.org/

    tl;dr summary - people who eat large amounts of rice run the risk of being deficient in Vitamin A, a deficiency which is estimated to be directly responsible for the deaths of perhaps a half a million children each year. Golden Rice is regular rice which has had genes inserted which synthesize Vitamin A (which is orange-colored, hence the "Golden Rice" name). Despite the rice being given away for free, despite fifteen-odd years of research failing to indicate any negative effects at all, and despite the fact that it could help save the lives of half a million kids annually, Golden Rice has met with strong and sustained opposition from anti-GM activists, most of whom are as unfamiliar with the problem as they are with the solution. It's very frustrating; a little bit like dealing with creationists or flat-earthers.
    It's hard to tell how much of a consensus there is on golden rice - there is some evidence of scientists raising concern:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_rice#Clinical_trials_.2F_food_safety_and_nutrition_research

    Has it been through many long-term studies? (not just studies here and there across 15 years, but how many actual long term studies?)

    Maybe it's fine and perfectly safe, with all the proper research/trials done - but on an initial look, it doesn't seem set enough to go branding skeptics as akin to creationists/flat-eathers; anyone who does an initial look at the state of research here, should be able to find something to give them pause, from legitimate sources (i.e. actual scientists, not crackpots).

    GM seems to be a topic, where people should be listening to the genuine skeptics (rather than lumping them in with the crackpots) - not reaching for a stick to beat them with, as anti-science or whatnot.


  • Options
    #5495
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,856 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    recedite wrote: »
    50 years ago chicken was a fundamentally different food, being low fat and more like "game" than it is now. But this is due to selective breeding and intensive farming, not GM or scientific research. Its farmers giving the consumer what they want. Its not some scary unforeseen consequence of trusting in Dr GM Frankenstein.


    its a case by case I guess. Sometimes what the consumer wants might be taste and texture but the consumer on average wont know "whats under the bonnet". Im not concerned as such if the process is GM or old fashioned breeding

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #5496
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    KomradeBishop wrote: »
    It's hard to tell how much of a consensus there is on golden rice [...]
    It's relatively easy to tell whether there's a general consensus or not. Five minutes with google and it turns out that the wiki article you quoted includes one counter-consensual quote, and that from an organization which promotes homeopathy, and an individual who rejects the modern evolutionary synthesis and who writes some very silly woo indeed. The one easily-searched for claim made by Ho in that quote is demonstrably false- see here for a link which is returned in the first page of results. Took about 15 seconds to find.
    KomradeBishop wrote: »
    GM seems to be a topic, where people should be listening to the genuine skeptics (rather than lumping them in with the crackpots) - not reaching for a stick to beat them with, as anti-science or whatnot.
    I've been long enough dealing with the anti-GM crew that I've lost patience. I've heard all the arguments and debunked the lot of them long ago.

    If the best the anti-GM crew can produce is a single retired researcher who appears to have had little or no useful research published in reputable, high-impact journals, who rejects evolution, who promotes homeopathy and who makes while claims that can be debunked in seconds, then - sorry to say it - but I think I'm on solid ground in saying that this guy is a "little like" "a creationist or a flat-earther".

    If they want to be taken seriously, then they should start behaving seriously.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5497
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    Fair enough, that group arguing against golden rice is fairly discreditable, so I can't immediately see any credible opposition to it.

    My only remaining question on that would be, from last post: Has it been through many long-term studies? (not just studies here and there across 15 years, but how many actual long term studies?)
    I've tried searching for a bit, but can't immediately see. If it's been through many such long-term studies, with no potential problems or biases with those studies, I'd not have any remaining concerns about golden rice.


  • Options
    #5498
    CramCycle
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 24,603 Mod ✭✭✭✭CramCycle


    Has it been through many long-term studies? (not just studies here and there across 15 years, but how many actual long term studies?)
    What do you define as long term? What do you believe is needed to ascertain reputable safe usage?
    Maybe it's fine and perfectly safe, with all the proper research/trials done - but on an initial look, it doesn't seem set enough to go branding skeptics as akin to creationists/flat-eathers; anyone who does an initial look at the state of research here, should be able to find something to give them pause, from legitimate sources (i.e. actual scientists, not crackpots).
    No one in the scientific community labels someone a crack pot if they are raising genuine concerns from a reputable source, I have been at enough international conferences where scientists, equally renowned, will have full blown, mainly civil, arguments over unseen issues with studies, or something there studies have shown that the reported studies have not. In the peer review process, it should work that the reviewer is in a lab that works in the area or has the capability of reproducing these tests.

    The crack pots are the ones who hear GM and say it must be bad, the scientists are the ones who hear GM and ask, what was the aim (sometimes there isn't one), what did this work achieve and what are both the positives and negatives of this development.
    GM seems to be a topic, where people should be listening to the genuine skeptics (rather than lumping them in with the crackpots) - not reaching for a stick to beat them with, as anti-science or whatnot.
    But scientists generally don't, they might shrug off and LOL at some of the stupid anti GM arguments because they were clearly not researched or they took snippets of information to misrepresent what the studies were saying. A good example being the review posted earlier (the abstract only, you can get the full review for free on research gate), that claims half of GM foods are dangerous or have negative issues associated with them, rather than half of GMOs in development in the past 10 years had negative issues or consequences associated with them, most were scrapped before being made due to bioinformatics hinting/showing potential issues and those that showed issues in first stage cell culture and animal trials were also scrapped.
    robindch wrote: »
    It's relatively easy to tell whether there's a general consensus or not.
    The only consensus is that it has the potential to be beneficial and useful to the global population, there are risks, hence the whole studies and research side of things but there are huge potential benefits.
    If they want to be taken seriously, then they should start behaving seriously.
    There is no they in the general scientific community, there are those involved in it, from small research labs, government funded bodies and large companies. They all fund and contribute to the research in different ways and for different things, none are anti GM as that gives the impression that all GM is negative, which is rubbish, what they are is pro the development of useful developments and discoveries that will benefit society, some for interest, some for the reason that is their purpose, to help the people, the other for money (although many working for them will be from the first group, and the rest should be interested in not releasing anything with negative effects as it will stop the money pretty quick).
    KomradeBishop wrote: »
    I've tried searching for a bit, but can't immediately see. If it's been through many such long-term studies, with no potential problems or biases with those studies, I'd not have any remaining concerns about golden rice.
    out of the studies you have found, can you note any biases that have not been mentioned in the "conflict of interest" section of the paper/study.


  • Options
    #5499
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    I think GM foods and pharmaceuticals should share a similar approach to regulation/testing (I believe they do already in many regards) - extensive drug trials can last up to 10-15 years, so that'd be a good starting aim for long-term GM food studies.

    I haven't been able to find good information on long-term studies for golden rice.


  • Options
    #5500
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Evil paleontologists create two fossil-gaps where there used only be one.

    http://inhabitat.com/jawdropping-oldest-human-fossil-fills-in-a-2-8-million-year-old-gap-in-evolution/


  • Options
    #5501
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Nice infographic about Earth.


    Slight disclaimer. I don't know if all facts are 100% accurate. If you find any false ones or ones they have feelings of doubt over please post about it. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5502
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    I see the infographic is produced for Giraffe childcare, but it seems like it would go over the heads of pre-school kids. Maybe its designed to impress the prospective parents.... Yeah we'll make your kid super smart in here :D
    Here's two dubious ones anyway;
    Dinosaurs; more atmospheric CO2 back then, not more O2
    Death in space; less than 1 minute, not 2 minutes


  • Options
    #5503
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    Something which I posted about elsewhere, which seems relevant to this forum (particularly the latter):
    Two interesting things I came across recently, relating to agnotology (which is the study of culturally induced ignorance/doubt) - one was 'System Justification Theory' - which is a pretty fascinating way of trying to understand psychologically, how people come to hold beliefs which justify the 'status quo' (be that in politics, or even in e.g. academic fields), even given significant reason to believe the 'status quo' is wrong and unjustified. Good article touching on it here, where I first read of it:
    http://www.salon.com/2015/03/05/the_right_has_fked_up_minds_meet_the_researcher_who_terrifies_gop_congress/

    The other interesting thing, was this article explaining how some people (most especially religious people) are prone to trying to render certain facts 'untestable/unfalsifiable', when they conflict with their personal beliefs - how people 'fly from facts':
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-people-fly-from-facts/

    These would both tie into the topic, both as part of agnotology, and as evidence of many peoples poor grasp of epistemology/philosophy-of-science - and wider, a lack of critical thinking.


  • Options
    #5504
    swampgas
    Registered Users Posts: 3,540 ✭✭✭swampgas


    KomradeBishop wrote: »
    Something which I posted about elsewhere, which seems relevant to this forum (particularly the latter):
    Two interesting things I came across recently, relating to agnotology (which is the study of culturally induced ignorance/doubt) - one was 'System Justification Theory' - which is a pretty fascinating way of trying to understand psychologically, how people come to hold beliefs which justify the 'status quo' (be that in politics, or even in e.g. academic fields), even given significant reason to believe the 'status quo' is wrong and unjustified. Good article touching on it here, where I first read of it:
    http://www.salon.com/2015/03/05/the_..._gop_congress/

    The other interesting thing, was this article explaining how some people (most especially religious people) are prone to trying to render certain facts 'untestable/unfalsifiable', when they conflict with their personal beliefs - how people 'fly from facts':
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...ly-from-facts/

    These would both tie into the topic, both as part of agnotology, and as evidence of many peoples poor grasp of epistemology/philosophy-of-science - and wider, a lack of critical thinking.

    Some of those links are broken - any chance you could fix them?


  • Options
    #5505
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    Oops - cheers; fixed.


  • Options
    #5506
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Solar Impulse, the first decent solar airplane, now attempting a round-the world trip.
    They reckon when it crosses the Pacific, the pilot will be stuck in the cockpit for 4 or 5 days and nights (its not the fastest plane ever)
    Hopefully the solar cells will charge up the batteries enough during the day to keep it flying all night!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA5cPuhEinU


  • Options
    #5507
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    recedite wrote: »
    Solar Impulse, the first decent solar airplane, now attempting a round-the world trip.
    They reckon when it crosses the Pacific, the pilot will be stuck in the cockpit for 4 or 5 days and nights (its not the fastest plane ever)
    Hopefully the solar cells will charge up the batteries enough during the day to keep it flying all night!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XA5cPuhEinU

    Beautiful! I want one!!


  • Options
    #5508
    recedite
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,993 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    I've watched a few videos of the plane, and everywhere it lands it gets chased by cyclists :D
    It must be like the urge dogs have to chase sheep... they just can't help themselves.


  • Options
    #5509
    MrPudding
    Registered Users Posts: 9,788 ✭✭✭MrPudding


    robindch wrote: »
    With a refreshingly honest Public Service Announcement from 2:40.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgpfNScEd3M
    "Hey, remember that time you got polio? No? That's because your parents got you fcuking vaccinated.' Awesome.

    MrP


  • Options
    #5510
    obplayer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,190 ✭✭✭obplayer


    Sapolsky on Religion

    Fascinating lecture from Stamford.

    P.S. If you don't want to hear religion scientifically dissected by relating it, in a very witty and informed way, to mental health problems then don't watch.
    Obsessive Compulsive Disorder is an individual religiosity and religion is a universal Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (Freud)

    https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLA7BD1C62ECECA7C1

    Robert Maurice Sapolsky (born 1957) is an American neuroendocrinologist, professor of biology, neuroscience, and neurosurgery at Stanford University, researcher and author. He is currently a Professor of Biological Sciences, and Professor of Neurology and Neurological Sciences and, by courtesy, Neurosurgery, at Stanford University. In addition, he is a Research Associate at the National Museums of Kenya.[2]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sapolsky

    He is also a great author, I can particularly recommend 'A Primate's Memoir'.


  • Options
    #5511
    Shrap
    Registered Users Posts: 3,163 ✭✭✭Shrap


    obplayer wrote: »
    Sapolsky on Religion

    Fascinating lecture from Stamford.

    Absolutely brilliant, thanks for the link. Great way to spend my Saturday morning!

    What I took from that is that the possible origin of religious belief and ritual comes down to us all being like pigeons, wondering what we did that time food appeared or we won a fight, or sickness was cured, and developing these personal rituals to invoke these situations again. Over time these were shared and taken up within communities and enacted by the "one in every village" who was particularly suited to fervent reenactments of ritual (the others who couldn't manage to control their fervour, presumably being driven out of the community for making a nuisance of themselves). Fascinating stuff alright.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5512
    pauldla
    Registered Users Posts: 2,247 ✭✭✭pauldla


    Very quiet on here today...it's almost as if the entire country has gone to the pub or something:D


  • Options
    #5513
    Brian Shanahan
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,232 ✭✭✭Brian Shanahan


    pauldla wrote: »
    Very quiet on here today...it's almost as if the entire country has gone to the pub or something:D

    *burp*Iss not tha im no talking te ye but iss that is too busy to talk te ye. *hic*


  • Options
    #5514
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,371 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    I posted this in the Renua (spit) thread on Politics Cafe, but it belongs in this forum really. Deleted it from there as it'd probably be seen as incitement, or off topic, but the fact is we have a new political party being established in this country which is decidedly religious and conservative while being in denial of both.

    ......


    I'm willing to bet my eternal life in return for... nothing at all, except intellectual honesty.

    Religious people detest atheism as a concept. Other religions, they can accept (and rationalise them away as misinterpretations of their god.) But the idea that rational, intelligent people are leading perfectly happy, worthwhile and fulfilled lives without reference to any god at all totally blows their minds, to the extent that they make up all sorts of lies about us - that we are in denial about 'our faith', that we are really a bunch of hopeless misanthropes in denial, that we will convert in foxhole/deathbed, etc :rolleyes:

    The fact that intelligent, rational people are prepared to toss away this so-called 'eternal life' which they could supposedly have for little effort, should cause any theist to think why? Pascal's Wager in reverse. Why would people shun eternal paradise? No rational person would shun such a thing - unless they were completely convinced it was all a fiction.

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #5515
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    pauldla wrote: »
    Very quiet on here today...it's almost as if the entire country has gone to the pub or something
    Always a surprise to me -- in the ahwouldyaeverfeckoff kind of way -- why the church doesn't instruct the government to close the country's pubs on Paddy's day instead of Good Friday.

    Surely Paddy's day, the commemoration of the successful propagation of the new religion to this country, should be held in much higher regard than a simple memorial event within the religion itself.


  • Options
    #5516
    Hotblack Desiato
    Registered Users Posts: 34,371 ✭✭✭✭Hotblack Desiato


    propagation infection

    I don't celebrate the landing of Cromwell or the Vikings, why should I celebrate this other unwanted invader?

    Fingal County Council are certainly not competent to be making decisions about the most important piece of infrastructure on the island. They need to stick to badly designed cycle lanes and deciding on whether Mrs Murphy can have her kitchen extension.



  • Options
    #5517
    Peregrinus
    Registered Users Posts: 26,246 ✭✭✭✭Peregrinus


    robindch wrote: »
    Always a surprise to me -- in the ahwouldyaeverfeckoff kind of way -- why the church doesn't instruct the government to close the country's pubs on Paddy's day instead of Good Friday.

    Surely Paddy's day, the commemoration of the successful propagation of the new religion to this country, should be held in much higher regard than a simple memorial event within the religion itself.
    Tiresome, isn't it, when the observed evidence contradicts your preconceptions? It requires some nifty footwork to maintain your beliefs and still convince yourself that they're evidence-based. :)


  • Options
    #5518
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
    Religious people detest atheism as a concept. Other religions, they can accept (and rationalise them away as misinterpretations of their god.)
    I don't think I've ever met a religious person who detested atheism. Most of the really religious ones seem to make a point of trying to avoid detesting anything. I suspect there's probably a fair bit of variation amongst religious people when it comes to detesting things; it would be interesting stuff indeed if there was no variation. That might even be evidence of a higher power?


  • Options
    #5519
    robindch
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,403 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    Absolam wrote: »
    I don't think I've ever met a religious person who detested atheism.
    I know one person who can go white with anger at the mention of the word. Not exactly a good ad for the social benefits of religion.


  • Options
    #5520
    Absolam
    Registered Users Posts: 6,913 ✭✭✭Absolam


    robindch wrote: »
    I know one person who can go white with anger at the mention of the word. Not exactly a good ad for the social benefits of religion.
    I guess it must take all sorts, even amongst the religious, eh?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #5521
    joseph brand
    Registered Users Posts: 4,537 ✭✭✭joseph brand


    A couple of times I have been asked, "how come some scientists are religious?", like it's a 'gotcha' question. Usually my answer was; "who knows what happened in their life, draining their mental faculty"

    There is a myriad of possibilities, but this video deals with one example:(creationist with a PhD)

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPyKaH09lpc


    Answer: Creationist scientists are failed scientists. Makes sense.


Advertisement