Put That Fire Out!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Where the fuck is the heat supposed to come from? ANYTHING we do will pollute.

We gather in large naked groups and use animal heat to keep ourselves warm under thick blankets in well insulated houses

Let's leave the sheep out of this, please.

[Svartalf]

This is me, not pappa, the sheep will be represented only by wool and fleece, for all that I am concerned

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This is me, not pappa, the sheep will be represented only by wool and fleece, for all that I am concerned

The biggest flock of sheep I ever saw live was in France.

[Svartalf]

The ewes did not wear lipstick did they?
and we need'em for meat and cheese

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The ewes did not wear lipstick did they?
and we need'em for meat and cheese

And shepherds huddled with their flocks in bad weather. ...a very lonely job, tending sheep. Very lonely.

[Svartalf]

You never paid attention. Most shepherds have one arm and hand much more developed than the other.
Plus, most actual herding canines are not dogs but bitches.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You never paid attention. Most shepherds have one arm and hand much more developed than the other.

I never even thought to inquire.

Plus, most actual herding canines are not dogs but bitches.

I didn't know female dogs weren't dogs.

[Hermit]

"Research shows that nearly 70 percent of chimney smoke reenters nearby buildings." I'd love to see that research. Sam Harris is weird.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Research shows that nearly 70 percent of chimney smoke reenters nearby buildings." I'd love to see that research. Sam Harris is weird.

We would be in a perpetual cloud if that were true.

[Hermit]

"Research shows that nearly 70 percent of chimney smoke reenters nearby buildings." I'd love to see that research. Sam Harris is weird.

We would be in a perpetual cloud if that were true.

It reminded me of the claim that passive smokers suffer more damage than active ones.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Research shows that nearly 70 percent of chimney smoke reenters nearby buildings." I'd love to see that research. Sam Harris is weird.

We would be in a perpetual cloud if that were true.

It reminded me of the claim that passive smokers suffer more damage than active ones.

That one's true! I know, I read it on the Internet!

[PsychoSerenity]

"Research shows that nearly 70 percent of chimney smoke reenters nearby buildings." I'd love to see that research. Sam Harris is weird.

We would be in a perpetual cloud if that were true.

It may well have some basis in reality, but really it does need a better explanation. In a dense urban environment I'd imagine that smoke would get blown around until it finds somewhere to settle out of the wind - that's all I can think of.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Research shows that nearly 70 percent of chimney smoke reenters nearby buildings." I'd love to see that research. Sam Harris is weird.

We would be in a perpetual cloud if that were true.

It may well have some basis in reality, but really it does need a better explanation. In a dense urban environment I'd imagine that smoke would get blown around until it finds somewhere to settle out of the wind - that's all I can think of.

I meant "us", Ayaan and I. Lots of folks around here use wood for primary or secondary heating.

[Hermit]

"Research shows that nearly 70 percent of chimney smoke reenters nearby buildings." I'd love to see that research. Sam Harris is weird.

We would be in a perpetual cloud if that were true.

It reminded me of the claim that passive smokers suffer more damage than active ones.

That one's true! I know, I read it on the Internet!

Oh fuck! Wanna guess where I read that "Research shows that nearly 70 percent of chimney smoke reenters nearby buildings."?

Oh, wait. Luckily I also read that 87.3% of all statistics are made up.

[apophenia]

For what it's worth, the study appears to be one mentioned in the following paper and is noted as "unpublished data".

Potential Adverse Health Effects of Wood Smoke; Pierson, Koenig and Bardana, 1989, in Environmental Health

I find it interesting that people here focus on the specifics of the example when the specific example wasn't the point of Harris' article. Moreover, the generally concerted attempt to undermine the validity of the evidence seems right in line with Harris' point. (Not saying I necessarily agree with him, but the dialogue here appears to strengthen rather than weaken his argument.)