@@Armentitron Miles Jupp's screen persona is an old fashioned middle class duffer who went to a posh school etc. He is using fractions rather than percentages to play up to that image, and the others are playing along with the pretence that most people don't understand fractions. It's character comedy rather than a clever play on words.
People think the rise in sea levels is the worst thing that can happen, not so! Weather patterns will be thrown way out of whack. Meaning food shortages! Already in California we are in the midst of a twenty year drought cycle. California grows a great deal of food in a normal year! Prices will go up! Do you want to drown or starve?
The daft part is that turbines don’t even ruin anything. Up here in Cumbria we have the biggest offshore wind farm in the world... everyone complained for a while that it would spoil the view, and then realised it doesn’t and we don’t mind... build another thousand for anyone here cares, and we see them every day.
*Mock the Week (Season 12, Episode 11)* _aired 3 October 2013_ Host: Dara O'Briain Team 1: Andy Parsons (captain), Josh Widdicombe, Miles Jupp Team 2: Seann Walsh, Hugh Dennis (captain), Milton Jones
Ground water is being pumped out of the ground faster than it can be replenished. In California it means, the central valley is sinking. What that means is it could conceivably create an Inland sea! The weight of that sea could trigger earthquakes. But, hey climate change is for people who don't own land in the mountains!!!!
@@decodolly1535 That would imply they just pretended to think it, but it seemed like they actually thought it. It seems unlikely they would've come up with the jokes they did otherwise.
etoro takes fifty percent of your funds to cover losses if the market falls past your sell at margin. so they do kinda take funds. just in more subtle way.
How to solve climate change: Cover an England of Sahara in solar panels, or a third as much in solar thermal planys which are cheaper in comparison. Make a lot of Algae for biofuel and make it cheap for every person. Have all of the houses that have big clean roofs be fitted with solar panels or something that gets power even if not as powerful.
I'm with Josh. Rising sea levels are hard to calculate. But the one thing I NEVER hear being brought into the calculation is...how much does a new ship being launched raise the sea level. And considering 1 ship building yard in Korea was launching a 100,000 ton ship every week. That has to do something to the sea levels! Perhaps calculate that, then maybe stop launching new ships for a while.
The total water surface on the Earth is about 360 million km². If you want to raise sea levels my a mere cm, that'd mean you need to displace 3.6 trillion tonnes. Meaning 36 million of those ships mentioned lead to 1 cm. For refecerence: since the recording of the show, sea levels have risen by about 2-3 cm. So we need about 100 million supermassive freight ships to account for that. Spoiler: the real number of freight ships is around 55,000. Most of those under 100,000 ton.
I can only assume that, with social distancing, the BBC are not holding in person interviews, and this is your pitch for a writing gig on MTW. There can't be anyone so breathtakingly insane enough to come up with that as a practical thought.
Dara obrian doesn't seem to understand that the earth's crust also go up and down. Ever heard of tectonic plate movements. That's why some Pacific islands are sinking while more are rising I thought he was into science.
@@JonBowe I said it had little to do with it, not that it had nothing. I'm not aware of any long-term climate related effects from Chernobyl, especially with the sarcophagus in place, though there certainly were in the short term effects from the fire and contaminated debris.
@@BlackEpyon The effects of Chernobyl still annoy sheep farmers in certain regions of Norway, where the sheep have to be tested for radioactivity before being butchered for meat, after having grazed in contaminated pastures all summer. If they're found to be too radioactive for human consumption, they have to live on a diet on uncontaminated feed for a period of time until the levels are below the requirements set by the food administration. There can be no question that Chernobyl, and really all spent fuel from all nuclear power plants, has serious long-term effects on the environment. However, it is unrelated to the greenhouse effect, which is what we're mostly concerned with when talking about climate change. So no, the nuclear tests of the 1950's, while releasing a lot of heavy radioactive particles into the air, didn't really affect the greenhouse effect. It did however contaminate the surface enough to make carbon dating very inaccurate when measuring anything after the 1950's, which is a shame.
@@ze_rubenator "It did however contaminate the surface enough to make carbon dating very inaccurate when measuring anything after the 1950's, which is a shame." When talking about carbon14 radiometric dating (and there are plenty of other forms of radiometric dating), one is going on the ratio between C13 and C14. There are other factors that play into contamination of the carbon sample, including the fact that the carbon cycle is constantly active, and carbon is VERY chemically fertile. So one must take care to use a sample that's isolated from active contamination. The measured age of the sample becomes more uncertain the older it is, because the levels of atmospheric carbon14 vary over the ages, and the rising carbon content of the atmosphere in our own time plays a part as well. So correlating with other forms of dating that are less susceptible to contamination and fluctuation are necessary to correct these errors, as is calibrating the record of atmospheric carbon14 content over the ages (including the 20th century). You never go by only one form of dating if you want an accurate measurement, because each method, where they overlap, acts as an error check on the other.
It's good that they have the special needs kid on. I only thought Josh Widdicombe could get work making crap leather wallets. He's not even so bad he's funny type of funny.
@@TequilaToothpick Intelligence and imagination is required for a sense of humour, people saying Josh Widdicombe is funny have a remarkable lack of both.
My goodness, they know nothing! Darian's credibility just plumeted for me. Why didn't he question where the 95% came from? (The IPCC changes its "evidence" with every report.) And the land does go up and down, more often down than up. And if the mounting for your sea level gauge falls, the measurements it shows suggest that sea level is rising.
Water levels are rising. Scientists blame climate change (formally known as global warming), but I wonder how much the sea levels would drop if all the naval ships and supertankers were taken out of the sea? I think the term 'climate change' was preferred, because 'global warming' was too hard to explain 'warming' when we have freezing weather, rain, storms and snow.
Global warming refers to the average temperature of earth's surface going up. Climate change refers to changes in long temp patterns if the climate (including season rainfall, wind patterns, and seasonal temperatures). Removing all ships from the ocean would lower ocean levels by a couple of microns. However, just the sea level rise from ice melt is higher than that (and only about 10% of sea level rise comes from ice melt).
Miles Jupp swoops in with that zinger 😎
Is Andy suggesting he'd make love 100 times with the same condom? Because actually that's not actually how probability works in fact.
I absolutely love it when Hugh loses it and bursts out laughing cos he usually holds it together xD
I didn't get the joke
Hugh’s face when Miles says 7/20th’s 😂😂
Perfect
I didn't get it
@@Armentitron Miles Jupp's screen persona is an old fashioned middle class duffer who went to a posh school etc. He is using fractions rather than percentages to play up to that image, and the others are playing along with the pretence that most people don't understand fractions. It's character comedy rather than a clever play on words.
The only time Hugh has ever lost it I think 😂😂
He lost it during a few of Frankie's one liner
Miles Jupp destroys Andy in one perfect line
never seen hugh so energetic
You should see him talk about jam
Scientists are '95% certain' Miles Jupp carried this episode.
Miles: “A cooling off period!”😁
Part of me really wants the cast of MTW to be part of G20!
Best show ever.
People think the rise in sea levels is the worst thing that can happen, not so! Weather patterns will be thrown way out of whack. Meaning food shortages! Already in California we are in the midst of a twenty year drought cycle. California grows a great deal of food in a normal year! Prices will go up! Do you want to drown or starve?
0:28 a man walks into a pharmacy and asks for 99 condoms. the shop assistant says fuck me. Then he says alright then make that 100.
You deserve a round of applause for that, well done!
It's odd that they never put up wind turbines in the areas where important people live, such as the Chiltern Hills or the North Downs.
The daft part is that turbines don’t even ruin anything. Up here in Cumbria we have the biggest offshore wind farm in the world... everyone complained for a while that it would spoil the view, and then realised it doesn’t and we don’t mind... build another thousand for anyone here cares, and we see them every day.
audigex I actually think they add to the scenery tbh, they’re kind of satisfying to look at
As someone who lives in the North Downs, lmao no we aren't important
Mike's said me wasn't expect the question until his name was said at the end
But it was one of the first words
He thought they were talking about him not to him until the end
*Mock the Week (Season 12, Episode 11)* _aired 3 October 2013_
Host: Dara O'Briain
Team 1: Andy Parsons (captain), Josh Widdicombe, Miles Jupp
Team 2: Seann Walsh, Hugh Dennis (captain), Milton Jones
Thank you! I wish they would post this themselves so I don't have to look up the episode list if I want to revisit an episode
The good thing about rising sea levels is that you won't have to drive as far to the seaside.
Oh, Josh!
3:06 in a way, Miles was right
It’s always disco on planet Earth
thanks to that giant mirror in the sky
Planet Earth gets 8760 x the amount of energy the grid needs for a full year so we never need fossil fuel oil.
Actually Dara, the land is sinking in some places. Like America.
That's a very dim view to take on the Trump years 😂
@@fds7476 He's a very dim president! :)
*cough* Florida *cough*
Ground water is being pumped out of the ground faster than it can be replenished. In California it means, the central valley is sinking. What that means is it could conceivably create an Inland sea! The weight of that sea could trigger earthquakes. But, hey climate change is for people who don't own land in the mountains!!!!
Why do they think the mirror would be facing down?
For comedic effect.
@@decodolly1535 That would imply they just pretended to think it, but it seemed like they actually thought it. It seems unlikely they would've come up with the jokes they did otherwise.
@@cruz1ale they sais "will it be double sided"
@@cruz1ale they're comedians of course they could have come up with those jokes
@@firstname1154 I said "would" not "could".
Y did miles step on andy's joke like that? Or maybe it was written that way
It was a chance for someone to joke that they’d made love over a hundred times. Why let that one slide?
Andy didn't seem to like Mile's joke.
etoro takes fifty percent of your funds to cover losses if the market falls past your sell at margin. so they do kinda take funds. just in more subtle way.
How to solve climate change:
Cover an England of Sahara in solar panels, or a third as much in solar thermal planys which are cheaper in comparison.
Make a lot of Algae for biofuel and make it cheap for every person.
Have all of the houses that have big clean roofs be fitted with solar panels or something that gets power even if not as powerful.
How would you make the solar panels?
End animal agriculture
Algae trap CO2 so using them for biofuel would only release the CO2 that they have accumulated and in doing so make the problem worse not better.
Comedians, like journalists, are to statistics, as Nureyev was to Oxy Welding .
slej iz something beginning with a.
I'm with Josh. Rising sea levels are hard to calculate. But the one thing I NEVER hear being brought into the calculation is...how much does a new ship being launched raise the sea level. And considering 1 ship building yard in Korea was launching a 100,000 ton ship every week. That has to do something to the sea levels! Perhaps calculate that, then maybe stop launching new ships for a while.
The total water surface on the Earth is about 360 million km². If you want to raise sea levels my a mere cm, that'd mean you need to displace 3.6 trillion tonnes. Meaning 36 million of those ships mentioned lead to 1 cm. For refecerence: since the recording of the show, sea levels have risen by about 2-3 cm. So we need about 100 million supermassive freight ships to account for that. Spoiler: the real number of freight ships is around 55,000. Most of those under 100,000 ton.
I can only assume that, with social distancing, the BBC are not holding in person interviews, and this is your pitch for a writing gig on MTW. There can't be anyone so breathtakingly insane enough to come up with that as a practical thought.
Atmospheric Co2 : 97 % natural. 3 % man made.
Dara obrian doesn't seem to understand that the earth's crust also go up and down. Ever heard of tectonic plate movements. That's why some Pacific islands are sinking while more are rising I thought he was into science.
Since all the Nuclear weapons tests of the 1950's onwards the environment is changing, go figure.
The nuclear weapons actually have very little to do with it. What also coincides with WWII is industrialization on a massive scale.
@@BlackEpyon Proof or just a climate warrior? So why did Chernobyl change the climate map? Acid rain from Nuclear fallout not a climate worry?
@@JonBowe I said it had little to do with it, not that it had nothing. I'm not aware of any long-term climate related effects from Chernobyl, especially with the sarcophagus in place, though there certainly were in the short term effects from the fire and contaminated debris.
@@BlackEpyon The effects of Chernobyl still annoy sheep farmers in certain regions of Norway, where the sheep have to be tested for radioactivity before being butchered for meat, after having grazed in contaminated pastures all summer. If they're found to be too radioactive for human consumption, they have to live on a diet on uncontaminated feed for a period of time until the levels are below the requirements set by the food administration.
There can be no question that Chernobyl, and really all spent fuel from all nuclear power plants, has serious long-term effects on the environment. However, it is unrelated to the greenhouse effect, which is what we're mostly concerned with when talking about climate change.
So no, the nuclear tests of the 1950's, while releasing a lot of heavy radioactive particles into the air, didn't really affect the greenhouse effect. It did however contaminate the surface enough to make carbon dating very inaccurate when measuring anything after the 1950's, which is a shame.
@@ze_rubenator "It did however contaminate the surface enough to make carbon dating very inaccurate when measuring anything after the 1950's, which is a shame."
When talking about carbon14 radiometric dating (and there are plenty of other forms of radiometric dating), one is going on the ratio between C13 and C14. There are other factors that play into contamination of the carbon sample, including the fact that the carbon cycle is constantly active, and carbon is VERY chemically fertile. So one must take care to use a sample that's isolated from active contamination. The measured age of the sample becomes more uncertain the older it is, because the levels of atmospheric carbon14 vary over the ages, and the rising carbon content of the atmosphere in our own time plays a part as well. So correlating with other forms of dating that are less susceptible to contamination and fluctuation are necessary to correct these errors, as is calibrating the record of atmospheric carbon14 content over the ages (including the 20th century).
You never go by only one form of dating if you want an accurate measurement, because each method, where they overlap, acts as an error check on the other.
It's good that they have the special needs kid on. I only thought Josh Widdicombe could get work making crap leather wallets. He's not even so bad he's funny type of funny.
That’s rather mean. Not everyone is an academic genius. His observational comedy is spot on.
@@kjamison5951 Dumber than mud. Poor morons that call stupid people funny.
Yeah, he's just funny.
@@TequilaToothpick Intelligence and imagination is required for a sense of humour, people saying Josh Widdicombe is funny have a remarkable lack of both.
@@shakesfirst2443 You're such a unique snowflake aren't you?
My goodness, they know nothing! Darian's credibility just plumeted for me. Why didn't he question where the 95% came from? (The IPCC changes its "evidence" with every report.) And the land does go up and down, more often down than up. And if the mounting for your sea level gauge falls, the measurements it shows suggest that sea level is rising.
Water levels are rising. Scientists blame climate change (formally known as global warming), but I wonder how much the sea levels would drop if all the naval ships and supertankers were taken out of the sea?
I think the term 'climate change' was preferred, because 'global warming' was too hard to explain 'warming' when we have freezing weather, rain, storms and snow.
That is a good point. There genuinely are politicians so scientifically illiterate that they confuse global climate and local weather.
Global warming refers to the average temperature of earth's surface going up. Climate change refers to changes in long temp patterns if the climate (including season rainfall, wind patterns, and seasonal temperatures).
Removing all ships from the ocean would lower ocean levels by a couple of microns. However, just the sea level rise from ice melt is higher than that (and only about 10% of sea level rise comes from ice melt).
Andy is so unfunny.