Just to be clear, I wasn’t implying that Ed was trying to be deceptive; it’s more likely sloppy work from AFP/Getty. It is not unheard of for these wire services to use photographs that are misleading or unrelated to the accompanying stories and captions.

Also, to be clear, I have no doubt that there are severe pollution problems there, otherwise why would they have instituted their odd/even automobile policy and shut down factories for miles around?

Anyhow, lighten up, folks. It’s only life.

Earth Liberation Front, silly. You’ve heard of them, right? Those are your comrades, right? After all you are for a better environment, so you must be an EL’er just like I argue that a photo on smog in a Beijing is an exaggeration of the condition, so I must be a communist comrade.

Oh, and the last sentence can’t obfuscate, but it can distract.

I could just say, “Wow, just wow …” but I refuse to let you prevent me from giving you the benefit of the doubt.

- The Cat

Now be a good little ELFist and sign Al’s petition to convert all our energy production to wind power in 10 years.

Dusty on July 28, 2008 at 4:49 PM

Besides being unbelievably incoherent in your post…what does that last sentence have to do with anything.
I have no idea what you mean by that…are you trying to take this down a road to obfuscate what you wrote?
Elf (Elvish Linguistic Fellowship)as in J. R. Tolkien (trying to say I am inventing languages)? And what petition?
Wow, just Wow…

These people want the world to be too pretty, too sanitary. Mount Olympus this ain’t. We have temperature controlled swimming pools and artificial rapids. Springy floors that add two feet to your jump. And who knows what makes up those vaulting poles. What’s next? Country’s complaining about the specific gravity of the water and it’s trace elements? They want Evian?

Let them swim in mud. Now that would get me to watch again.

No I am not being coy whatsoever. I am being forthright, clear and unambiguous. Infer implies just what the definition is not the tenor you want to place on it. Oxford is also forthright, clear and unambiguous in that it says, “But each has it’s own job to do, one at the giving end and the other at the receiving.”

As for what I inferred from the photo, it wasn’t so much as what I inferred from Ed’s “Breathe deep the gathering gloom” and “but the LA air was pristine next to Beijing’s”, the latter inference, IMHO, being quite close to what Ed implied. And I think I am in good company as you defending the use of it.

But your clownish twisting can’t obliterate that fact that I implied exaggeration because I used the word exaggeration, a word, by the way, that implicitly acknowledges a condition you assert I denied altogether. For the most part, I chalked up your poor use of the language to a rush to comment but you make a continual effort to deprive me of my rationale for giving you the benefit of the doubt.

Yup, stick with the folks who have no dogs in this fight — just the ones with children in the fight, like your sources do. Nope, no agenda that belies a reason for exaggeration there.

No, I don’t think the Chinese have an interest or agenda in promoting smog. I think their country is driving down the same damn economic development road we are driving down only they are 50 years behind us. Now be a good little ELFist and sign Al’s petition to convert all our energy production to wind power in 10 years.

I infer nothing by my comments. Readers infer. Writers imply. That’s basic commonsense. (except when something like this happens…the picture infers that there is not a problem with Beijing air quality…oops, guess Webster was right. r2b notes)

Dusty on July 28, 2008 at 2:11 PM

Want to get semantical…being a little coy are we? (”infer implies arriving at a conclusion by reasoning from evidence”, by reason of evidence (a photograph) you inferred, then you implied…sheesh, good try strawman)
As I said, I will use the testimony of people who are there, along with some posters who have no dog in this fight…you can use your source, the Chinese Government.
My sources have no reason to exaggerate, they were concerned about their daughters health. MattMacD on July 28, 2008 at 12:50 PM was just posting about his recent experience.
The Chinese, do you think they have an interest in promoting “smog”…yes I am “implying” and inferring that the Chinese have an agenda…now be a good comrade and accept that.

As I said, you inferred that the picture was not smog…here read this again.

[right2bright on July 28, 2008 at 1:39 PM]

I infer nothing by my comments. Readers infer. Writers imply. That’s basic commonsense. What I implied was, um, you know, that the severity of the problem appeared exaggerated by kind of like saying, something to the effect that the “photo was chosen to inaccurately portray the pollution problem in Beijing”. But I can’t keep you from inferring that what I wrote means “No smog there”, just as I can’t keep you from saying other photos which show a much different level of smog than a dark grey, quarter mile visibility is less accurate because it’s a commie government owned camera that snapped the pictures at a different time of the same day and in a slightly different location in the city and it’s much brighter and clearer with a much higher visibility.

But you can always one up me go get some pictures without a flash inside of a closet in Beijing where it’s pitch black and visibility is zero call that pollution, too. Make sure to use a free and independent owned camera because they’re the only ones that take accurate pictures of what you want to show me.

more accurate representation of the smog in the city since it was during the day when the sun was out and not what was likely some early morning photo of fog.

Dusty on July 28, 2008 at 12:02 PM

As I said, you inferred that the picture was not smog…here read this again.

MattMacD on July 28, 2008 at 12:50 PM

These are people who are there, as is two families who have kids participating in the Olympics called and told me, the pollution is like nothing they have ever seen, they were concerned.
These are real people, giving you real information, not 24 pretty pictures from the Chinese Government.
I don’t know what your beef is…you say the picture (HA post) isn’t accurate, and others with personal knowledge say it is…you have your sources (Chinese Government) I have mine, people who are there now…it only becomes an argument when you think your sources are worth defending and more accurate, or I think my sources are worth defending and more accurate…you take the Chinese Government photos, I will take first hand knowledge.
You think the Chinese Government photos are accurate (”…might indicate a more accurate representation of the smog…” and tell a more accurate picture of their pollution, I don’t think so. We agree to disagree…

I was hoping for some of that there global warming to stop in for a visit too. ;)

Ohhh, I’m the complete opposite. I hate heat even with clean air. But my time spent in Xi’an in the hottest part of summer? I would kill people to get rid of that memory. Utterly horrible. I could hardly breath on many days. Had to keep drinking water.

Some teams have decided to train elsewhere instead. The British, among others, won’t arrive in Beijing until just before the opening ceremonies. Other national teams have already arrived and will have to acclimate themselves to the heavily polluted air.

The teams that won’t arrive until the last moment are making a mistake. They will get throat infections and stuff like that. They need to spend a little time for their body to adapt.

I get a throat infection every time I go to China, and I don’t even stay in Beijing. Oh and my snot goes black.

I’ve told my (chinese) wife about how it’s just NOT NORMAL, and not good, but she says she won’t know what I’m talking about until I bring her to England. Every time I come home I’m so relieved to breath fresh air at last.

Although, when I go, I stay in Dalian, which is a port city, and not quite so bad (but it’s still bad).

I missed a flight home to England because of the smog. All flights to Beijing had been cancelled, and the highway had been closed too! Really pissed me off, only had a couple of days left on my visa. I did get home though. That was less than a month ago.

They said the flights had been cancelled due to “fog”. Hah.

My wife just got back from visiting her family in China. She went over in May so she could get back before the Olympics. She did not want to get caught up in that mess.

Addendum…

When I was in China it was the winter. First tome was February, the second early december. I spent most of my time in northern China.

I was hoping for some of that there global warming to stop in for a visit too. ;)

I did not post pretty pictures, I linked a site with some 24 pictures in which many of them had panoramas that might indicate a more accurate representation of the smog in the city since it was during the day when the sun was out and not what was likely some early morning photo of fog.

That you are too absentminded to keep to the subject of smog and whether the photo posted here is an accurate representation of the conditions it is purporting to report is just another reason why it is not worth arguing with you, right2bright.

Wanna buy a nuke plant cooling tower pollution photo from Beijing, right2bright? Anything to prove your point there is pollution is okay by me. LOL.

“fake but accurate” when it suits your purpose.

Dusty on July 28, 2008 at 11:29 AM

ummmm, I believe you are the one who posted the “pretty” pictures. No inference, the “no problem” was shorthand for your inferring that the picture was propaganda (misleading as you stated…your inference, not mine).
Hundreds of stories, hundreds of links, and you think this picture was “misleading” and you posted pictures stating the opposite…whom is inferring?
Your posts speak for themselves.
Just say your post was misleading, and move on…

First you post “no problem”.

[right2bright on July 28, 2008 at 11:02 AM]

You infer too much. But that is the case with you right2bright when a story pops up that hits one of your emotional nerves. My point, concurring with hillbillyjim, was aboslutely clear that the photo was misleading and I said nothing about whether pollution in Beijing was a problem.

I’ll be happy to agree with you there is pollution in Beijing because I’ve been there. I’ll also not bother arguing with you when you use/defend evidence that’s “fake but accurate” when it suits your purpose.

I think any athlete from a free democratic country should boycott China.

It is a country that sells dissidents organs and abuses child labor.
If you even watch the Beijing Olympics on TV, you are a traitor to freedom!

[right2bright on July 28, 2008 at 10:02 AM]

Of course, they are. What’s your point? T
Dusty on July 28, 2008 at 10:24 AM

A little testy are we?
Here let me take you down memory lane:

Well, me too. I’ve been to Beijing and it’s a lot more likely this is early morning mist than Beijing smog…

Dusty on July 28, 2008 at 9:05 AM

That is you minimizing the smog

Here’s pictures of the opening of the Olympic Villag, in northern Beijing, yesterday.

Dusty on July 28, 2008 at 9:20 AM

This is your link to pristine photos (yeah, you were just keeping us informed of the opening ceremonies on a blog discussing smog).
See how the two tie in? First you post “no problem”, then you post pictures showing “no problem”…and I state that the pictures are from the official Chinese news.
And you get testy…why?

That’s what happens when the IOC makes decisions based on politics.

TooTall on July 28, 2008 at 10:43 AM

Exactly. This organization has about the same credibility for clear thinking as the Nobel committee.

Oh it’s real bad.