Brian Cox is a top-notch chap.

@oldbrasso808

2 жыл бұрын

"critical thinker" Brian Cox supported war criminal Tony Blair and his right wing takeover of the Labour Party. Remember brit pop Cox and his song" things can only get better"? Only they didn't , they got WORSE. Top notch my arse.

@TheCorrectionist1984

Жыл бұрын

@@oldbrasso808 , what??? Even if that was completely as you say, which I rather doubt, does that offset the contribution he has made to particle physics and the spread of the interest of science among the youth?

I do like Brian. he is very impressive ☺

@saintofchelseathomascarlyl5713

7 жыл бұрын

impressive....? XD what an interesting choice of words

@Principessa180

7 жыл бұрын

luxannna crownguard Hello, Thanks. Yes I really appreciate his mind-set. That's always an attractive trait.

@newlchipson2900

Жыл бұрын

​​@@saintofchelseathomascarlyl5713 fr I agree

don't watch this when you are hungry! I need to come back to this

Why do the animals that provide the manure have to be eaten?

@mariaangelova8275

2 жыл бұрын

They don't need to be and there is also veganic farming which is more sustainable. 🙌👍

Thanks for uploading. Can I make a suggestion to the technical crew? It might be better to use hand held mics. These head sets seem to pick up far too much top end - at least this is the impression when listening on this platform.

I nodded off during this and had a dream I was working with crops

1:07 START

first question in..... were can i buy that shirt prof cox is wearing? it is absolutely amazingly subtle.

@scottishwoodart

Жыл бұрын

It is. What does it represent?

@SK-gj3wb

Жыл бұрын

@@scottishwoodart call the boys from tatooine, they know that its not impossible because they know how to hit the swomprats.

Heres all the best resources i could ever find on such a subject as feeding the future, if of many things beyond just human as well: kzread.info/head/PLKty8zmNqWGynKTXoPFpxAOlZDlzC_Ntq

Comments are heavily censored. That's no surprise . The topic of Genetic food is sensitive for good reason.

We already outdated by 2 years those predictions at about 3:50 -- we reached 8 billion people this year already (with more than 2 million, now when I write this; and, btw, India is very very close to outrank China as number 1 in world's largest population).

The one "elephant in the room" that wasn't suggested or discussed was the most fundamental to ALL of our problems is: human overpopulation ! How about a discussion about that or is it not politically correct enough. Would the churches of the world be too threatened to see their cash crop (our pocket books in numbers) decrease. Is the quality of life better crammed?

@mariaangelova8275

2 жыл бұрын

Human overpopulation and let's not forget that we grow about 60 BILLION animals just to kill them for consumption so that's a very expensive way to try and convert them to calories. When we technically grow more than enough food to feed the world many times over, we choose to feed these poor animals rather than feed all humans. I guess the other "elephant in the room" is animal agriculture and how it destroys our planet, how it's not an efficient way to feed humanity. When you couple that with the fact that a whole foods plant based way of life is the healthiest, then we have a solution here. Plus, I agree that we have to talk about the problems of human overpopulation, but I think you're right, that's not a PC topic. Not sure if or when we'll be ready to openly talk about it.

@irvingkurlinski

2 жыл бұрын

@@mariaangelova8275 FYI: From Ecology, food is the number one driver of population growth in all species. Pollution is a limiter.

2022 Ireland uses less than 10% of land to grow crops for people ,90% is used to grow grass

@another2462

Жыл бұрын

That's because the land isn't suitable for agriculture. Cattle, sheep and horses is making best use of the land. Humans are primarily hunter gatherers, there's a reason hunting came before gathering as gathering was seasonal. Through eating meat and fish our brains grew. Perhaps people have become more gullible since eating predominately vegetables and grains?

@King.Mark.

Жыл бұрын

@@another2462 very good pont 👍

Yes but we should bring back purple carrots

@alexiewallace

2 жыл бұрын

Yes

@billyhendrix5544

Жыл бұрын

Yes

I only eat enough to satisfy my hunger. I've always been that way. It is sad to see people gorge themselves till they become obese. I see a trend with the youth of today; they are all larger than life! For years now, I've been wondering about the food we consume. If it is made by a plant naturally, then it's okay; if made in a plant, beware. I live in Canada where the majority of our food does not label whether or the contents are genetically modified. We, every person on Earth, should have a choice of what goes into our bodies!! I enjoyed the stream, but remain on the fence regarding GMO's.

@Lewis360

7 жыл бұрын

I don't see the point of labelling food, because you'll have to label everything as GMO.

@TiborRoussou

7 жыл бұрын

Amir Bright I'm certain you are absolutely correct, as horrifying as that may be :/

@jfabiani

7 жыл бұрын

Not everyone is born the same abilities to regulate hunger and same metabolism. Those people literally have a physiological harder time than others.

@TiborRoussou

7 жыл бұрын

All our modern creature comforts don't help with obesity. We surround ourselves with devices that encourages lazy behavior. One good example is research. I can do that with any one of my electronic devices; learn about anything at a whim spending zero energy. There was a time, in my life, where I would physically go to a library to do same research - expending much much more energy. At the end of the day, there are many reasons for the obesity trend we are seeing.

7 жыл бұрын

Withholding information for the sake of withholding information is a curious thing to do. The information is being withheld for ulterior motives.

Tomato does not agree with the mucosa

@alexiewallace

2 жыл бұрын

That tomato looks like a pumpkin

@scottishwoodart

Жыл бұрын

Is that an anagram joke??😆

Honestly what even is this discussion? GM TOMATOES because we want less waste? That's just because the store stocks more than it needs to stock so that it gives the illusion of abundance so that people go to that store to buy things! It's such a circular non argument.

@alexiewallace

2 жыл бұрын

Yes, let's import lemons from the united states of america, just so we can stock an abundance of perfectly symmetric lemons, because hey, no one counts the emissions from global trade routes, so why not? why not.

Gosh this is upsetting me

@alexiewallace

2 жыл бұрын

beans! yes! fuckn ! talking of SHELF LIFE! BEANS

@alexiewallace

2 жыл бұрын

"Beanz there, dones that" *washes hands with F@H*

Good to see the other panelists respond to the sociologist's BS. Her presence was like an anti-vaxer being at a vaccine discussion pannel, totally muddied the waters.

@WorthlessWinner

7 жыл бұрын

debates over scientific issues should take place among scientists, not ill informed people from totally different disciplines

@WorthlessWinner

7 жыл бұрын

What do you even mean by that? I said nothing about the topic, i said that experts should discuss it not ignorant people from other fields. Do you think that you can't say that experts should discuss topics, not ignorant people, without being an expert? An expert in what?

@AnaVerona_

4 жыл бұрын

@@WorthlessWinner There're people too emotional to engage in debate, as you can clearly observe here.

@WorthlessWinner

4 жыл бұрын

@@AnaVerona_ - unclear. Are you saying I am too emotional to debate? I don't know what is emotional about "debates over scientific issues should take place among scientists, not ill informed people from totally different disciplines" or "Do you think that you can't say that experts should discuss topics, not ignorant people, without being an expert?" If I am the one you were accusing of being overly emotional, which parts of those comments do you think are too emotional?

@ivandafoe5451

3 жыл бұрын

Sorry...but I must take issue with your entire point here. Firstly...the "sociologist's BS" conclusion was entirely incorrect. In her introduction she states that she started her career as a biologist involved in the early research on the development of GMO food crops which lead to her present position as a sociologist researching the societal impact of the way we are developing this industry. To characterize her as an ill-informed "anti-vaxer" who "muddied the waters" is completely wrong...as a "scientist" she is more than qualified to offer "expert" opinion on this subject. Secondly...restricting public discussions solely to "experts" in a narrow field of expertise is not the best way to further knowledge or understanding of anything...in fact it's the worst way. Specialization in any field has its inherent advantages (allowing increased focus on the subject by individuals and groups etc.) and its disadvantages (excessive "group-think" and ignoring externalities...the real world consequences of their work). Thirdly...all of your comments here are based on missing an important detail (and clearly seeing and hearing through your biased filter) from which you then make arguments based on false premises concerning the socioeconomic implications of any field of research and then arbitrarily qualifying how and by whom it should best be discussed and presented. Thankfully this important discussion was presented by the Royal Society and not you.

Nar l reckon brian would be more useful as a 5th beatle