Sir David Attenborough

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

16 hours ago, En Passant said:

Thing is, doesn't he have a point though? Attenbororough (and crew) must have an absolutely massive co2 (and all the rest) footprint compared to your average fortnight in Benidorm every other year or whatever?

 

You could, and for me probably would, argue that 'his' having been there and filmed it in HD is enough to determine that 'I' don't need to, saving however many other individual trips?

On the flip side, when he started out I sincerely doubt that was the reason, nor has he ever claimed we shouldn't do what he has (to my knowledge).

 

It's a conundrum for me for sure.

 

What was the reason when he started out? He started making nature documentaries for the BBC because he had a passion for the subject and wanted to share it with people who had never seen a giraffe or gorilla or elephant outside of a picture book. When Attenborough started, he was a big-wig at the BBC (Controller of BBC2 when it launched). He was guided first and foremost by the Reithian mantra that the BBC's purpose was to Inform, Educate and Entertain. He never suggested others shouldn't do the same, but it was never practical for Joe Public until relatively recently.

 

I also reckon that his personal carbon footprint, and the footprint of his shows has reduced significantly over the past 20 or 30 years. Mostly these days, at most he films a couple of shots to introduce series/episodes and the rest is voiceover. Regarding the wildlife shoots, a lot of it uses local talent and remote equipment, which can reduce the personnel and length of time spent out on location. I would also be astonished if the teams travel on anything other than commercial air services, which means their carbon footprint is divided among all the people on the plane: the plane would still be going whether they were on board or not.

 

14 hours ago, Perhaps said:

The CO2 emissions he has single-handedly contributed by swanning around the world is totally justified by the amount of people he's inspired into climate protection, conservation and the like... his lifetime worth of emissions is just a drop in the ocean of what's pumped in our atmosphere in a single day. Nobody has ever done anything close what he's done in inspiring multiple generations and nobody will for a very long time.

 

This dude could rip off a newborn's head and shit down it's neck and it'll be ok with me. He's the MVP.

 

Thank you. I tried composing a similar sentiment last night but gave up as I couldn't find the right words. People 60 and under have all grown up watching Sir David's documentaries and are interested in and care about nature because he's inspired them. Long may it continue.

 

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,221]

35 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

What was the reason when he started out? He started making nature documentaries for the BBC because he had a passion for the subject and wanted to share it with people who had never seen a giraffe or gorilla or elephant outside of a picture book. When Attenborough started, he was a big-wig at the BBC (Controller of BBC2 when it launched). He was guided first and foremost by the Reithian mantra that the BBC's purpose was to Inform, Educate and Entertain. He never suggested others shouldn't do the same, but it was never practical for Joe Public until relatively recently.

 

I also reckon that his personal carbon footprint, and the footprint of his shows has reduced significantly over the past 20 or 30 years. Mostly these days, at most he films a couple of shots to introduce series/episodes and the rest is voiceover. Regarding the wildlife shoots, a lot of it uses local talent and remote equipment, which can reduce the personnel and length of time spent out on location. I would also be astonished if the teams travel on anything other than commercial air services, which means their carbon footprint is divided among all the people on the plane: the plane would still be going whether they were on board or not.

 

 

Thank you. I tried composing a similar sentiment last night but gave up as I couldn't find the right words. People 60 and under have all grown up watching Sir David's documentaries and are interested in and care about nature because he's inspired them. Long may it continue.

 

Ok, so the man is a saint.

 

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

3 hours ago, Lord Fellatio Nelson said:

Ok, so the man is a saint.

 

Is that what I said? Must've missed that. 

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,221]

3 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

Is that what I said? Must've missed that. 

That is what you alluded to.

You missed quite a lot actually.

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

Just now, Lord Fellatio Nelson said:

That is what you alluded to.

You missed quite a lot actually.

 

Care to tell us all the dastardly things that make anything David Attenborough has to say utterly irrelevant? All you've highlighted so far is that it's awful that he suggests climate change is an issue whilst travelling the world making nature documentaries. As if nobody who's stepped on a plane is allowed to speak on such issues.

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,221]

4 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

Care to tell us all the dastardly things that make anything David Attenborough has to say utterly irrelevant? All you've highlighted so far is that it's awful that he suggests climate change is an issue whilst travelling the world making nature documentaries. As if nobody who's stepped on a plane is allowed to speak on such issues.

I've never said that what he has to say is irrelevant.

Climate change is happening now, it has been changing since the planet was formed and it will keep changing long after the humans have completely fucked it up.

We are not the sole cause of climate change nor are we innocent of the crime.

Attenborough has become one of those preachy, whiney fuckers that bang on and on about all of us needing to change our habits, like not flying, not driving fossil fuelled cars, changing our eating habits, etc etc, while he has spent the best part of 60 years travelling the globe in the most polluting way possible.

Just because he was showing the world wildlife in their natural habitats and explaining the effect climate change had caused and is causing doesn't change the reality that he is as guilty as the rest of us. The excuse that he may use commercial flights and, consequently, shares the co2 burden with the other paying folk is as weak as piss.

Harry and Megan were banging the same drum when they were flying back and forth, by private jet, to the south of France.

See, these high profile characters can do what they tell us not to because they are doing it to 'spread the message' which, frankly, is bollocks..

Just my opinion.

 

 

 

 

[Banana 859]

This screams of the idiots who called Bernie Sanders a hypocrite for being a millionaire. 

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,221]

23 minutes ago, Banana said:

This screams of the idiots who called Bernie Sanders a hypocrite for being a millionaire. 

Why would they accuse Sanders of being a hypocrite?

Do tell...

[CoffinLodger 1,248]

Is there anyone here who ever gets mixed up between David Attenborough and John Simpson, or am I the only one? They do look very similar you must admit ! 

[En Passant 3,743]

 

Not certain why Rover has addressed his argument at my post rather than LFN's other than simply daisy chaining. However I didn't actually say Attenborough's activities were bad (I don't believe they are overall), simply affirmed that few things are ever completely black and white.

On 25/09/2020 at 00:26, En Passant said:

You could, and for me probably would, argue that 'his' having been there and filmed it in HD is enough to determine that 'I' don't need to, saving however many other individual trips?

Was and remains my view. I also never said he wasn't 'a national treasure' or such.

 

This though,

 

17 hours ago, RoverAndOut said:

which means their carbon footprint is divided among all the people on the plane: the plane would still be going whether they were on board or not.

 

Is a bit of strawman. It doesn't really work that way. That argument can be made for anyone who ever gets on a commercial scheduled flight, "it was going anyway".

Supply and demand, if people didn't want to fly so much there would be less flights.

 

[msc 18,490]

It might be a tad hypocritical, but then David Attenborough is beloved in that very rare way that he could probably fart on the Queen and people would defend him.

 

It's the Johnny Cash/Jane Fonda scale again.

 

Johnny Cash spoke out against the Vietnam War, he was a much loved public figure so got leeway with any hypocritical elements in that.

Jane Fonda wasn't, so didn't.

 

David Attenborough is a much loved public figure so he gets leeway with any hypocritical elements in his public speaking.

Jeremy Corbyn was widely seen as a cunt, so doesn't.

 

Simple.

 

 

[Dying Probably 579]

 

 

Interview with BBC Breakfast. Doesn't look very well.

[Ulitzer95 12,690]

Looks fine to me. Dude, he’s 94.

[Joey Russ 7,234]

He definitely looks more his age now than he did 6 months ago though. He definitely needs to stay on the list...

[Dead Wait 1,149]

1 minute ago, Joey Russ said:

He definitely looks more his age now than he did 6 months ago though. He definitely needs to stay on the list...

I agree. 6 months ago he looked 93.....

[Lafaucheuse 4,052]

42 minutes ago, Ulitzer95 said:

Looks fine to me. Dude, he’s 94.

True, for me he looks fine for a 94 yo man, I knew people who looked completely dead after 90yo

[RoverAndOut 4,746]

1 hour ago, Dying Probably said:

 

 

Interview with BBC Breakfast. Doesn't look very well.

 

Just looks pissed off with humans really. Looks perfectly well for 94.

[roaming_comrade 471]

He still looks pretty spry, much to the contrary of someone like Noam Chomsky, who has truly degraded these past couple years (Then again that might just be his beard)

[Deathrace 1,171]

He still looks pretty good for his age and clearly still very active. I see him living for another 2-3 years at least. I'd drop him for next year. 

[paddyfool 379]

On 29/09/2020 at 08:48, Deathrace said:

He still looks pretty good for his age and clearly still very active. I see him living for another 2-3 years at least. I'd drop him for next year. 

 

He's one of the most eminent Brits over age 90, rivalled only by Phil and Lizzy. I think he may be too big to risk missing, so I doubt they'll drop him.

 

Plus, having watched his latest doc Extinction, he's definitely going downhill and it has the air of a valediction. I regret that I wouldn't be at all surprised if he pops his clogs in the next year or so.

[RIP Wee Jum 1,559]

Is he now Sir Sir David Attenborough

[Lord Fellatio Nelson 6,221]

2 hours ago, Wee Jum said:

Is he now Sir Sir David Attenborough

The sooner they fucking scrap all of that Honours bollocks, the better.

[roaming_comrade 471]

SIR YES SIR David Attenborough!

[The Old Crem 3,611]

Attenborough is more liked by younger people than older people. Older people tend to be more likely to think climate change is fake news and a money making scam, 

[En Passant 3,743]

22 minutes ago, The Old Crem said:

Attenborough is more liked by younger people than older people. Older people tend to be more likely to think climate change is fake news and a money making scam, 

What data are you basing that on? Because unless you can produce some it's just your opinion. 

 

tldr: rubbish.