Thread: Penn and Teller - Gun Control
8/22/2006 2:42am, #11Originally Posted by chris_ketchens
Which is pretty much your point.
8/22/2006 5:35am, #12
oy vey, i hate it when i make spelling errors. by=buy
Inside the context of the show, they made it seem like recycling is usually not worth any money at all and the only people who make money off of it do so by tricking society into pursuing it. They didn't breathe a peep, except for a short blurb about aluminum cans, regarding the highly profitable and highly efficient industry that is built up around recycling that is utterly legitimate. Right now exporting scrap materials to foreign nations is a huge industry for the US.
Now I like Penn & Teller alot, and have been a fan of their stage acts for a long time; the show does make good points, but I found the format of the recycling show questionable. Seeing how I don't really know so much about alot of the subjects they've talked about other than the recycling industry it makes me question their intellectual honesty in general. For a show about exposing Bullshit, it makes me questionable sweeping generalizations.
Even if you aren't making money on recycling metal, it's still a very good idea by the very nature of how metal is mined and processed. For instance, the price on steel right now is very bad, but there it won't be like that forever. If people stop recycling steel, then it's only a matter of time before we need to start again or face mining for it. Simply melting metal down and re-using it is far more efficient in almost all cases.
The show omitted the vast metal recycling industry in attempt to make their point. It would have taken just a few seconds to say that recycling metal is generally a very good idea, but instead, they repeatedly said that recycling was bullshit with the exception of aluminum cans. Lying by omission is still lying. They omitted to increase the effect of the show on it's viewers... or, they didn't actually look very close at the recycling industry instead focusing on the area's of industry that were the least viable.
Last edited by Sun Wukong; 8/22/2006 5:39am at .A lie gets half-way around the world before the truth has time to get it's pants on. - Winston Churchhill
8/22/2006 7:23am, #13
You missed the point of the show. It wasn't that recycling was BS and shouldn't be done, it was that the government shouldn't be using taxpayers' money to fund it because any worthwhile recycling will be funded by the market.
8/22/2006 8:49am, #14
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Lund, Sweden
Just viewed the Recycling episode to get a better idea of what you were talking about.
I agree with Chris on that there were a few things in it that were questionable and barely any mention of the cases where recycling actually makes sense. The life cycle assessment of the recycling of paper seemed to be very worst-case and they never actually showed the other side in a comparison of cost in energy and emissions derived from recycling paper and making new paper from scratch.
(Life cycle assessment is an important tool when trying to estimate environmental impact and is explained here.)
8/22/2006 11:18am, #15
The problem with this sort of show is eventually the stars will start talking about something the know jack **** about and end up wrong.
"When recycling is worth doing, you get paid to do it"
Not all issues fit a capitalism framework.
8/22/2006 11:18pm, #16
8/23/2006 1:12am, #17
Originally Posted by Don Gwinn
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Chattanooga Tennessee
We cannot remain on topic. This is why.
8/23/2006 3:37am, #18Originally Posted by chris_ketchens
Message board post where that is addressed.
Another thread on P&T's own message board
It seems like they focused on the fraud - they didn't discuss successful subsets of the other industries they've profiled.
Last edited by JohnnyCache; 8/23/2006 3:40am at .
8/23/2006 3:39am, #19
Another tiny story: I work for an office supply company now. They sell recycled paper. Recycled paper costs more. It's more expensive.
Recycled paper is also sometimes "pre-consumer" content. You know what that means? They pulped it before selling it and recycled new paper...along with some ends and waste and the like.
8/23/2006 6:36am, #20
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
- Lund, Sweden
While they may be right about recycling paper into new paper for printing not being cost and energy efficient, recycling paper into other things can still be a good idea. This still requires the households sorting their garbage into different bins.
About the recycled paper in JC's post. It's being bought, isn't it? Having an environment-friendly image is a big thing with companies nowadays and using recycled paper is one of many things that help projecting such an image, even if it in fact doesn't make sense.