Chris Packham Has Aspergers
Boo Radley75
Posts: 13,308 Forum Member
✭✭
I have aspergers too and have been saying for years, I'm sure he has it. I was right. So glad a hero of mine has this is common with me! - http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/suicide-agony-springwatchs-chris-packham-7865392#ICID=sharebar_facebook
0
Comments
Could someone with Aspergers really become a TV presenter?
I do like Asparagus.
Is it similar to aspergers ?
Didn't he say he wished pandas would become extinct.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/wildlife/6216775/Chris-Packham-Giant-pandas-should-be-allowed-to-die-out.html
No, he didn't. As your link clearly explains.
No way. Absolutely NO WAY!!!!!
He's beautiful inside and out.
The article makes it sound like the latter, unless he got a formal diagnosis afterwards.
Chris Packham: “I reckon we should pull the plug. Let them go with a degree of dignity.”
Aspergers is a fascinating condition: the person is at the high functioning intellectual end. It just demosntrates what the human brain is capable of and EVEN MORE which we haven't tapped into yet.:o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2uRuFgZSDc
In context with his whole view on the subject, how is that the same as 'I wish pandas were extinct'?
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/sep/23/panda-extinction-chris-packham
The point he is making is perfectly valid. It is pointless spending millions of pounds on saving the panda when the reasons why they are struggling are still happening.
However; since I've seen him recently, I've never liked his presentation style so I avoid his programmes.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b03cd94y
We listened in the car. Had to stop driving it was so moving.
He's absolutely right, it's obscene that so many animals go extinct without people caring just because they're not 'cute' enough. Pandas contribute far less to the ecosystem; the obsession with saving them is literally just because they look cute and cuddly and funny.
So basically what you're saying is pick and choose which animals should be saved.
Nice.
I don't think any species should become extinct where it's possible to save them
I don't think Aspergers makes your wee smell.
That we ARE picking and choosing which species should be saved. That we pick and choose to spend so much on saving the panda because it's big and cute, while little resource is being spent on other, more sustainable conservation matters that maybe don't have the great PR or profile of the panda.
That there is an argument that for whatever reason (even if it is manmade) the giant Panda species is unable to sustain itself in a natural habitat and that everything that is being done isn't working. And that the level of huge investment should be put towards saving and protecting species that do have a more sustainable future. That less 'glamorous' species that could be conserved are dying out because of a lack of investment while millions is being spent on a folly.
I'm not saying I agree, there are opposing arguments (I don't really know enough on the subject to know which I err on) but that is what their argument is.
Of course no species should become extinct when it's possible to save them. The problem is there just aren't the resources to save everything so it isn't possible. As such many conservationists believe we should be relooking at how we use those limited resources.
I'll take your word for that
Btw, even conservationists openly admit that the only reason pandas get all the money and attention is because it's important for PR and brings in tourist $$.
Besides, it's basic scientific fact that some species are more crucial to the planet than others. If pandas stop having babies, it won't affect anyone or anything apart from humans being sad. If bees go extinct it would probably result in humanity being wiped out.
Over one hundred different species become extinct every single day, most of them with zero attention. 99.9% of all species that have ever existed on this planet are extinct. Earth experiences regular Mass Extinction Events, which are essential for evolution (humans wouldn't exist without the K/T Boundary Event).
Asparagus is a vegetable of the middle classes.
Aspergers is a trendy diagnosis of the middle classes' children.
You can put asparagus into an aspergers but not the other way round.
Thus asparagus wins
:kitty:
Would you make fun of down's syndrome as well?
...No, I thought not.
Bet you wouldn't be so flippant if it affected someone in your family.
Talk about a bullying mindset.
Yes, they could - Guy Martin also has Aspergers I believe.