Rachel Carson and the Birth of Corporate Junk Science
"...she was vilified as a nature-mystic, a Communist, and a person threatening the world with hunger. Her work was satirized and "scientific articles" were written to counter her claims. It was one of the first examples of "junk-science" being used against science."
Dr. Rachel Carson was a scientist whose book, Silent Spring, became the means by which the American public first found out that pesticides killed other species in addition to "pests." The title of her book indicates what would happen if pesticide use were not regulated: a spring without birds. She wrote eloquently, yet as a scientist—presenting data and extrapolating what would happen if the trends persisted. The pesticide industry tried to halt publication of the book, and after it was published, she was vilified as a nature-mystic, a Communist, and a person threatening the world with hunger. Her work was satirized and "scientific articles" were written to counter her claims. It was one of the first examples of "junk-science" being used against science.
Read more on Rachel Carson and the ban on DDT.
22 comments:
Where did the deaths occur?
CATO:
Where are you getting your background info for this? Please don't tell me it's Steve Maloy?
CATO:
I willing to have an open mind on this. I believe people are more valuable than birds as well. But wiping out entire species doesn't seem like a wise idea either. I'll have to educate myelf more on the subject.
The story of DDT is a very good illustration of the interconnectedness of man and nature. Africa had a pre-DDT malaria problem. Africa has an AIDS problem, but you don't see BIG PARM rushing into to develope a benevolent care. There ain't not cash in that transaction.
You've throw in the old ad hominem argument to make it look like American capitalists give a crap about people dying in Africa. If there ain't no money in it, they won't be there. Leave the to Bono and Bill Gates.
Rachel Carson's fight against DDT was aimmed at an important environmental issue with far reaching implications. A song that comes to mind is "the knee bone is connected to the tight bone...etc." It is an intercommentec world.
If BIG PETRO CHEMICAL cared about people dying in Africa after the ban on DDT, they would have poured on the coals and developed an alertnative remedy for the problem. Onace again, there weren't no money in it.
CATO:
you said:
"In any event I would stipulate that one human is worth more than all the birds in the world, or all the damn mosquitoes, whose annoyance can be deadly and for many is. It would be a shame to allow one person to die just to satisfy some sacrament of enviornmentalism."
I think anon makes a good point.
When environmentalists are the "problem" your social concernt level rises to a 10. If there is an unmet need that the Corporate World should claim some responsibility your response is "let them eat cake, it's not my problem". I think you're demonstrating something of a double standard in your concern for the humans.
I veiw radical environmentalists with about as much distain as objectivists. But there are valid reasons to not extinquish species.
CATO:
I'm used to always being wrong in your eyes.
You've devised a fool proof cop out to be right all the time.
"Go do it yourself your say to others." The in the next breath you say you don't demand anything of anyone else don't demand it of me.
Don't ask me to do anything especially through my government."
Get REAL. You know damn well individuals will never have anything near the resources needed to takle these problems. Even Bill Gates with his Billions in donations sponsors programs in concert with governments.
In you attempt at philosophical purity, you are impractical in the extreme.
Besides, my point was you don't express concern over problems created by Corporations, only those created by government, and environmentists, your pet whipping boys.
Cato:
I believe the pragmatic approach is what has worked in America and we see little evidence of that in Soviet Russia. Americans have long been identified with the incremental improvement approach.
Or is the comparison to the communists another extention of your ad hominem approach to the discussion here. Regardless of the political framework that you are working in, you will find all shapes and sizes of the mothers or invention. I thought you argued with more than the colors of black and white.
Cato:
Out of miilions of taxpayers there must be a few who haven't paid their taxes. Can you provide a few examples of the non-payers who have been taken out back and shot by the government?
CATO said:
"Corporations do not force their customers to pay for whatever problem or percieved problem they create or others create."
Of course they don't. They just dissolve themselves and leave the government holding the bag. If it weren't for environmental regulations, who knows how many more Love Canals and Cuyahoga rivers we would have seen.
As for your moral stratosphere,
There's yet to be a civilization to function by your ideals, and there will never be one. If your ideal non-government were become reality, anarchy and chaos would reign in a matter of months if not sooner.
You cannot sue entities that have no legal status.
Try to sue the old K-mart, or Carborundum, or Hooker chemical.
They have vanished. Suits are the most assinine way to settle grevences.
They inevitable cost both parties as much or more than the initial damages and linger in the courts for years, often unsettled until the remedy is meaningless.
Cato:
Rudy Ridge had to do with entrapment of a private individual for a gun sale and a subsequent murder of a man's family by ATF agents that were out of control.
Where do income taxes come into play on Ruby Ridge?
No legal staus as in , they no longer exist.
And what about the years in court? You did not address that. Maybe there is not a better alternative. But how many people want to risk years of their lives fighting in court for the CHANCE of getting a remedy. For most it's not worth the effort. Maybe that's why you are such a fan of lawsuits?
Every instance I've seen where government becomes non-existent or ineffective (Natural disasters for one) Chaos ensues within hours. (e.g. looting etc.) That kind of self government I and I imagine most can do without.
Ruby Ridge:
One tragedy among millions of others.
Sure this should never have happened
but the anti-Government crowd will never let it go. You don't hear them whining about Wounded Knee do you?
CATO:
"People have to be more mature and ready to accept responsibilty before one can cast off the chains of oppression from the government."
This premise is naive as Lenin's in his "State and Revolution".
You cannot be serious?
I don't know where you'll get this fairy dust to make everyone good and responsible. Who will run the prisons for those who are not. I've never heard anything so lucicrous in my life.
Don't forget there were claims of police looting. More than likely they were helping themselves to essentials to keep themselves alive. I talking food and toilet paper, not wide screen TVs. Are they looters.
Are they above doing wrong. When push comes to shove, people will do what it takes to survive especially when it comes to property.
CATO:
"So how long between atrocity and present can we complain about it? 10 years? It's only been 14 years since it happened. Should I just let it go? Maybe I should just let go all government atrocities a few days after they occur. Surely they should not have happened but I should just let it go, eh?"
I don't hear you morning about other atrocities.
Pick a different atrocity to obsess over, as I said there are millions to choose from. This is just your pet. I'm sure what's happening in DarFur isn't of any concern to you.
I'm starting to sound as calloused as you. True, Ruby Ridge was wrong and terrible. But it's the only thing people of your ilk remember. That and WACO.
So you are so morally upright that, you wouldn't take a can of beans from a flooded and unoccupied grocery store, a can that could not be resold and would surely be dicarded? That's not moral, it's just plain foolish. This is the "looting" I referred to by police.
If it were a new computer, it'd be different.
Not all atrocities are governmental!
In the minds of some yes, by our negligence.
Besides, that is what I'm saying, you only whine about government atrocities.
Cato:
"Corporations do not force their customers to pay for whatever problem or percieved problem they create or others create."
Of course corporations do this. They do it by pouring cash into the political system and turning a hefty ROI on it.
---
Ruby Ridge: I asked about income tax. Name someone who has been taken out back and shot because they didn't pay their income tax?
I believe what happened at Ruby Ridge and Waco were examples of the law taking the law into its own hand and committing murder.
It's much like the murder committed by corporate America via unsafed goods and services. Notice the post on how the BIG TOBACCO lied about the facts. Corporations actually don't lie -- the people that run them do.
CATO:
You convieniently focus on the letter of the law and totally ignore it's spirit.
You couldn't find a jury in this country to convict anyone of theft for taking a damaged can of beans from an unoccupied store in the midst of a disaster. You know you couldn't. And frankly, if your stomach was growling after several days of not eating, I have no doubt you would "steal" in this manner.
Andy:
You must not forget the Cato previously stated the he adheres to his libertarian principles by not taking welfare or using public transportation.
Of course, he does use public roads to drive to work. That would be a form of public transportation. He most likely takes as many tax exemptions as legally feasible. That would be a form of welfare.
CATO said:
"Andy, I would hang the jury if I needed to."
What kind of "hang" do you mean?
As in Kill? That's certainly the higer moral ground!!!
Or am I missing your sarcasm?
Post a Comment