4 ms·
And brown bears are less dangerous than cars because fewer people are killed by them. If you see a car, RUN. They are dangerous. Brown bears, not so much. Go ah
by nilslindemann 1y ago
And brown bears are less dangerous than cars because fewer people are killed by them. If you see a car, RUN. They are dangerous. Brown bears, not so much. Go ahead, pat their fur, statistically this is safe.
- mbs159 1y agoYou generally can't really pet a wild brown bear, since they are not interested in humans and would avoid you. You can't run away from it either, since it can outrun you easily
- mensetmanusman 1y agoThis analogy is probably wrong.
- nilslindemann 1y agoNo. You just have an irrational fear of brown bears.
- dijit 1y agoIt’s important to understand the qualifier per unit of energy. The correct parable for you would have been the number of bear deaths vs interactions with bears weighed against number of car deaths vs interactions with cars.
- nilslindemann 1y agoYou mean, number of deaths per incident? Yeah, that makes sense.
- fl7305 1y agoWith that logic, we should put 100.00% of all public funding into protecting us against world ending asteroids.
- 1718627440 1y agoOne day we might wish we did.
- fl7305 1y agoBy your logic, it's wrong to spend many billions per year on traffic safety. It should go into bear safety instead. "Average deaths per TWh produced" is a good yardstick to me.
- fl7305 1y agoNot apples to apples. Just being near a potentially aggressive bear is a bad situation. Being near a car or a nuclear power plant is not a bad siuation. Of course you should run in the other direction if you're close to a potentially aggressive bear. Same thing if you're in the path of an out of control car, or near a nuclear power plant accident. But you've got to separate the "probability of bad situation occurring" from the "severity of the bad situation when it does occur".