Has David Attenborough got Roy Castle syndrome?

[10ClarionSt]

Roy Castle said he contracted lung cancer through passive smoking, even though he couldn't prove it, and even though no-one, even now, can be proven to have contracted lung cancer through passive smoking. But everyone believed him , because he was nice man wasn't he? He couldn't, perhaps, be mistaken, could he? In a similar vein, David Attenborough says that climate change is due to Mans' behaviour, so the Government. the BBC and the rest of the media believe him, to the extent that it is now constantly rammed down our throats that we are to blame. Where is the proof? I said proof, not evidence, which can be contradicted. Has anyone got any proof?

[WaldoMcFroog]

What would you accept as proof?

By the sounds of it, you're similar to a Christian who says that unless they can take a time-machine back to the primordial soup to see the first life develop with their own eyes, evolution isn't supported by enough evidence.

[sp1814]

Or the tobacco lobby who (still) say there's no 'proof' of a link between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer.

What's the harm in recycling?

What's the harm in switching off your telly, rather than leaving it on standby?

What's the harm in walking your kids to school, rather than driving?

What's the harm in making all those little changes that take little or no effort?

So what if all the thousands of scientists are wrong (unlikely don't you think)? It won't cost you and just in case they are right, who knows, you may be leaving a functional world for your grandkids.

[stewey]

Must be a boring life existing just in order to worry about what the future has in store for grandkids.

[wendilla]

Yes I agree 10 CLARION ST about no proof but some where in the bible I think it is Revelations it says MAN will destroy the EARTH or something to that effect. I am referring to what you say as man's behaviour.

[flip_flop]

Ah yes but in The Shining by Stephen King wendilla, he told of how man in isolation would go mad and try to kill his family whilst looking after a snow bound hotel.

I can provide fiction references too!

[Haggisdj]

Hmmmmm... primordial soup!!!

[CT]

Where's your proof of Roy Castle syndrome?

[China Doll]

I actually asked about the smoking thing in Science as it interested me. I then went and asked my manager about it.

The link between passive smoking and smoking related illnesses is based on probability rather than 100% proof from what I understood.

That being the case I doubt we'll ever have proof as you define it but that it's still worth taking notice of.

I'm not mad keen on a nanny state myself but I do think that politicans don't latch on to things just because they're bored. To win votes yes, but not through boredom.

And the simple fact remains that for all the things we can't proove, I don't think you can disprove them either. So you're caught in a weird circular reasoning that helps no one.

I think I'm going to go and plant my butt firmly on Splats</b< side of the fence for this one.