We had an economics seminar on Tuesday that was about including environmental adjustments into Total Factor Production. They had pretty poor data, a dodgy methodology and faced a hostile crowd of economists who think that externalities are just that, stuff we don't really have to worry about.
So the presenter was a bit shaky and when she started to talk about the benefits of forests, beyond the immediate choping down for wood variety, she said, 'the forests could be harbouring a cure for cancer.' And immediately I have visions of little squirrel scientists in lab coats beavering away at or even squirreling away their research.
Damn selfish little fuzzy rats! After all our nuts that they've munched, it's the very least they could do to share the cure with us.
So the presenter was a bit shaky and when she started to talk about the benefits of forests, beyond the immediate choping down for wood variety, she said, 'the forests could be harbouring a cure for cancer.' And immediately I have visions of little squirrel scientists in lab coats beavering away at or even squirreling away their research.
Damn selfish little fuzzy rats! After all our nuts that they've munched, it's the very least they could do to share the cure with us.
Comments
'the forests could be harbouring a cure for cancer.'
That sort of stuff allways makes me laugh. There's allways some evidence to back up any theory no matter how barmy. When someone comes to a meeting there has been plenty of time to prepare for without even googling a little information to back up the thrust of their arguements I tend to wind them up. Did you tease the presenter terriblly?:)
It's not just squirrels. All those little woodland creatures aren't nearly so harmmless as they would have us believe:
http://community.livejournal.com/animenmangafan/174176.html
Especially economists!
I think that the oak ones are similaly Blighty's hedge against future shortages of timber for the fleet.