Cargo cult science has deep roots among those who deny global warming or who allow that warming is occurring, but claim we can do nothing about it. So, it’s no surprise that, at the voodoo science 2nd International Conference on Climate Change, somebody would trot out the old falsehoods about DDT.
According to Traditional Catholic Reflections (you can tell its traditional Catholic because it brooks no comments — you can’t correct an error there):
Speaking at the conference hosted by the Heartland Institute in New York City,[Dr. Arthur Robinson, Director of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine] said, “There is a current example of genocide by the removal of technology, and that is the ban on DDT, and that has resulted in the deaths of 30 to 40 million people and has left half a billion infected with malaria.”
It’s malaria that kills people, not a lack of DDT. The removal of DDT from spraying cotton crops in Texas and California did absolutely nothing to promote malaria in Africa. Dr. Robinson needs a basic geography course. Mosquitoes do not migrate from the U.S. to Africa or Asia.
Stopping the spraying of DDT in the U.S. in 1972 wasn’t a factor in the cessation of usage of DDT in Africa seven years earlier, either. Dr. Robinson could use some basic math sequencing and calendar reading remediation, too.
Dr. Robinson could use some history and public policy instruction, too. DDT was never banned in Africa, nor was it banned in India or China which together now produce almost all the DDT used in the world, which is a lot. There’s no ban on DDT in Uganda, where Dr. Robinson’s friends in the business world are suing to stop the spraying of DDT in huts in affected regions — because they are afraid it will harm their tobacco business.
It’s a heckuva lot easier to throw darts at health care workers and disease fighters than it is to talk about real solutions with these guys.
If Robinson is dead wrong on a one-liner about DDT, how wrong do you think he is in the rest of his presentation on climate change?
Is there any crackpot “scientist” who was not at the Heartland Institute’s wing-ding?
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 
Oh forgot on thing, Stephen. Do you want to know why massive deforestation is a bad thing? It’s because the planet’s forests…are this planet’s lungs. So here’s the question you need to ask yourself.
But explain to me. 99.9999% of the world’s scientists say that global warming is real. And we shouldn’t believe them because?
LikeLike
First off, Stephen, the UN doesn’t have authority to do eminent domain seizures anywhere. Secondly, a 50k peacekeeping force would not have the ability to take on the US military, the Chinese military or even the Russian military. Hell..it couldn’t do anything to the North Koreans.
And your link to Intercontinental Cry is oops..a link to a blog.
Your “NWO conspiracy” is nonsense and the blatherings of insane people. If you think the UN is a threat or potentially a threat then you think that Bigfoot exists.
You have proof of nothing. All you have is opinion, Stephen. You’re like the whackos on the Do You Believe board over on AOL who think the world is going to end tomorrow because of such signs as “earthquakes and wars.”
LikeLike
Ed, I prefer Op-eds and invite you to submit one.
Well, enough for the (seriously) pleasant journey to San Francisco…Do visit from time to time. All of your remarks will find multi-layered and referenced documentation to stir the pot of thought, assuming Global Warming is not a superdogma with you guys. Too dangerous and consequential a theory, even if it keeps the theorists and ‘scientists’ well funded. It’s been fun.
Peace,
SH
LikeLike
That report quacks like a news quack, but not like a duck.
Do you know what eminent domain involves? There’s no hint of it in the story.
You’re aware that the UN is working to include indigenous groups in the process, right? Among other concerns, these are the groups that are hit hardest by climate change. They are the beneficiaries of environmental clean-ups, often more than others. Indonesia appears happy to try to comply.
I find it interesting that the diatribes against this program so often fail to give the name of the initiative, from which the acronym comes. It’s the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation initiative. Deforestation is one of the major causes of poverty and suffering in the world right now.
What is it with you guys? You make up wacky claims that these programs, desired by poor and indigeonous peoples, will hurt them instead. Then you don’t talk about what the program really is, but instead insinuate that there is something evil about forest conservation.
Do you guys remember the 20th century at all?
LikeLike
Stephen, you really should click on the comments at your blog. So much could be corrected so quickly, no fuss.
In one post, you say:
Except each nation keeps its sovereignty, the supreme court has almost no power and several nations refuse to grant it any heed, there is no criminal enforcement system, civil disputes can’t be resolved, and there is no joint military force.
EU hasn’t even been able to get the regulations set for importing bananas.
LikeLike
“The Charter of the United Nations does not allow eminent domain declarations”
Wow, this is some dream team here…if it quacks like a duck…
http://intercontinentalcry.org/un-paves-the-way-for-a-massive-land-grab/
LikeLike
Something in the post triggered the spam filters, and I was in the air (over Arkansas, probably). My apologies. I don’t cut off posts for spite like most climate change skeptic blogs do. Your post has been salvaged.
LikeLike
Oil grab?
Do us a favor: Look up how much U.S. oil came from Iraq before 2001, and tell us how much comes from Iraq today. Then look up the sources of foreign oil that the U.S. does use.
Oil grab? Yeah, like Napoleon’s invasion of Russia was a snow grab.
LikeLike
The Charter of the United Nations does not allow eminent domain declarations, nor in fact does it allow the UN to manage any land at all with the exception of the building management for their own buildings. (There is often confusion about the trusteeship sections — see Chapter XII of the Charter. Nor should there be confusion over World Heritage sites, which are more like being declared a national historic site in the U.S., but without any formal legal protection.)
These sorts of wild, “look out for the UFOs” style claims help convince me that climate change denial is not so much an intellectual exercise as a syndrome.
LikeLike
Well, I wish you would look at the documentation there before laughing, friend. There’s an awful lot of documentation that bears on everything above, including, yes, a New World Order (but one sample here on that:
http://stephenhand2.blogspot.com/2008/12/financial-times-and-now-for-world.html )
But I am especially concerned you look at the links on population control, eugenics, Agenda 21, Rwanda, Kissinger, war, etc., etc. I mean you mocked first and I have tried to reply and the documentation (not my writing) is essential for that.
LikeLike
So lets get this straight. You’re attempting to back up your claims….with your blog?
pardon me for a minute so I don’t die laughing. Because that and your “New World Order” conspiracy nonsense is insane. Resume taking your medication, Stephen.
LikeLike
The original neatly written post disappeared. I can’t write it all again. But,
The Global warming dogma goes hand in hand with another doctrine: Population control
http://stephenhand2.blogspot.com/2009/03/sermon-from-corporate-church-by-by.html
We rushed to Iraq for an oil grab for Babel but simply left these poor to be massacred
http://stephenhand2.blogspot.com/2008/12/beacon-of-white-liberty-question.html
Then follow the general links on Population control here
http://stephenhand2.blogspot.com/search?q=Population+control
and the links on eugenics…meanwhile lands are confiscated by the UN under global eminent domain, land which the poor cannot farm to eat…
It all serves a very radical globalist NWO agenda, so the elites may eat steak, build their hyperreal civilization (environmentalism, eh?!) and be rid of the parasites known as the global poor by suppressing basic technology by which the poor would feed themselves and build affordanle housing
LikeLike
I tried to respond. Have I now been been cut off?
LikeLike
It seems like a point of orthodoxy for you, a faith I am not likely to uproot. But I urge you to heed warnings when so many lives could be at stake, especially in a time when the UN in the name of a New World Order is looting land all over the world by asserting eminent domain in the face of Global Warming, lands that could be used by the people. The global warming dogma threatens to harm development—food and water for the poor, which also may cost millions, maybe hundreds of millions of lives. That’s a lot of blood to risk for a superdogma of a New World Order.
Meanwhile we see genocidal policies enacted in the name of “population control” whereby the elites assert many have no right to be alive and are parasites on Mother Earth.
Check half way down this link to the piece on Agenda 21:
http://stephenhand2.blogspot.com/2009/03/sermon-from-corporate-church-by-by.html
And more…
http://stephenhand2.blogspot.com/2008/11/war-against-population-true-agenda-of.html
We RUSHED to Iraq on an oil-grab to maintain the hyperreal standars of the Babel of the elites, but when these people begged for help they were left to slaughter—population ‘control’ through attrition:
Then there is Henry chowing down food:
http://stephenhand2.blogspot.com/2009/03/report-who-is-responsible-for-world.html
There is also genocide by neglect for the sake of population control, to make more room for the elites, exterminating the poor
http://stephenhand2.blogspot.com/2009/02/why-un-is-worthless-to-human-existence.html
All of it is a horrow show which makes me ask how people can sleep at night?
LikeLike
Stephen Hand:
1) Do you *really* think that TheRegister is a credible source on climate information?
2) Please read:
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2009/03/more-ado-about-nothing.html
http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2009/02/much-ado-about-nothing.htm
I.e., written by a serious climate scientist who lives in Japan and knows the situation well.
“Emori-san apart, the other 4 participants in the farce have no background in climate science…”
LikeLike
Finally, in the US we know there has been a ban on DDT:
http://www.edf.org/article.cfm?ContentID=4407
You write “It’s malaria that kills people, not a lack of DDT”
But transporting the DDT ban to Africa is something that worries the WHO precisely because of the malaria link. DDT “kills or repels” mosquitoes:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6083944
Yet there are Global Warming dogmatists who do want the ban for environmental reasons. Thus the original concerns as posted.
LikeLike
Please write me up an Op-ed with references to back up your contentions and it will be posted.
If scientists told me that a vote for a scientific dogma may result in ‘only’ the hundreds of families being killed I would be very concerned; in this case the scientists said far, far, more than that could be injured or killed. So I posted the piece. More recently Japanese scientists also contested the apparent superdogma, taking to task those “advocates who give conjecture the authority of fact”
See
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/25/jstor_climate_report_translation/
These scientists have all the requisite bona fides and very likely know both their facts and geography. They think there is causality in the facts and potential consequences.
Stephen Hand
LikeLike
I’ll receive corrections from you anytime, good man, and sincerely correct anything I can corroborate is wrong. Comment boxes were a distraction. I urge people to write Op-ed pieces instead which if well done I will post.
romcath1@yahoo.com
SH
LikeLike