Member
Its a side effect of soy...floated over from England, I believe.Originally Posted by Mark Rippetoe
Member
I married one (and dated several). She's a "redhead." "Ginger" is akin to calling me, an Italian, "guinea." Done in jest, can be said insultingly, not the preferred nomenclature, Dude. Is not insulting except to the easily insulted.
Member
Gingers are pretty much the only minority that it is acceptable to ridicule. At least in the UK.
Fun fact: UK astronaut Tim Peake got special monitoring as he was the first ginger in space.
Member
So does anyone have any ideas on a solution to this? I've always known this as I feel wonderful in the summer, by December with no sun I'm feeling terrible, and vitamin D supplementation doesn't seem to help much. Maybe I need more? Is there anyway to get artificial light as a replacement, or some kind of supplementation when there are long stretches of cold or no good sun available?
Member
I'm very confused. When are we supposed to believe "science"? Why are people on board with this, yet when 95% of scientists agree with each other on global warming they are just ridiculed for being liberals?
Member
I supplement Oct - Apr. While you may have done this perhaps it was not enough. RDA is a measly 400 IU's a day. That is enough to keep rickets at bay. Test to see where you are. I shoot for 60 ng/ml. As a rough guess if you are taking less than 5,000 IU's a day you are not in that range.
Member
Gosh, I would have thought by now everyone knew that "95% consensus" claim was, is, and always has been bogus.
Member
Some things are beyond our ken - is the earth warming or cooling or changing?
Others are as plain as the nose on our face: lifting barbells (like lifting haybales) is a good thing; running 26.2 miles (as what killed the messenger) is not; sunshine, fresh air, rare steak and tennaged girls are good for you; living your life closeted out of fear of a golden orb that is (ultimately, trace it back) the source of all life on earth, staying inside playing video games, eating tofurkey and banging infertile old crones are bad for you.
If the "science" comes from the sociology, archaelology, psychology or biology departments its definetly not "science" its "propoganda."
✓ Member
Do Americans ever use 'Ranga'. That one gets a fair run down here in Australia. 'Fanta pants' is another hilarious one, not as common these days. And of course the Aussie classic, referring to a redhead as 'Bluey'.
Member
I believe it all started in Britain when it became the one genetic group that is acceptable to ridicule. It then gradually integrated into the mainstream American lexicon over the past 5 years or so. Usage in American English, however seems to have been mostly descriptive rather than derogatory from the beginning. During that time, I began using ginger as a noun and redhead as an adjective.
We believe science when the facts support the science.
We do not believe people based solely on their credentials (They are experts afterall! But, often with financial incentives, bias, politics, calculation errors, logical errors, poor data from financial or logistical difficulties or just plain laziness corrupting their conclusions. No, the peer review process does not catch 95% of these errors.)
When red flags like:
ad hominen support of the science (ex. 95% of climate scientists agree) rather than data are presented,
ridicule is necessary to convince people rather than reason,
and terms like "settled science" are used to justify conclusions rather than the socratic method,
it is wise to be highly skeptical of the "science".
Posting Permissions
