It’s spring, and nutcase fancies turn to thoughts of slandering Rachel Carson and making unholy noises toward environmentalists.
Here’s one nutcase who engages in that peculiar nutcase practice of completely rewriting posts of commenters — claims to be Graeme Bird; is he really running for office? His claim is that lack of DDT is causing the spread of dengue in Queensland, Australia. He won’t be swayed by reason or fact (of course — his avatar is a photo of confirmed liar Joe McCarthy). He asks “how many have died,” but is unhappy with the official answer (one, but that’s not clear — an older woman in poor health). Nor does he appear to have any sense of irony that drought-stricken Australia has a plague of mosquitoes due to recent rains. Nor does he appear to understand that dengue is an imported disease in Australia, imported by a traveler, it appears.
Australian officials ask people to drain water from pots, old tires (“tyres” downunder), rain gutters, or any other small pool, which is where the vector mosquitoes breed and mature. The nutcase appears unfamiliar with the concept of simply preventing the mosquitoes from breeding, in his rush to poison Australia. Nor do alternative effective techniques for fighting the disease appear to be on his radar.
Alas, there are a lot of these lone nutcases loose. Watch for updates here for a week or so.
- Commenter “Jake” at a Wall Street Journal site
- An odd Canadian site (another site that censors dissenting comments)
- Peter Foster hyperventilates about Al Gore, at The National Post (Canada)
- Commenters at Listverse take up the erroneous meme
- Commenters at Michelle Malkin’s site (of course — would you expect reason there?)
- Bogus science at Creative Minority Report
- Block Rants
- And, speaking of hyperventilating rants . . .
- Adirondack Musing
- Let’s not forget our old carbuncle, Steven Milloy
- Wake Community Network, with the old “genocide” hoax
- Doug Ross @ Journal, adding a 75% fact-free promise to his snark-free pledge
- Blogger News network
I wonder if it’s a virus that makes them censor any fact or opinion contrary to their own, or whether they simply are complete cranks. I mean, even Bush’s Secretary of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne got DDT right.
(Bird’s blog is on WordPress, which will automatically post a link from this post to his blog. Anyone want to wager on whether he has enough cojones to let the trackback stand?)
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 
Bird, you have one heckuva an active fantasy life.
1. I’m no Holocaust denier, and I have the posts to prove it. You have no such posts to prove either your side, or that you are NOT a Holocaust denier.
2. You’re the one who advocates ineffective policies for fighting malaria, thereby condemning the black babies you pretend to like. I’ve got the posts to back my side, you can’t read them, it appears.
3. My silence is not a filibuster. It’s patience, waiting to see if you can muster any facts to back any of your claims. So far you’ve shown your avatar with convicted liar Joe McCarthy, and you’ve cited the hoax science site, “Junk Science.” How can you expect anyone to take you seriously?
4. You’ve failed to provide an iota of rebuttal to any of the points I’ve made, or any of the experts I’ve cited.
5. You’re a rude boor.
Retract? Retract what?
LikeLike
Would it be inappropriate at this point to nominate little Graeme for Troll of the Year? I mean, I know there’s still a whole lot of year left for people to nominate themselves, but I don’t think anyone will be able to match his persistent spamming, raving and ability to engage in doublethink.
LikeLike
You going to end your filibuster or not Ed.
End the filibuster or make your retraction. Or forever be recognised as a holocaust-denier and black baby hater. Which clearly you are. In fact its really to late to escape that tag.
LikeLike
Heretofore at Deltoid and Quiggins blog your whole sides case has been one of wordgames. Picking people up on the use of the shorthand word “ban”. Pointing out that DDT production was at least going on somewhere all throughout that time so there was no ban.
Check it you will see. Thats been your holocaust-deniers sides entire argument. Check both Quiggin and Lambert. Whereas you are merely filibusting. You and Mark being holocaust-deniers both.
LikeLike
“weren’t murdered as a result of centralizing access to DDT” is what I meant.
LikeLike
How about ending the filibuster Ed and coming good with your alternate history where tens of millions of kids weren’t centralized and there was no obstructions to locals tackling their own problems.
Or whatever make-believe history you are currently backing. You are a trasher of history ED. As your lies about McCarthy emphasised.
LikeLike
Take a time out, Mr. Bird. Fourth warning.
LikeLike
Mr. Bird: See the New Yorker article by Malcolm Gladwell. It’s not an “alternative” history. It’s the real history.
Alternative histories are for suckers. Stick to the facts.
LikeLike
Oh, and thanks for helping my Mrs. Much appreciated, as we both hold you in high regard for your scholarship.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH. This always happens. Dumb evidence-free leftist holocaust-deniers hold hands in a motherload of praise as a substitute for any evidence or sholarship. What an idiot you are Mike.
LikeLike
But Mike you dummy. You and Ed have never once engaged the argument since you won’t put up any evidence for your alternate history. You know the history where they didn’t bureaucratise the DDT and tens of millions of people weren’t murderered.
You are just aren’t too bright are you mike you holocaust-denier.
LikeLike
Yoink. Ed, you’re a better man than I am, to keep engaging with this whackjob. I thought the birthers were bad, but this guy takes the biscuit; he makes Orly Taitz look like a balanced individual with well-reasoned arguments.
Oh, and thanks for helping my Mrs. Much appreciated, as we both hold you in high regard for your scholarship.
LikeLike
You can see what went wrong can’t you? DDT was so effective that it was overused. Not in the sense that too much of it was sprayed necessarily. But in the sense that it was cheap an easy to spray and not do the follow-up hard yards like Soper had done in the old days.
The answer was not to restrict DDT. But go overkill on the other activities such that you find sooner or later that the DDT is piling up in local storage.
LikeLike
It is indeed tough and dirty work arguing with nazi-sympathisers and holocaust deniers.
The fact is we can win against Malaria and the mosquitoes. But not if liberty is compromised or if environmentalists are in any way given authority or involved.
I’ll give you are paradoxical example. The Cod. We fished Cod for 100’s of years. And it looked like we would always be able to fish Cod. The amount of Cod we pulled from the water from 1400 to 1900 must have been truly stunning and a marvel. And if you take the Cod the Cods own food supply is enhanced. Hence more Cod. And if you take the Cod the Cods predators are diminished. Hence more Cod.
But we broke the back of the Cod population just the same. And by overfishing ruined one of the most valuable industries in all of history.
Likewise we can destroy Malaria and all of the more serious mosquito-born diseases. Its not an easy undertaking. And it may await hyper-federalism and hard money in Africa since it probably cannot be done by aid alone. But it can be done. The main thing is that restrictions to the weaponry needed to achieve this must be both voluntary and local. Because if you centralise anything the environmentalists will repeat this (still ongoing) murder and this you can count on.
LikeLike
It’s tough and dirty work arguing with this known Nazi sympathiser, Ed. Big ups to you.
Great blog by the way.
LikeLike
Supposing it is fullscale war and you are evenly matched with the enemy. And the news came through that your air-power was less effective then you thought. That it was killing too many civilians, that the enemy had a new class of anti-aircraft resistance weapons coming out of the factories. That some of the bombs were effectively being exploded in midair and that this percentage was set to increase.
Do you work on targeting better and beefing up you non-air warfighting? Or do you scrap your airforce on the grounds that the enemy may adapt to it even a little bit more.
The answer is you adapt but you never throw whole classes of weapons away.
Using less spracying wasn’t the answer. The answer was doubling and tripling the efforts in other areas. And then one fine day you might find that you only need to spray every few years.
LikeLike
Right. And I keep it in mind. And destroying our freedom to deal with problems is where the causation is here. That all began in the early sixties and is still with us. Thats the causal relationship here.
Thats why as wrongheaded as Rachel was, and she was an airy fairy type, we don’t blame her nearly so much as the white-guy bureaucrats who took it upon themselves to reduce local autonomy in myriad ways.
Its just what we see with the Victorian fires. The urge to centralize everything so costs are increased, people are discouraged, and you need to get down on one knee and ask for permission to do anything. Even simple discouragement is a killer.
Its not just a DDT issue. Its an issue of liberty. Its discouragement and encroachment on property rights that killed the people in Victoria. Just having to go to the council to get permission to clear your own trees on your own property is a discouragement. When in the old days you could chop things down for firewood.
LikeLike
I think that one thing that needs to be kept in mind is this, by everyone: Correlation =/= Causation.
LikeLike
Absolutely any pest control at all brings up the issue of diminishing the natural predators of that pest.
Nothing new here. A non-argument unless you think that anti-Malaria crusaders are all intellectually handicapped rather than serious biologists.
LikeLike
Well thats unproven. But on the other hand its a reasonable thesis. If you are going to actually eat the stuff continually one doesn’t suspect its going to be famously good for you.
But the fact that he didn’t die on the spot proves you are wrong and lying about DDT being a dangerous poison for mammals.
LikeLike
Gordon Edwards died of sudden cardiac arrest during extreme physical exertion (mountain climbing), a classic sign of chronic DDT poisoning. This was a week or so after his cardiologist had cleared him of any other heart disease.
Why is it you’re keeping the fate of the Loibls secret? How did they die (as they almost certainly did, since their experiment was in the 1970s)?
LikeLike
One can see the problem you have identified. DDT kills the insects in their grown-up and larval stage. And being as a lot of mosquito-predators rely on these critters for food then the predators of the mosquito are diminished. Hence we face a comeback later on.
This is the same with all pest control and is not specific to DDT use. And it needs to be taken into account by people who truly want to rid the world of Malaria. And these are serious people and they will take all factors into account and don’t need mad leftists to breathe intelligence into their brains.
What is needed is LIBERTY. Yes stern warnings about not using DDT flippantly against insects where no human disease is at issue. But LIBERTY nonetheless. Liberty and local control is what is needed.
Just like with the fires in Victoria. The killing was a result of taking away local property-owners control.
LikeLike
About Sri Lanka:
But of course, you have no link to “the appearance of the irrational anti-human environmentalist movement” and any action in Sri Lanka. So your argument fails.
On the other hand, there is solid evidence that the problem was not environmentalists, but DDT advocates who proceeded to over-use DDT:
http://info-pollution.com/ddtban.htm
And as Deltoid has conclusively demonstrated, the many causes of the upsurge in malaria in Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) in the official accounts do NOT include any absence of DDT due to environmentalist pressures. The government of Sri Lanka dropped the ball. That’s most of it.
LikeLike
Its not highly toxic to mammals. Stop lying. Anything is toxic if you have too much of it.
You’ve been proved wrong already on that score you idiot. You are going to have to watch that youtube 100 times to get it through your thick skull.
You can at least fucking retract that lie you —-.
I don’t think thats too much to ask you —- when you’ve been proved wrong outright.
LikeLike
Mid-to-late sixties with an interest in combating Malaria would be closer to the age range I was after.
LikeLike
Isn’t it about time you came up with some sort of evidence for YOUR ALTERNATIVE HISOTRY?
Even now, anybody in their mid to late 50’s saw this coming in advance. They saw the anti-DDT campaign. If they knew about the story of Malaria they would have seen the mass-killing happening like a slow-motion trainwreck before their eyes. Its the same with the Victorian fires. And where my main understanding is is in energy economics. And I’m watching the same slow-motion mass-murder by the same crowd set in motion and happening right before our eyes.
Face it. You are a trasher of history. And you won’t be coming up with your evidence for your alternative make-believe history anytime soon.
LikeLike
DDT as a poison to mammals? It absolutely is. Among other things, it’s a known carcinogen to mammals, and is listed as a “probable human carcinogen” by every cancer fighting agency on Earth. I’ll take the American Cancer Society over a befuddled pro-DDT lunatic every time.
See here for more dope on mammals:
https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2007/07/09/another-reason-why-ddt-use-damages-mosquito-control-bats/
And see here for fun:
https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2007/09/15/ddt-as-snake-oil/
And see this:
.
LikeLike
The claim is that we were beating Malaria, as the stats show, until the appearance of the irrational anti-human environmentalist movement. From that time on Malaria went bad on us and everything centres around 1963. This is obvious to anyone who isn’t themnselves a holocaust-denier.
As each year after 1963 went on we found ourselves with less and less ability to make decisions on a local basis. Now the same evil movement wants to do this with energy. Having already gotten in the way of nuclear energy they now have this idiot-anti-science CO2 demonisation on the fly.
So just as they demonised DDT, then nuclear energy, now its CO2. Their Modus Operandi, motives, and useful idiots are known and are even old hat.
LikeLike
Then what is your claim? If you blame environmentalists for lack of DDT spraying in Sri Lanka, you should be able to indicate a link between environmentalists and the cessation of the use of DDT. So far you have not done that.
Your failure to document your claims does not make me a liar, Mr. Bird. Your continued vitriolic, over the top insults do suggest you’re a complete nutcase, however. Third warning. Dial it down. Stick to the facts.
What evidence is there that environmentalists had anything whatever to do with the cessation of DDT use in Sri Lanka, just a few months after the publication of Rachel Carson’s book? Is there anything?
LikeLike
No its not a deadly poison to mammals. Thats just a holocaust-deniers lie. You didn’t think these people would kill tens of millions of people and not try and cover their tracks. Campaigner has disproved your lie even before you made it.
One fellow used to follow the nutball Rachel around and he would eat spoonfulls of DDT onstage before a live audience. But this was just ignored by the new anti-science movement that had been kicked off.
LikeLike
In tiny amounts, DDT is not acutely fatal to humans. But it is a deadly poison, even to large mammals.
Here, read about humans using DDT for suicide.
I’ve been trying to find someone to explain what happened to the Loibl’s for several weeks. Without knowing their fates, it’s not possible to suggest they were not poisoned by DDT.
LikeLike
“So, it is your claim, campaigner, that the government of Sri Lanka stopped spraying DDT in 1963 based solely on their reading Carson’s book and agreeing with it?”
He didn’t claim that you are lying again. Come off it. We are talking about a wider global movement when we are talking about the environmentalist movement. We are not just talking about some Sri Lankins who read a book.
This is precisely the trick they used in relation to the fires in Victoria. I’d hold the environmentalists responsible for it and some nutcase would say “Look the Greens party isn’t all that strong in local government in country Victoria” or some other excuse like this.
It is in this way that the environmentalist movement taken in its wider sense can murder so many people. These are pack-animals. And no one person has to ever take responsibility for the human eradication that they perpetuate. No-one is going to do anything but via plausible deniability.
LikeLike
Wow. Magnificent YouTube fella. I’m going to steal that one and run like a thief in the night.
LikeLike
If we are going to use YouTube as evidence here is the best example yet. A man and his wife took DDT for three years in order to prove that DDT was either not toxic or marginally toxic to mammals.
You can scarcely get a more comprehensive refutation to the Malthusian racists then this YouTube alone.
There will be no valid gainsaying of this evidence.
LikeLike
Here is a reasonable representation of the known history of this matter. The holocaust-denial side refuse to even put up an alternative to this story or prove that this known history is somehow wrong.
LikeLike
So, it is your claim, campaigner, that the government of Sri Lanka stopped spraying DDT in 1963 based solely on their reading Carson’s book and agreeing with it?
Got any evidence? Where Carson’s book was extremely popular, in English, and where mosquito-borne diseases were extremely rare, it took more than 8 years before DDT was acted against. Your claim is that Sri Lanka led the world in such action?
Got a map? Can you read a calendar?
LikeLike
So far the Malthusian side of the argument haven’t made a real sterling case for their alternative history Mr Bird. 1963 is indeed the critical year. When was Silent Spring published? Somewhere just before or after 1963 no doubt. Except it wasn’t silent. Black women crying everywhere.
LikeLike
Oh, like the position you were denied by your neighbors and the other people of your district who know you?
Dial down the vitriol, Mr. Bird. Second so-explicit-you-can’t-miss-it warning.
LikeLike
You can believe that if you wish. It, however, would be erroneous to do so. As I have stated, I do not know enough about the topic of DDT to speak confidently on it and nor have I spoken on it.
The only topic I have touched on is your incredibly bad presentation style.
An expert on what? The only thing I am an expert/professional on is the english language (which, as I have stated, I teach for a living). That is also all I have commented on thus far; your extremely poor use of it in a debate setting.
I am not a public servant, I do not work for the Australian Government (state, federal or otherwise) in any capacity. I am, however, gainfully employed in a job I tend to quite enjoy. How I can be regarded as some form of ‘parasite’ … well, you shall have to actually explain your statements for once instead of jumping to seemingly random conclusions.
LikeLike
Godwins law is idiocy. You Nazis ought to get yourself a book on logic. And Godwins law, idiocy that it is, was not how Matt would have it.
LikeLike
Godwin’s Law.
LikeLike
“Hm. I think there’s a debate law somewhere that states something along the lines of whoever compares the other side to Nazi’s first loses.”
Thats just rubbish. Get yourself a book on logic nazi. Your support for this holocaust is pretty much established now. You’ve come out of the closet.
LikeLike
Australia dummy.
I have to accept I’m only arguing with third parties. Because if you are ever bigoted and racist enough to be a holocaust-denier in the first place there really is no curing you. The sickening racist Matt was doing the leftist play-dumb-and win trick. Now all of a sudden he is an expert. We can deduce that Matt is an Australian public servant or otherwise a parasite.
Here is a microcosm of the history of it from the Sri Lankin point of view. You racists might notice that the critical year of 1963 looms large. And that the bureaucratisation of DDT lead to mosquitoes getting high levels of resistance as could have been predicted in advance.
Most disgracefully was the 5 years the spraying was scaled back, even though it was known that the malaria was still out there. 17 new cases in 1963.
“In Sri Lanka, after the minimum of 17 cases in 1963, the incidence increased markedly and practically unimpeded, reaching 537 700 registered cases in 1969…”
ANYONE WISH TO TELL ME THE SIGNIFICANCE OF 1963????
“…..There were still 400 700 cases in 1975…..”
“…. These conditions occurred again in late 1967 and in 1968. During the successful eradication period P. falciparum had been eliminated, but in 1975, after the resurgence of malaria, this species constituted 16% of all infections….”
“….The reasons for the upsurge were many. It was certainly facilitated by the backlog of slides accumulated in the laboratories and the comparatively low numbers of blood smears taken by health institutions that permitted a gradual build up of undetected, untreated cases……”
If you centralise DDT availability then you always get a time-lag that will give the mosquitoes their chance to build up and gain immunity.
“….. Intradomiciliary residual spraying with DDT had been withdrawn in the early 1960s because of the low number of cases (in accordance with the criteria for passing from attack to consolidation)…..”
So there we have it. They stop the spraying even though they have fresh cases. The change of plans centered around 1963. In sympathy with the known history of what happened and in contradiction to the holocaust-deniers, Neo-Malthusian and blatant racist view of history.
“….. After the resurgence was recognized, administrative and financial difficulties prevented the purchase of insecticides of which there was no residual stock……”
No residual stock. Thanks to the bureaucratisation of DDT by the environmentalist taxeaters.
“….. and the employment of temporary squads for spraying them when insecticides were donated…..”
Private individuals cut off at the knee-caps. No DDT at the local store.
“….. In 1968, the programme reverted from consolidation to attack phase…..”
5 years of free reign to the mosquitoes. So now when the spraying starts in earnest rather than in a hyper-cautious way, the mosquitoes have had the ability to build up resistance. As could be predicted and was surely predicted at the time. Like everyone not following the doctors prescription for anti-biotics.
“….. but by that time malaria had already taken root again in all previously endemic areas. DDT residual spraying was again applied on a total coverage basis, accompanied in some areas by mass radical treatment. These measures met with limited success, but the malaria situation deteriorated once more between 1972 and 1975. Apart from operational and administrative shortcomings, the main reason for this second increase was the development of vector resistance to DDT, to such an extent that it was necessary to change to the more expensive malathion in 1977. Residual spraying with malathion was the main measure of an intensive plan of operations supported by a consortium of bilateral agencies and WHO. In addition, surveillance was intensified and complementary control measure such as larviciding, space spraying, water management and drug administration were applied as necessary. The situation levelled out in 1978 and 1979 after a dramatic reduction of cases in the first year of the intensive programme, and in 1980, 47 949 cases of malaria were reported of which 3% were due to P. falciparum.
Attempts have been made to estimate the economic losses caused by this resurgence of malaria in Sri Lanka by considering the effect on education, earning capacity, food production and the Government expenditure on treatment*. During the period 1971-75 it was estimated that a total of 4.99 million school days were lost; 6.92 million man-workdays were lost, equivalent to an earning capacity of Rupees 69.19 million; the loss of rice production was equivalent to Rupees 6797 million necessitating the importation of rice at a cost of Rupees 1664 million. No attempt has been made to measure the effect on development projects, but such projects are usually situated in malarious areas and hence the workers and their families are at high risk. The total Government expenditure for treating malaria during the period 1971-74 amounted to Rupees 1034 million for outpatients and another 2395 million for inpatients. The population of Sri Lanka at that time was approximately 13.5 million.
* Country Report on the Malaria Programme in Sri Lanka presented at the WHO Consultative Meeting on Malaria, New Delhi, India 21-24 April 1976.”
Too bad I couldn’t get the original link. 5 years. This is what the environmentalist movement did to the Sri Lankins alone.
So there you have it. Give the enemy a 5 year fighting chance, take the ability away from locals to do anything themselves, and you have let the enemy adapt to your best weapon.
Thats mass murder by the environmentalists in Sri Lanka alone on a shocking scale. And we see that same thing everywhere. And everywhere connected with the year 1963.
LikeLike
Hm. I think there’s a debate law somewhere that states something along the lines of whoever compares the other side to Nazi’s first loses.
But you, as I have stated, need to reread what I have already stated. I have not taken sides in this argument and that is on purpose. I have merely pointed out that your presentation thus far has been done in a woeful manner.
It is a fallacy known as the appeal to emotion.
LikeLike
Get a grip, Mr. Bird. Don’t hyperventilate.
What in the world are you talking about? Victoria, B.C., Victoria, Texas, or the State of Victoria in Australia? What incident in which January? What happened? How does it support your point?
Rant less, give information more.
LikeLike
Bird, check out my posts on Martin Luther King, Jr., on genocides, on Loving v. Virginia.
What’s clear is that you’re an A #1 ass.
I’ve got e-mails from five other bloggers who said you’re such an ass they had to ban you from posting, and they all advised me to do the same. Do you think you can dial down your assness enough to stay civil? Stick to the issues, use real evidence. Use your “send” button less, and your thinking cap more.
LikeLike
You can’t kill all the mosquitoes, period. Did you think you could? That would require an amount of DDT large enough to kill almost all mammals.
You sound eerily like the Holocaust deniers who claimed that the gas chambers in the concentration camps were really for delousing. They never said that it requires much higher concentrations of cyanide to kill the lice than it does to kill a human, so if you kill the lice, the humans die, too.
Is that what you’re arguing for Australia, to poison it to death? That’s what it sounds like. DDT is the wrong pesticide to use against dengue fever, but you call for it. It’s the wrong pesticide to use in any flood situation, since that would spread the stuff and kill a lot of non-target species — but that’s what you call for.
If you’re trying to create a chemical holocaust in Australia, you’re on the right track. Once again, all your “holocaust denial” claims appear to be projecting on your part.
As to immunity of mosquitoes to DDT, check out Weiner’s book. He points out that the immunity and resistance alleles are present in all mosquitoes, worldwide. Now, you could do the world a favor and grind up some of your local insects and check to see if they’ve lost the alleles. But last time anybody checked, the resistance was still there. The problem for getting rid of those alleles is that they also confer resistance and immunity to a number of other pesticides, and so the selection processes favor those alleles.
Your claim is directly contradicted by research — see here, and here, where it is revealed that in those populations of aegypti (found in India in that case) where DDT resistance is lower, there are still better pesticides to use, so DDT is NOT THE PESTICIDE OF CHOICE.
Aegypti resistance to DDT has been found around the world, in research up to the last few months. If you think you have some data to show Australian populations have magically lost that resistance, unlike every other species studied, please present it.
But then, you’ve been basing your argument entirely on emotional rant, and not fact, from the start. Your premises, that Rachel Carson was wrong, that DDT still works, that there is some official ban on the use of DDT, that DDT would be effective against dengue, are all in error.
Nobody can manufacture DDT cheaper than China and India. Expense is not an issue.
LikeLike
There is a particularly tragic link out there to do with the Sri Lankins changing their protocols in line with the new environmentalist irrationality. Within years they were dealing with an explosion of Malaria suffering and DDT-tolerance in the mosquitoes just as you would expect.
LikeLike
Lets have that evidence ED. 1963 is the key year. Thats when the environmentalist takeover of the situation became evidence.
LikeLike
Damn straight, Bird. Let’s have some evidence. When have you ever advocated going after dengue fever with effective means? Never.
You advocate dillying while people die. Your encyclopedia of irrelevant tales and outrageous dodges was old the first time you pulled it. When do you pull your cranium out of your rectum and talk about fighting disease?
We haven’t seen it yet.
LikeLike
What is absurd about the “think of the children” argument Matt?
These guys have murdered tens of millions of kids with malice-affore-thought and still DDT is out of bounds for almost all of us. And your excuse is through mental association with some minor character on the Simpsons.
Its absolutely clear as day that you are a hardcore racist.
LikeLike
We only achieved an anti-Nazi stigma after World War II by a concerted campaign to demonise such attitudes. In the current context the only way to do things is to cut such people off from their public service jobs. So Lambert and Quiggin would have to be fired and sent into look for work in the private sector. Hopefully retrain as sparkies or something useful like that.
We cannot have people getting about pretending that the deaths of all these black kids was inevitable and in no way related to the environmentalist movement.
LikeLike
As pointed out. The people perpetuating this human-eradication can afford to be cool-headed like someone schooled in court by lawyers. They don’t give a damn about all the murdered black children and their fathers impotent to help them, their wailing Mothers. They don’t give a toss about Brian Naylor and all the others that were killed in Victoria recently either. Neo-Malthusianism teaches us that humans are like rats run amok on this planet and despoiling it. Many areas of Africa are still natural and untouched by human agriculture. Hence these people seem secretly and sometimes explicitly happy that the human eradication programs went ahead.
LikeLike
Being a holocaust-denier is no small character-fault Matt. By your own admission you are ignorant of this matter. And yet your first instinct is to jump on board with the Nazi side of the argument.
LikeLike
The appeal to racism as some sort of argument is not one which is based in intellectual merit as far as I can see. It seems much closer to the argument, based on what I have read in these comments, of “Think of the children!” which is absurd to say the least.
Campaigner, it seems your reading comprehension also needs considerable attention. Please note that at no time have I come to the defence of the articles author; I have merely pointed out that graemebird’s presentation is extremely poor and liable to communicate the notion that he has nothing constructive to say and is immature in attitude.
Your own ability to jump to some seemingly absurd racism declaration indicates much of the same, sadly.
LikeLike
Your reading comprehension obviously needs more attention. Please note I have refrained from commenting on the entire DDT issue completely – as I have stated, I have not done the research or looked into the matter to a degree where I can confidently speak upon it.
I am commenting solely upon your presentation of your arguments. Now, as I teach english for a living, this is something I am actually quite qualified to do. Your style does not come across with any sort of authority. You present no evidence to back up your claims. Your low brow name calling does nothing but indicate to the audience that you have nothing of actual substance to say and pretty much annihilates your own credibility.
There is nothing wrong with being passionate about a particular subject. There is, however, something wrong when it interferes with the presentation of your point of view. That is happening in your case, which is something you desperately need to address before people will start to take you seriously.
You might have a valid case. I do not know. But at this time I (and I am forced to assume many others) simply will not seriously listen to you while you endeavour on your course of juvenile name calling, insult throwing and lack of presented evidence.
LikeLike
Matt has to indeed be presumed to be a racist. As do you James. If your first instinct is to jump to the defense of the holocaust-denying side of the argument. If you are ignorant as at least one of you claims to be, the first thing to do was to ask questions. Your flippancy towards millions of black children being murdered has been noted.
LikeLike
Well Matt it looks like you are a failed analyst. And in any case where there are holocaust-deniers on the one side and people who have some human feeling on the other side the other side is INDEED going to be angry about it.
Get a brain transplant Matt and then get back to me. You are indeed ignorant of this problem and more generally.
LikeLike
Graemebird,
Matt criticizes you on how you are presenting yourself here and you respond by calling him a “DDT-bureaucratisation-holocaust denier” and a racist–all with no justification whatsoever. Thanks for illustrating exactly what Matt is criticizing you for. I second Matt’s sentiment. Name-calling will only irritate people, and more importantly doesn’t do anything to help your position. You could actually say something substantive and proactive in place of, say, “holocaust-denier,” which doesn’t actually communicate anything but your personal opinion.
LikeLike
I have no opinion on DDT. It is not a matter I have ever taken the time to research. I am, as far as practical purposes go, an independent person as far as this debate goes.
And my opinion right now is that you, graemebird, are coming across as a belligerent fool of an idiot. Your statements are not evidenced. Your insults are not based on any sort of factual basis. Your rambling style of writing indicates that you have little to no idea of what you are writing on.
I recommend you make a critical evaluation of your own works at this point in time. Currently no one is going to take what you say seriously in the least, simply because of the way you communicate your point of view.
LikeLike
“This was one speech. Over the course of years of hearings, McCarthy had promoted a witch-hunt atmosphere that tarred thousands of innocents, falsely.”
This is the opposite of what happened. Rather the left ran a witch-hunt against McCarthy and his supporters. Whereas McCarthy only went after communist traitors. He didn’t have time to go after anyone else. Since his intelligence source was so solid.
I can see now that you will always be a trasher of history. You are the liar and not McCarthy.
Name one person who McCarthy investigated for being a communist who was not a communist. One person who he hauled into cross-examination for this purpose?
You cannot find one. Since there were too many communists and security risks to send to get a proper job in the private sector it is not plausible that he would have wasted time going after anyone who was not a communist.
LikeLike
“McCarthy waved a “list” that he said contained the names of hundreds of State Department employees who were communists. Turned out he didn’t have a list when he claimed to. ”
No thats all wrong. He had a list of communists. And had he told people how the list had been compiled then that would have revealed to the Soviets how the FBI was intercepting their messages to American traitors. This was all revealed when the Venona files came out and is proven by his 100% hit rate at going after communist traitors. He could not have such a perfect hit rate without either the gift of second sight or alternatively a full-proof intelligence source. The secret of which he took to the grave. He didn’t tell anyone. He didn’t tell anyone at all. Thats what makes him the great American hero he is.
But you on the other hand are a trasher of histroy.
LikeLike
Well I searched you blog Matt. And nothing on DDT. So perhaps you are uncommitted and don’t know this history of horrendous mass-murder.
Hopefully you are not as dumb as you sound here and are rather somewhat closer to being as smart as you sound there. You ought to be able to build your own case from the fact and not get all snooty and rely on impressions.
This is serious mass-murder we are talking about. You ought to be not too dim as to fail to figure out who the bad guys are. They are the same bad guys who got all those people burnt to crispy critters in Victoria by taking away the control a landowner has of his own land and forcing him to go to the council to get anything done.
Lightning, arsonists and other things are sources of ignition. But only environmentalists murdered those people in Victoria last January. And they intend to murder many more through energy rationing and the centralisation of as much power as can be centralised.
LikeLike
So are you a DDT-bureaucratisation-holocaust denier too? That sort of malevolence towards black kids and fear of population increase…… well it appears to be a hard habit to quit. Harder to quit then smack no doubt. But Girl, John Quiggin, Tim Lambert and others. These people are still deeply addicted.
And its only be a series of verbal tricks that they can hide all the black kids under the floar-boards. The latest I’ve identified being the ludicrous notiong that DDT means ONLY DDT.
How about you Matt?
You a DDT-Bureaucratisation Holocaust Denier?
I think you are. And this is an important issue because the same mass-murderers now want to ration energy-use.
LikeLike
I have to say, graemebird, your general behaviour does absolutely nothing for your credibility. At the moment you are coming across as something akin to a frothing at the mouthing lunatic idiot.
Here’s a tip or three: Do not make unfounded accusations. Back up everything you say with actual evidence. Be calm, not angry. Even if you disagree with someone communicate in a manner which is still respectful.
LikeLike
So are you going to retract this claim that spraying means spraying and nothing else?
Which is idiotic as the claim that having an airforce means having no recourse to other military forces?
That appears to be your whole argument. And it in no way changes the known history of the DDT-Bureaucratisation-Holocaust.
LikeLike
“Why don’t you advocate getting rid of the mosquitoes that cause the disease, instead of just calling for DDT?”
See this. This in one of several tricks of the holocaust-denier. He lies and says that the DDT supporter is a person that demands ONLY SPRAYING AND NOTHING ELSE to kill the mosquito.
It would be the equivalent of these same guys wanting to destroy our airforce, and then the advocates of buying new planes, the holocaust-deniers would then pretend that the people who wanted and airforce that EVERYTHING COULD BE DONE WITH AN AIRFORCE.
Lets have some evidence holocaust-denier. Because this Tim Lambert encyclopedia of outrageous dodges is getting old.
LikeLike
If you kill all the mosquitos you cannot get lasting immunity. There is no chance our mosquitoes have any immunity for DDT since it hasn’t been used in this country for decades. So its simply the case of the environmentalists making people sick for no reason at all. By stopping us from manufacturing DDT and buying DDT where we want it. This jacks up the price for DDT.
LikeLike
Don’t be an idiot Holocaust-denier.
Now this Tin Lambert holocaust-denying technique is getting old.
You do know the difference between a COMPLEMENT and a SUBSTITUTE. This was very big with Lambert and the other holocaust-deniers like Bug-Girl. The assumption that only they knew that spraying wasn’t the only thing that needed to get done. The idea that anyone who would use spraying would use only spraying.
And none of these verbal shenanigans can bring back to like the tens of millions of black kids that the environmentalists murdered by the bureaucratisation of DDT.
LikeLike
On McCarthy:
McCarthy waved a “list” that he said contained the names of hundreds of State Department employees who were communists. Turned out he didn’t have a list when he claimed to. Challenged to produce the list, he did — it named many people who had nothing whatever to do with communism, and it contained fictitious names.
This was one speech. Over the course of years of hearings, McCarthy had promoted a witch-hunt atmosphere that tarred thousands of innocents, falsely. His refusal to dial down his vitriol prompted the Senate to act. Arthur V. Watkins, a devout Mormon, headed the committee on the censure. His own constituents loved McCarthy, even with the lies — but the pious Watkins could not brook such dishonesty. Those who led the charge against McCarthy were to a man and woman the most virtuous of the Senate. This was not mere politics, but true Shakespearian tragedy.
They wished he would stop the falsehoods. They did not wish him ill. McCarthy didn’t have a state funeral, but many senators and others attended.
You advocate poisoning Queensland for no good reason. I have nothing to retract. DDT is inappropriate for use in floods. DDT is not the pesticide of choice to use against dengue vectors. Where DDT could be effective, it’s legal and nothing needs to change. Your slams on environmentalists and Rachel Carson are full of calumny and McCarthy-like disinformation. You need to be held accountable for that.
You would do well to study the behavior of mosquitoes and how evolution works. Getting rid of breeding places is how we beat disease — still. DDT, when it was effective, offered a chance to get rid of the disease. It didn’t work.
Not so. Check out Jonathan Weiner’s description in The Beak of the Finch, a story of evolution in our time. Most mosquitoes today have many copies of the alleles that make them resistant and immune to DDT. Some of this immunity may fade over time when DDT is not used, but it will never be true in our lifetimes that mosquitoes are not powerfully resistant to DDT.
I wrote about it here:
https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2007/12/08/peregrine-falcons-100-things-about-ddt-77/#comment-50390
The same is true of most other vector mosquitoes, including those species that carry dengue.
Bird said:
Read what Weiner wrote. Evolution is forever, not just for the season. You need to study up.
What we know is that eliminating the breeding areas is necessary to end the disease. DDT can’t do that, doesn’t help at all. Your call for DDT is inappropriate — it’s the wrong stuff to use against dengue. As you correctly caught, DDT was not a panacea way back then, either. Draining the breeding pools was the key component of successful strategies against vectors.
Use of DDT at all risks raising immunity. DDT is the wrong pesticide to use against dengue. It’s inappropriate for the species and the conditions under which they breed. DDT use might supplement other methods, but it is not the method of choice by any stretch.
Why don’t you advocate getting rid of the mosquitoes that cause the disease, instead of just calling for DDT? If you were concerned about getting rid of dengue, you’d not call for DDT at all — it wastes money that could be better spent, it wastes time that could be better spent, it doesn’t do much against mosquitoes under the best of conditions, it’s the wrong pesticide to use against these species, and it kills off predators of mosquitoes, allowing the next generation of mosquitoes to run rampant.
You’re advocating a dengue epidemic. Stop it.
LikeLike
I’ve cut down the link to the points that are most relevant to how a real expert goes about destroying mosquitoes. Spraying isn’t the whole strategy. But its an essential part of strategy. Like artillery barrages. If you cut it out your side will lose and the mosquitoes will win. And thats what did happen. We notice also from the extended quote that 1963 was the key year when things went wrong. This ought to surprise no-one.
“….Fred Soper, who ranks as one of the unsung heroes of the twentieth century. With DDT as his weapon, Soper almost saved the world from one of its most lethal afflictions. Had he succeeded, we would not today be writing DDT’s obituary. We would view it in the same heroic light as penicillin and the polio vaccine.
2.
……. Soper disagreed. Fighting malaria, he said, had very little to do with the intricacies of science and biology. The key was learning to think like the men he hired to go door-to-door and stream-to-stream, killing mosquitoes. His method was to apply motivation, discipline, organization, and zeal, in understanding human nature. Fred Soper was the General Patton of entomology.
While working in South America in 1930, Soper had enforced a rigorous protocol for inspecting houses for mosquito infestation, which involved checking cisterns and climbing along roof gutters. (He pushed himself so hard perfecting the system in the field that he lost twenty-seven pounds in three months.) He would map an area to be cleansed of mosquitoes, give each house a number, and then assign each number to a sector. A sector, in turn, would be assigned to an inspector, armed with the crude pesticides then available; the inspector’s schedule for each day was planned to the minute, in advance, and his work double-checked by a supervisor. If a supervisor found a mosquito that the inspector had missed, he received a bonus. And if the supervisor found that the inspector had deviated by more than ten minutes from his preassigned schedule the inspector was docked a day’s pay.
One of Soper’s greatest early victories came in Brazil, in the late nineteen-thirties, when he took on a particularly vicious strain of mosquito known as Anopheles gambiae. There are about twenty-five hundred species of mosquito in the world, each with its own habits and idiosyncrasies–some like running water, some like standing water, some bite around the ankles, some bite on the arms, some bite indoors, some bite outdoors–but only mosquitoes of the genus Anopheles are capable of carrying the human malaria parasite. And, of the sixty species of Anopheles that can transmit malaria, gambiae is the variety best adapted to spreading the disease. In California, there is a strain of Anopheles known as freeborni, which is capable of delivering a larger dose of malaria parasite than gambiae ever could. But freeborni is not a good malaria vector, because it prefers animals to people. Gambiae, by contrast, bites humans ninety-five per cent of the time. It has long legs and yellow-and-black spotted wings. It likes to breed in muddy pools of water, even in a water-filled footprint. And, unlike many mosquitoes, it is long-lived, meaning that once it has picked up the malaria parasite it can spread the protozoan to many others. Gambiae gathers in neighborhoods in the evenings, slips into houses at dusk, bites quietly and efficiently during the night, digests its “blood meal” while resting on the walls of the house, and then slips away in the morning. In epidemiology, there is a concept known as the “basic reproduction number,” or BRN, which refers to the number of people one person can infect with a contagious disease. The number for H.I.V., which is relatively difficult to transmit, is just above one. For measles, the BRN is between twelve and fourteen. But with a vector like gambiae in the picture the BRN for malaria can be more than a hundred, meaning that just one malarious person can be solely responsible for making a hundred additional people sick. The short answer to the question of why malaria is such an overwhelming problem in Africa is that gambiae is an African mosquito.
………..Soper told Brazilian officials to open the dykes damming the tidal flats, because salt water from the ocean would destroy the gambiae breeding spots. The government refused. Over the next few years, there were a number of small yet worrisome outbreaks of malaria, followed by a few years of drought, which kept the problem in check. Then, in 1938, the worst malaria epidemic in the history of the Americas broke out. Gambiae had spread a hundred and fifty miles along the coast and inland, infecting a hundred thousand people and killing as many as twenty thousand. Soper was called in. This was several years before the arrival of DDT, so he brought with him the only tools malariologists had in those years: diesel oil and an arsenic-based mixture called Paris green, both of which were spread on the pools of water where gambiae larvae bred; and pyrethrum, a natural pesticide made from a variety of chrysanthemum, which was used to fumigate buildings. Four thousand men were put at his disposal. He drew maps and divided up his troops. The men wore uniforms, and carried flags to mark where they were working, and they left detailed written records of their actions, to be reviewed later by supervisors. When Soper discovered twelve gambiae in a car leaving an infected area, he set up thirty de-insectization posts along the roads, spraying the interiors of cars and trucks; seven more posts on the rail lines; and defumigation posts at the ports and airports. ………………….. His goal was to eliminate gambiae from every inch of the region of Brazil that they had colonized–an area covering some eighteen thousand square miles. It was an impossible task. Soper did it in twenty-two months.
……..
Soper’s diary records a growing fascination with this new weapon. July 25, 1943: “Lunch with L.L. Williams and Justin Andrews. L.L. reports that he has ordered 10,000 lbs of Neocid [DDT]and that Barber reports it to be far superior to [Paris Green]for mosquitoes.” February 25, 1944: “Knipling visits laboratory. Malaria results [for DDT]ARE FANTASTIC.” When Rome fell, in mid-1944, Soper declared that he wanted to test DDT in Sardinia, the most malarious part of Italy. In 1947, he got his wish. He pulled out his old organization charts from Brazil. The island–a rocky, mountainous region the size of New Hampshire, with few roads–was mapped and divided up hierarchically, the smallest unit being the area that could be covered by a sprayer in a week. Thirty-three thousand people were hired. More than two hundred and eighty-six tons of DDT were acquired. Three hundred and thirty-seven thousand buildings were sprayed. The target Anopheles was labranchiae, which flourishes not just in open water but also in the thick weeds that surround the streams and ponds and marshes of Sardinia. Vegetation was cut back, and a hundred thousand acres of swampland were drained. Labranchiae larvae were painstakingly collected and counted and shipped to a central laboratory, where precise records were kept of the status of the target vector. In 1946, before the campaign started, there were seventy-five thousand malaria cases on the island. In 1951, after the campaign finished, there were nine.
“The locals regarded this as the best thing that had ever happened to them,” Thomas Aitken says. He had signed on with the Rockefeller Foundation after the war, and was one of the leaders of the Sardinian effort. “The fact that malaria was gone was welcome,” he went on. “But also the DDT got rid of the houseflies. Sardinian houses were made of stone. The wires for the lights ran along the walls near the ceiling. And if you looked up at the wires they were black with housefly droppings from over the years. And suddenly the flies disappeared.”
So all along there has been implied in your story the idea that the pro-spraying crowd needed to be lectured by the holocaust-perpetraters on matters to do with non-spraying combat of mosquitoes. From the above we see that nothing could be further from the truth and this history is consistent with the DDT bureaucratisation holocaust.
Try again.
LikeLike
No he wasn’t a liar. You are a liar. Thats not the same as McCarthy being a liar. The Censure isn’t any way to judge it for goodness sakes. These are politicians making the censure. The same ones who later gave hi a State Funeral.
I’ve read all the pieces and it doesn’t change the history of it. So you are going to have to retract.
By your own admission the fellows who used DDT back in those days were also fanatical about getting rid of breeding grounds. You cannot have it both ways. If you spray and then get rid of the breeding grounds then there is no hope for the mosquitoes to develop immunity since they cannot have immunity since they are all dead.
Immunity is a short-lived phenomenon in any case. When they used to use DDT as a general agricultural spray what would happen is that the mosquitoes would develop immunity SPECIFICALLY FOR THE SPRAYING SEASON.
I don’t know anyone who believes in going to war with only one weapon, nor in throwing whole classes of weapons away. What is implied in what you are saying is that the DDT sprayers didn’t know about draining swamps. But they did. As your links show. DDT spraying and draining the swamps are not competitors by complements. And a bad on dealing with stagnant water might have been just as lethal as a ban on DDT. But the bad (for want of a better word) wasn’t on banning draining swamps. It was rather a set of moves to delay or underuse DDT and make DDT more expensive. And thats all it took to kill all these people.
To not use DDT until the horse has bolted is to ensure adaptation of the malarial agent and the vector to DDT. Thats how you get rising immunity levels. Its akin to only taking a half-course of anti-biotics. You’ve got to wipe all the mosquitos in the area OUT. Which by your own information you can do. Since you can spay and then meticulously deal with the potential breeding areas.
LikeLike
Malaria was listed as beaten in the U.S. in 1939. DDT wasn’t available for another 7 years. Again I wonder, can you read a calendar?
Go read Gladwell’s piece. You’ve got some bad information about the history of fighting DDT, and it has skewed your views. You’ve got bad information about the viability of DDT as a weapon, which also skews your views.
There is no reason to believe we can poison black children in Africa to make them healthy. Your advocacy of such action is horrendous. DDT is no panacea, ineffective when used in abundance, dangerous at all times.
LikeLike
Joe McCarthy was bad news, a certified liar (read the debates on his censure, led by Sen. Watkins, my former neighbor). In the end he was so bad that he’d lie about things that were breaking his way, like the golf cheater who had it so bad that when he scored a hole-in-one, he wrote “0” on the scorecard.
Oy.
LikeLike
“Why in the world do you use Joe McCarthy as your avatar, Mr. Bird?”
Because he’s a great American hero. And he wasn’t a liar. But you are. You are a trasher of history. You set out to debunk history but this is ridiculous. Since you are a maintainer of historical myth. Everything you are about to say about McCarthy is a lie.
LikeLike
Your choice is to retract, come up with evidence AGAINST this known history. Or to just sit there with egg on your face.
You and Tim Lambert cannot hide tens of millions of murdered black kids under the floorboards you know. There are too many of them.
LikeLike
Malarial rates fell during the twentieth century thanks to DDT. The manufacturing and use of which was not restricted by international agreement, by local laws, with regards to aid programs or in any other way. Nor did anyone worry about using it liberally.
This all changed in the early sixties just prior to the publication of Silent Spring. This was a horror-show for the community fighting malaria even before Silent Spring was published. This was a slow-motion trainwreck. Prior to that hopes were high that malaria would be ended. As smallpox was finished entirely except in a couple of labs just a few years later.
Then the environmentalist movement started and the rest was history. A holocaust via DDT-bureaucratisation which is still on-going. Centralising control is a clear and predictable way to ensure mass-death and to give the mosquitoes a chance to adapt to the DDT.
So what the malaria battlers thought would happen did happen. And that this happened didn’t stop the environmentalist movement from continuing with the mass-murder and this continues to this day.
LikeLike
Hi Ed,
There’s a couple of things you need to know about Mr Bird:
1) He’s completely insane
2) That’s about it
Bird has been infesting the Australian blogosphere for about a decade, and has been thrown off just about every site.
But we now have our revenge. Please, don’t hold back. After you get over the initial outrage it’s very entertaining:
http://graemebirdforum.wordpress.com/
LikeLike
Why in the world do you use Joe McCarthy as your avatar, Mr. Bird?
LikeLike
Then we are at an impasse, Mr. Bird. Your loutish behavior, wild accusations, rude claims and general oafishness produce no reason on my part to retract anything.
You seem affected with Holocaust denial. I don’t know why you falsely accused me of that claim — and of course, I provided you with a link going back some years to show the contrary, while you have nothing to show your own bona fides on the topic.
You falsely accuse people of murder, of mass murder (when only one death is known!). You’ve got no moral ground to demand retractions on such issues from anyone who posts the facts.
As you well know, malaria rates rose dramatically through the 20th century, perhaps as a result of better reporting. WHO engaged in a campaign to “eradicate” malaria, by knocking down mosquito populations for six to twelve months, long enough that malaria would die out in the human reservoir, and thereby disappear. This campaign was frustrated ultimately because farmers and industrialists encouraged gross overuse of the main anti-mosquito weapon of this campaign, DDT. Mosquitoes developed alleles that made them resistant and immune to DDT. WHO ended the eradication campaign in the 1960s as a result. Other advances in malaria control provided methods to reduce malaria further, however, and by about 1975, annual malaria deaths were reduced to under a million people per year. Mostly this was achieved with the use of effective pharmaceuticals, delivered effectively to malaria victims.
The malaria parasites developed resistance to the main pharmaceuticals, however, and malaria rates began to rise again. The introduction of arteminisin-based treatments has knocked back malaria again. Sadly, it now appears the parasites are gaining resistance to these drugs as well.
The tried-and-true methods of fighting mosquito-borne diseases — draining breeding areas near human activities, screening sleeping areas, improving treatments of the diseases — offer some new hope. Bed nets in Africa have reduced malaria by 50 to 85 percent wherever they have been used, in carefully-run tests over the past three years.
There are a few DDT nuts — I believe you count yourself in that category — who argue that poisoning Africa with DDT would be a better solution. DDT has been used despite its dwindling effectiveness, and it has never been banned for use to fight malaria. The DDT nuts argue to the contrary, however, and claim that all we need to do is dump massive amounts of DDT on Africa to save the world from malaria. Now you argue that dumping massive amounts of DDT and poisoning Queensland would be a good idea.
On the basis of those facts, I see nothing to retract on my side.
LikeLike
You have to come up with some evidence or retract your holocaust denial. You refuse to come up with an alternative explanation for the fall and rise of Malarial infection.
LikeLike
I’m not retracting anything. You must retract your holocaust-denial. You are a trasher of history. Your pose as a debunker of historical inaccuracy is now a proven lie.
LikeLike
I see nothing to retract, nor have you suggested a scintilla of an iota of evidence to suggest any error on my part, nor any reason to correct, let alone retract.
In any case, as I noted a moment ago, you are the party who introduced the issue. If you now regret the rash way in which you made wild, unsubstantiated and unanchored accusations, you may say so.
Here is a good history of DDT and malaria, and WHO’s attempts to eradicate malaria, from The New Yorker. It may provide details you would have interest in.
LikeLike
Are you saying you retract your accusation? After all, Mr. Bird, you’re the party who introduced that concept to this thread, this discussion. It was your accusation.
If you’re retracting it, please be clear.
LikeLike
Maybe I should rephrase that. Repent and retract your holocaust-denial. Since you know full well the history of the fall and rise of Malarial infection.
LikeLike
Where is your evidence that the history is not how it appears to be. Malaria was on the way out. Then the DDT stink came up, he environmentalists bureaucratised the thing, and we know what happened next.
So retract you ghoulish holocaust-denying black child hating —-.
Or lets have some evidence.
LikeLike
Retract holocaust-denier.
LikeLike
Put your retraction wherever you want to post it, Mr. Bird. You can post it at your blog, you may post it here — and we’ll take an apology, too. You’ve said many wrong and scurrilous things you need to retract and atone for.
But we will not hold our breath.
LikeLike
Wow. A second post before I could get one response up. Mr. Bird, you are certifiable.
I’m not the one making up stories of Holocaust denial, nor am I the one posting in all caps.
Here, take a look at my post on Mermelstein. Once again, you have no evidence, and you’re fantasizing. Classic nutcase behavior.
And looking, I see you now have nine posts spreading Joe McCarthy’s photo all over my blog. You feel a particular kinship to Joe McCarthy, do you? It shows.
Did Lambert cut you off? He clearly had good reason. Alas, it appears you have no reason at all. Nor do you have any control over your anger, which has nothing to do with DDT, but which probably has blinded you to the facts.
The issue comes up to anyone looking for the cause of dengue in Australia. DDT isn’t necessary for many reasons, but the fact that stopping the importation of the disease is the most effective barrier seems as good a reason as any to ask about it. It popped up in the first news stories I Googled.
Got Google? Ever seen a library? Know anything about public health?
Typical answer of a Holocaust Denier, which I suspect you are, since you’re so absorbed in the claim. Draining water from areas near homes is among the top ways to prevent dengue infection. Mosquitoes don’t migrate long distances. Most vectors that infect humans hatch within about 50 yards of the home of the victim. Flooded fields — which often have water running well enough to be inhospitable to mosquitoes — are less of a problem than the rain gutter outside the bedroom window of a potential victim.
So you dismiss as “dopey” what is in fact one of the most effective measures to prevent mosquito-borne illnesses. That’s a typical way to extend a holocaust while making a very superficial appearance of opposing it. You claim to wish well on the victims, but you ignore, denigrate and obfuscate information that might save lives.
If I made a bad or silly argument at your blog, you should have left it and exposed me. But that’s not what I did. I gave you the cruncher arguments to your entire wrong-headed screed. You censor because you have no answer.
Really? I search your site quickly, and I find nothing about anything other than slamming environmentalists and your cry to poison Australia (and then you have the temerity and gall to call me a Holocaust Denier, even as you advocate a chemical holocaust — damn if you don’t exhibit all the classic symptoms of complete, bat guano insanity).
What alternatives to DDT do you recommend? Give us a link.
By the way, I can’t find anyplace you admit the Holocaust on your site. Am I correct that you are a Holocaust denier? Is this yet one more case where the nutcase doth protest too much?
Have you bothered to check to see whether DDT is avaialable at all? I doubt it. Have you bothered to check to see whether DDT is even effective against dengue-carrying mosquitoes? Evidently not — most mosquitoes in the world now carry multiple copies of the alleles that allow them to digest DDT as food, rather than dying from the stuff.
I suspect you know very little about the disease, or about any diseases in general. I suspect it never occurred to you that DDT would not be the best method of control, your fascination with killing things obviously out of control. I suspect it never occurred to you that, even were poison the preferred method of dealing with these vectors, DDT might not be that poison. We have not even gotten to the most obvious of your oversights, failing to account for the damage that DDT would do to the environment — especially under flood conditions, which would make any control of spreading of broadcast spraying completely impossible.
Do you even think at all, Mr. Bird?
Here’s what the U.S. Centers for Disease Control have to say about fighting dengue — note the absence of any call for DDT from the health professionals:
Spraying for mosquitoes is “a relatively ineffective approach for controlling Ae. Aegypti.” Damn, there’s your entire case, blown out of the water. Now if only we could get Queensland out of the water, too, maybe that would help. DDT won’t.
It’s astounding, folks! The best argument he has is projecting Holocaust denial on me. As often as he repeats the canard, one might be excused for thinking it’s his only claim. And it’s wrong. It applies to him, not me.
I’d be happy to take you on in any science contest. Sputtering isn’t science. Name-calling isn’t experimental results. Projecting isn’t research. The people of Australia were wise not to elect you.
But I can’t post on your site. You shamefully edit my comments to say things I would never say. You won’t allow any facts to be posted. You’ve already demonstrated that. It’s fascinating to watch you deny what you’ve already done. Such denial strikes me as pathological.
Here are the facts, again from CDC — DDT doesn’t appear to be a practical solution:
Mr. Bird, you do evil work. Calling for DDT does nothing to help any victim of dengue, or malaria, but instead creates hurdles for victims, health care practitioners and disease prevention experts to attack the real problems. Every moment of delay, every nickle spent explaining why DDT won’t work, every minute lost from simple, effective action, kills another kid.
Don’t accuse me of holocaust denial when you advocate actions that increase the death toll, rather than actions that would save lives.
LikeLike
I don’t see no retraction here. And I don’t see any evidence either. Just that tired old playing-with-words like “worldwide ban” and attempting to say that those who aren’t holocaust deniers are blaming it all on someone who dies shortly after the book was published. All feeble excuses for mass-murder carried out over decades.
So no retraction?
Well why not try some other unrelated matter of history. See if you can come to grips with the history of Operation Keelhaul. Lets see how deep your holocaust-denying leftism is carved into you.
Then maybe you’ll be able to deal with this DDT business with fresh eyes.
LikeLike
Not only did this mass-murdering crowd pull this off by rationing. But they intend to do even greater damage with hydro-carbon rationing. All these seem to want is some sort of world-wide control of CO2 release.
We’ve seen what happens when you start bureaucratising stuff and rationing it. When you leave power in the hands of leftists and environmentalists. They turn it into a human eradication program. And this is a racist site because you have shown that given the choice you would repeat this history all over again.
LikeLike
“Here’s the nub of the issue, Bird: Rachel Carson didn’t urge a ban on DDT at all…”
No thats not the nub of the issue at all. And total bans are irrelevant. The holocaust was performed by the bureaucratisation and rationing of DDT. Not by a world wide ban.
We all know that history and its not relevant. The focus on Rachel Carson is a Holocaust-Deniers tactic. As is the focus on the issue of TOTAL BAN versus rationing and bureaucratisation.
These are all holocaust deniers tropes.
LikeLike
This is indeed the site of a racist. Since if you could go back in time you would still be supporting the mass-murder of black kids, in the tens of millions, via international agreements to ration and bureaucratise DDT and other chemicals and to use it sparingly when man-kinds oldest and most fearsome enemy loomed.
I don’t know how much more racist you can get then that.
LikeLike
“When dealing with a dishonorable person such as you, Mr. Bird, what expectation could I have that any fact I posted would be left accurate and intact ”
I’m an honourable person and you are a compulsive liar. Its the compulsive nature of your lying that might make the situation difficult. There is to be no lying on my blog. So take a copy of your own work before posting. And then after I’ve edited all your lying away, you might find you have some evidence in favour of your holocaust-denying argument or on the other hand you might not.
Now your claim was that ten times the deaths would have occurred WITH easy access to DDT. Is the implication that we would have had 8310 confirmed cases of Degue fever by April had everyone been conveniently able to buy DDT at the local store?????
Is that your claim. Well if you can make a decent argument for idiotic claims of this nature go right ahead holocaust denier. And if you cannot find the evidence then try and get some assistance from your holocaust-denying/supporting Amigo Tim Lambert.
LikeLike
I notice that you played down the death of some women from Dengue fever. But what about all the sickness? You linked an article where they had had 831 confirmed cases by the beginning of April. This is what I’m talking about. Australia is supposed to be a first-world country and yet it tolerates this sort out damage to the health of its people out of the mindless unsupportable whims of holocaust-denying extremists.
LikeLike
I replaced you LIES. As we have seen you LIE ALL THE TIME. Just above in that little screed of yours you lied constantly. There is to be no lies on my site.
Now you claim that ten times as many people would have died WITH DDT use. Lets have your reasoned argument and evidence for this contention. Since it is a lie, and furthermore a lie of holocaust deniers, the obviously it was going to get wiped on a site that follows a no-lie policy unless you can come up with something to justify it.
LikeLike
Mr. Bird, you replaced my post with crank words of your own. You do not have the honor of a sand flea, and your descent into calumny and name calling is only evidence of that.
When dealing with a dishonorable person such as you, Mr. Bird, what expectation could I have that any fact I posted would be left accurate and intact — since you butchered my statements without noting your contribution. You have tried to take my good name, the act of a codswallop. If you want discussion, it will have to be here — I will not risk letting you change my words again. Such actions are those of dastards, and I will not give you such a forum.
It wasn’t crickets until you gassed the life out of my post. You’re dishonest as well as dastardly.
Here, your words will be left intact so long as they are not profane.
Spend a minute browsing the site, Mr. Bird. You’ll see that this is not the site of racist. My experience is that racists generally hurl that unevidenced epithet when they are bested in discussion, and so I will take your claim as an admission you’ve lost that point.
As for Holocaust denial, you’re really racing turnips to see who can be stupider, aren’t you.
Here’s the nub of the issue, Bird: Rachel Carson didn’t urge a ban on DDT at all. DDT has never been banned in Africa, where the malaria you pretend to worry about occurs. So your claim that she had anything to do with spreading malaria is simply false. But you too easily try to spread falsehoods, where a bit of reason would show your error. WHO stopped spraying DDT against mosquitoes in broadcast spraying, in Africa and Asia, in the middle 1960s, by 1967. U.S. action to ban spraying DDT on cotton crops in Texas and Arkansas didn’t occur until 1972.
Can you explain why you think a U.S. ban on spraying DDT in Texas and Arkansas, caused a decline in DDT use in Africa five years earlier? Can you explain how not using DDT in Texas caused an increase in malaria in Africa, a half-a-world away?
If you can’t read a map, and if you can’t read a calendar, no wonder you’re reduced to sputtering rude epithets.
Got any data? Let’s see it.
LikeLike
NOT ONLY ARE YOU A HOLOCAUST DENIER, YOU ARE A COMPULSIVE LIAR.
“Nor does he appear to have any sense of irony that drought-stricken Australia has a plague of mosquitoes due to recent rains.”
There is nothing Ironic about this. Australia is a big place for one thing.
“Nor does he appear to understand that dengue is an imported disease in Australia, imported by a traveler, it appears.”
The issue never came up. Another lie from a compulsive liar.
“Australian officials ask people to drain water from pots, old tires (”tyres” downunder), rain gutters, or any other small pool, which is where the vector mosquitoes breed and mature.”
As if they are going to get round to doing that when all their fields are underwater. Dopey.
” The nutcase appears unfamiliar with the concept of simply preventing the mosquitoes from breeding, in his rush to poison Australia.”
Thats just another lie on your part. This is why you got edited at my place. It was one constant lie after another. Using DDT when one has been overwhelmed by mosquito-breeding under extraordinary circumstances is hardly “poisoning Australia.” Clearly you are as stupid as you are dishonest.
“Nor do alternative effective techniques for fighting the disease appear to be on his radar.”
No thats rubbish too. But this is a flood. Many people are coping with great property damage, and sensible people never through all their options away.
So its critical we license DDT production and sale in Australia with every tax exemption for its production that we can find.
In summary you are a holocaust-denier, a science-imbecile, a compulsive liar and a believer in idiotic fairy stories. You can post on my site anytime you like but if you tell ludicrous lies you get edited. That will always be the case.
LikeLike
Won’t be swayed by reason or fact Holocaust Denier?
I asked you for evidence for your idiocy and there was just crickets. Your claim was that ten times more would have died if we were free to use DDT. So I wiped that claim because I have a no lies policy on my site. Then instead of backing your claims you just wanked on about censorship.
Fire away. Lets have that reasoning in your own words. You too Lambert. You’ve been a supporter of human eradication far too long. While your supporting the mass-murder of black people how about deal with operational keelhaul. Leftists are full spectrum holocaust deniers and supporters and we see that Jason Soon has never backed away from his full support of keelhaul, just as Tim Lambert would murder all those tens of millions of people over through DDT bureaucratisation.
You guys must really hate black kids.
LikeLike
That’s a relief. He’s easily as great a crank as some we have here in the U.S. Nasty, too.
LikeLike
Bird was the LDP candidate for Dobell at the last federal election. No, he didn’t win.
LikeLike