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 
DDT and breast cancer:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080213193738.htm
DDT and testicular cancer:
http://men.webmd.com/news/20080428/cancer-risk-lingers-for-long-banned-ddt
http://www.oncologystat.com/news-and-viewpoints/what_patients_are_reading/DDT-related_Chemical_Linked_to_Testicular_Cancer.html
LikeLike
“A groundbreaking research study coordinated by the non-profit Silent Spring Institute ………..”
Right. That sounds really convincing there. And you wait in vain for a description of this study that would allow one to check their inferences.
“DDT was not banned from use because it was thought to be a carcinogen to humans. Since 1972, evidence has piled up that it is, indeed a human carcinogen. All the evidence suggests the ban on broadcast spraying and overuse was correct.”
Just a straight lie. Idiocy. We wanted the evidence itself. Not some lying claim that there is that evidence.
LikeLike
“It is possible some of the men who later developed cancer of the testicles were exposed to DDE at very young ages — in the womb or through breastfeeding, the researchers said.”
Wow. They really have a handle on this….. (NOT). Surely if you had anything more than this preliminary speculation then you would come up with it. Hence this is evidence for the contrary case.
LikeLike
Yeah right. So it skips a whole generation. In other words you cannot find evidence that DDT has ever given anyone cancer. So you’ve gone in for some speculative JIVE about it skipping a generation.
LikeLike
But it would be misleading, and false, to say that DDT is NOT a carcinogen, since it has been discovered to be carcinogenic to mammals and other creatures (see the stuff Nick refers to above), and since every cancer-fighting agency on Earth lists it as a probable human carcinogen.
The entire “DDT-is-not-a-human-carcinogen” meme is misleading. DDT was not banned from broadcast use because of its carcinogenicity, but because of its supreme toxicity to all living things. DDT kills insects, and fish, and birds, and bats (mammals, by the way — there was a lot of testimony about the use of DDT to get rid of bats at military installations; don’t pretend DDT doesn’t kill mammals when there was so much furor from DDT manufacturers testifying to the efficacy of using DDT to kill mammals that were perceived to be pests). That toxicity cannot be controlled once released, and in most ecosystems, DDT biomagnifies, multiplying the doses received by living things at higher trophic levels, where it does the most damage to beneficial species.
DDT was banned for its damage to wildlife and wild ecosystems, not because of carcinogenicity to humans.
Though, of course, it is also a suspected human carcinogen.
But don’t ignore the links to cancers; it seems DDT might be particularly pernicious in this regard, striking the children of those exposed in very nasty ways:
1. Testicular cancers in children of people exposed:
https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2008/05/02/ddt-linked-to-testicular-cancers-in-next-generation/
2. Breast cancers have been the most studied, and there is no great evidence that DDT exposure causes breast cancer in a short time; but studies suggest this also goes to the next generation; women exposed to DDT through their mother’s milk, or in utero, have a positive correlation. See here for a start:
http://www.alternet.org/environment/54492/
DDT was not banned from use because it was thought to be a carcinogen to humans. Since 1972, evidence has piled up that it is, indeed a human carcinogen. All the evidence suggests the ban on broadcast spraying and overuse was correct.
LikeLike
That is not evidence. You have also not presented any research done by geologists or any related field which supports this assertion.
Here’s some more then. From the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, September 2002.
http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp35.html
From http://www.pan-uk.org/pestnews/Actives/ddt.htm
” The US Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) has determined that ‘DDT may reasonably be anticipated to be a human carcinogen’. DHHS has not classified DDE and DDD, but the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has determined that they are probable human carcinogens.”
You’re really not very good at this, are you?
So you’re not taking peer reviewed research and journal entries as evidence now? What was that you were saying before about sides wanting handicaps.
Sir, I label you a hypocrite of the highest order. And a base imbecile as well.
And I’m still waiting for you to answer questions posed to you and for you to present peer reviewed evidence or scientific study results of some sort.
LikeLike
*yawns* you can engage in this stupid ad hominen attack nonsense all you want, Graeme, but my sense of morality beats yours any day of the week. You simply don’t have the ability..much less the intelligence to actually insult me.
And if you want to delude yourself into thinking that DDT is perfectly safe and harmless…then use it on yourself. Use it around your family.
But don’t come whining to those who know better then you when your family starts dying horrible deaths.
LikeLike
Right you see we wanted actual evidence that DDT was a carcinogen. You might have thought we wanted you to lie and claim the evidence has already been presented. But what we really were after was the evidence.
You didn’t have any and you won’t find any because its just a eugenicists cover story.
LikeLike
You say that the evidence has already been presented for the holocaust-supporter cover story. So it ought not take you more than a few seconds to track it down if you are not lying about that also.
LikeLike
“Evidence has already been supplied that it is a known carcinogen. It is now either up to you to discredit said evidence or show credible evidence that it is not.”
No its NOT a carcinogen and no such evidence has been supplied. If you think otherwise let us have your evidence. And thats not just linking to google scholar by the way.
Lets have evidence for this eugenicists cover-story.
LikeLike
You are still lying Matt. I pointed out that the continents fit together both ways.
So I take it you are just going to constantly lie and stick to your lie no matter what.
LikeLike
Claim A: That is something you have brought forth but, alas, come forth with no evidence to support said claim.
Claim B: You have yet to produce any credible evidence for the expanding earth hypothesis ( also, please learn what the difference between a hypothesis and theory is).
Evidence has already been supplied that it is a known carcinogen. It is now either up to you to discredit said evidence or show credible evidence that it is not.
I am also waiting for a response to several questions thus far posed to you but you have so far failed to provide any answers for.
LikeLike
“I’m a bit more bemused that Graeme seems to have no problem in exposing Africans, among others, to significantly higher rate of cancer but then turns around and claim we’re the ones supporting a genocide.”
The idea that DDT is a carcinogen is the holocaust-supporters cover-story and he’s sticking with it.
LikeLike
You parroted Wikipedia and claimed that there was no evidence for the growing earth theory. Thats a lie. A blatant one. Since the continents fit both ways, that they fit without the Atlantic was the starting point for evidence for Plate Tectonics in the first place.
So a blatant lie on your part Matt. Compounded by you not coming clean with your lie. I already told you what you lied about you blockhead.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Notice this. Nick Kelsier is so genocidal or post-modern he cannot believe that people would be concerned or get how under the collar when leftists decide they want to murder millions of people.
Its astonishing. He is just overcome with disbelief. He cannot even so much as imagine that normal people, non-parasites and non-psycopaths, who understand what the left is doing could disapprove. In his view this is unthinkable and must be some sort of act.
So if leftists are murdering babies. Like if Che Guevara is killing children, or if eugenicists are banning local autonomy and flexibility in fighting malaria and opposing DDT use, so that millions will die, if a normal average Joe, without genocidal leanings catches them doing this…. AND GETS ANGRY ABOUT IT… well thats a fake-up in Nicks view.
Holocaust-deniers and enablers are just so certain that the rest of us want all these black kids dead that telling them to “hey stop that” is thought to be a statement of mixed motives.
Look what we see above. We see Nicks eugenicist and holocaust-denying cover story… the idea that DDT is a carcinogen, which it isn’t…
And we also see the total belief that any body could even be concerned with leftists running slow-motion murder plans.
“I’m a bit more bemused that Graeme seems to have no problem in exposing Africans, among others, to significantly higher rate of cancer but then turns around and claim we’re the ones supporting a genocide.”
Its just unbelievable isn’t it. That I can know that you are hell-bent that these kids be murdered through high-food prices, malaria and energy-deprivation and if I’m not happy about it I’m just faking it in your view.
So you see the holocaust-supporter doesn’t even so much as BELIEVE his opponents. We may be talking 2nd and 3rd generation parasitism here. They talk about an inter-generational underclass. Generations of welfare. But they seldom talk about a similiar phenomenon where people can be public service taxeaters up to the third generation and may not even have met anyone who would think the slightest bit different from them.
LikeLike
Oh and by the way, Grame, if anyone is engaging in “holocaust” denying it’s you. Because you’re the one trying to argue that using DDT is worth the fact that it will cause cancer in people. And for what?
To stop something that can be stopped better through other means?
Ed asks the right question. What problem do you have with Asians and Africans that you want to see them die so?
LikeLike
Graeme…what part of DDT causes cancer did you miss?
LikeLike
And yet the only thing in evidence is the CDC material that calls for stuff other than DDT, the papers that show DDT doesn’t work against dengue. You’ve offered no support whatsoever for the bizarre claim that DDT is useful, Mr. Bird. Can you find any support for your claim? It’s been days now. Even on the wacko exterminator sites, you’ve found no support?
That’s a clue.
LikeLike
Mr. Bird, you offer people eating tiny amounts of DDT — about what a robin gets in a morning after a spraying (but it kills the much smaller robin) — versus the clear demonstrations that DDT can be fatal to humans, as evidenced by its use in suicides across Asia.
Your best claim is that the story of a suicide effort left the poor woman barely clinging to life in a hospital. Your sole defense for DDT: “She wasn’t dead yet.”
You don’t do it as well as Monty Python. Plus, you do it with animus. Shame on you. Why do you mock suicides in Asia? What do you have against Asians and Africans that makes you want to poison them so? We might guess that, since your neighbors refused to send you to the legislature, you’d bear them animus and want to poison them (still the mark of a crazy man). But what has India ever done to you?
LikeLike
What, precisely, did I lie about? And I want specifics, not general and broad statements.
As for evidence; I have presented plenty. Try those links to the peer reviewed journals I provided earlier. It is you who have not actually presented any sort of credible evidence.
Ed has supplied plenty, from health analysis from government bodies to real life examples of where it has caused major headaches when used.
Says the man who has presented zero scientific evidence for his cases and subscribes to completely unsupported quackery as the expanding earth hypothesis. And also discounts supported science such as the Big Bang.
It is to laugh.
LikeLike
So you guys won’t come up with anything for your holocaust-denial. You don’t have anything to justify the demonisation of DDT. For the demonisation of CO2. Its just constant parroting of bad unscience that we get from dumb-left-wingers.
LikeLike
So you claimed there was no evidence. You lifted that lie from wiki. And now you cannot justify it. You are a dummy mate.
Do you even know what evidence is.
You are not smart fella. You are too stupid to be having this conversation.
LikeLike
You lied Matt you filth. And you don’t have an argument.
The fact is lied and you had nothing. The continents fit both ways you twit. Or didn’t you get that far in school.
You are a blockhead mate. You are a thick-head. You don’t even know what evidence IS. Dope.
LikeLike
*shrugs* I’m actually finding his incoherent (mixed with complete lack of evidence) frothing at the mouth ranting kind of amusing at this point.
LikeLike
Mr. Bird, your constant viciousness makes us all weary. Please limit your posts to rational responses, and stop substituting vitriol for substance.
In fact, I’ll wager that you can’t keep in the good graces of the most staunch DDT advocates. I’ll bet you can’t keep posting here:
http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2009/04/epa-holds-bed-bug-summit.html
LikeLike
“They cannot join both ways on a moonsize planet by sheer coincidence. There must be some explanation.”
Bird has discovered a mysterious new element. We’ll call it Handwaveium.
Oh, and look out! Martians!
LikeLike
You idiot. If the continents join both ways thats evidence.
At least concede that fact you compulsive liar.
They cannot join both ways on a moonsize planet by sheer coincidence. There must be some explanation.
Matt if you are going to be a constant idiot and a relentless liar just stop talking.
LikeLike
It’s listed by numerous government bodies as such and recognised by biologists as such (links have already been provided for this information by Ed). I guess you lose.
Units studied in 2003 & 2004 (as a minor in another course), Deakin University. IIRC, I received a distinction for the unit overall. If I had a scanner I would post the results transcript for you.
It really is a fascinating subject for study.
I don’t see how that constitutes evidence much at all, sorry. All it does is show that plate tectonics is entirely possible.
On the other hand, the expanding earth hypothesis is blown out of the water by simple GPS measurements which (for example) show that Australia is slowly moving north – closer to other continents (in this case Asia). Whereas if the earth was expanding uniformly, it would be moving away from every other landmass at the same time, much like dots drawn on the face of an expanding balloon move away from each other.
And as someone already asked; where is all the extra matter coming from?
LikeLike
Ed- check your spam filters. I posted links to a few journal articles but I guess the wordpress spam filter caught it.
LikeLike
“But considering the editing process at Wiki, if Wikipedia says it, it’s most likely the best science.”
You moron.
Look you cannot fake it Ed. You could never have any affinity for science or for the practice of history in 1000 years. Since leftists are tribal and intellectual pursuits must be be done as if the individual has to verify all the important building blocks of his claims.
We have Golf for sportsmen who are not athletic. Jump cuts in rock videos for dancers who cannot dance. Mathematical physics for mathematicians who are not natural philosophers. And now we have wiki science for people who don’t understand anything about science.
In wiki-science people like William Connelly take control and obsessively bring the alleged consensus in line with tribal leftist positions. These people are children of the cultural methodology known within the communist party as “democratic centralism” Where though they debated things into the ground when all was said and done “Truth” was the communist part position. All thats happened lately is that the “scientific consensus” is held to be truth. But leftists then rig the game and try and dictate what the consensus is.
None of these shenanigans has anything to do with the truth of with science.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
digression:
“’m a bit more bemused that Graeme seems to have no problem in exposing Africans, among others, to significantly higher rate of cancer but then turns around and claim we’re the ones supporting a genocide.”
You idiot. DDT is not a carcinogen. Thats just leftist lying. Leftist lying is not the same as science dummy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Anyway if Matt really did study plate tectonics at University, which is probably just another lie, but if he did then clearly he was lying. Because the most striking evidence in favour of Plate tectonics is that if we get rid of the Atlantic Ocean all the continents fit snugly together. And the fossil record backs this observation up so we have convergent evidence in this regard.
So immediately we have marvellous convergent evidence for plate tectonics. But only if we disregard the fact THAT IF WE GET RID OF THE PACIFIC AS WELL THE CONTINENTS ALSO FIT SNUGLY THE OTHER WAY. And the fossil record also backs this up.
That may not be convincing to you but it does constitute evidence. If that doesn’t constitute evidence then someone has decided to swap our language around and he ought to stop it.
So one way or the other Matt lied. And so its only reasonable that he lay low for awhile.
LikeLike
On the subject of expanding earth, try asking Graeme where all that newly created matter is magically coming from.
Hilarity ensues.
LikeLike
But considering the editing process at Wiki, if Wikipedia says it, it’s most likely the best science. If Wiki agrees with Matt, that’s pretty powerful confirmation that Matt’s on the right track.
LikeLike
I’m a bit more bemused that Graeme seems to have no problem in exposing Africans, among others, to significantly higher rate of cancer but then turns around and claim we’re the ones supporting a genocide.
Oh and by the way, Graeme, when it comes to nuclear power you really shouldn’t go blaming it on the environmentalists who have blocked it. First off..if you didn’t happen to notice from 2000 to 2006 we had a Republican President and a Republican Congress. It doesn’t occur to you that if the companies that build nuclear power plants really wanted to build more that would have been pretty much the golden opportunity to do so?
A large part of the reason that nuclear power plants haven’t been built is simple NIMBYism. Speaking as someone who lives within 10 miles of a nuclear power plant…noone with an ounce of sanity wants one in their back yard. Those who want nuclear power plants built all want them built…….in someone elses backyard.
LikeLike
Thankyou for confirming that you have no idea what you are speaking about as well as having no idea about normal debate conventions.
Back up your support of the expanding earth hypothesis. I tried looking for peer reviewed evidence for it but none showed up in any of the science journals or databases I could find. On the other hand, there’s a great deal for tectonic plates/continental drift.
And just for shits and giggles, here’s just a quick selection of journal entries for plate tectonics:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/288/5473/2002
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/298/5591/207
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119159720/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/279/5347/60
And you have yet to present any peer reviewed evidence for any of your cases. Until you do, I’ll say again, you’re just wasting time.
LikeLike
Look I got to go. But already you appear to want a special handicap for your ideas.
You made a wrong claim. Retract it or back it up. If you are right (you are not right you are wrong) it ought to be easy since you claim to have studied plate tectonics.
Now dumb leftists are always putting their hand out for a special handicap for their ideas. They call this the burden of proof. But I’m not inclined to give it to them since the real universe isn’t the least bit interested in their petty pleas for handicaps.
LikeLike
Please. You seem to have no understanding of the term ‘Burden of Proof’.
You’re trying to establish the credentials of something which goes against all known scientific evidence – and yet you have not provided any evidence to back up your claim. It is not up to me to disprove your claim, it is up to you to prove it.
Which is something you have thus far failed to do with either the expanding earth hypothesis or your DDT claims.
You’re making the claim. Prove it.
LikeLike
Shouldn’t be too hard if you studied Plate Tectonics at school Matt.
I should see some evidence. I’ll be gone for a few hours. What with your education and that amount of time to work with you ought to be able to come up with something.
Best not to rely on silly sentences at the wiki fella.
LikeLike
We are talking about evidence Matt and you made a wrong claim. And now we are hiding behind the cult of peer reveiw.
So lets see that evidence. I say that you were getting your nonsense claim specifically from a sentence in wiki.
But you can try and show me otherwise.
LikeLike
So kindly provide links to/references to the peer reviewed scientific journals/research/papers that have been accepted by the scientific community which verify the expanding earth hypothesis.
Until you do, all you’re doing is wasting everyone’s time.
I was unaware you could see what I am doing on my PC. Amazing. Unless you have psychic powers. Oooeeooooh (insert Mentok the Mind Taker noise here).
Here’s a hint: I didn’t look up plate tectonics on wiki. I actually had to do some environmental science units at University and covered the subject there.
LikeLike
I got to go now but get specific Matt if you are not a bulldust artist. I happen to know that you just lifted that ludicrous comment from wiki. But if not lets see something specific.
LikeLike
I got to go now but get specific Matt if you are not a b——t artist. I happen to know that you just lifted that ludicrous comment from wiki. But if not lets see something specific.
LikeLike
See you lied and claimed that all scientific EVIDENCE pointed away from an expanding earth. And then you get mixed up with scientific opinion, scientific sentiment and scientific evidence. Make sure you know which one of these three you are talking about.
Now you want to say that most scientific sentiment or opinion goes against expanding earth then say that. But the fact is you went to wiki and you repeated their lie. And if I was to ask you to be specific I wouldn’t be able to get a good answer out of you in half an hour and perhaps not ever.
The important thing is for you not to lie and not to pretend you know a lot of stuff that you have no clue about.
LikeLike
No I just agree with the science. Thats all.
LikeLike
I like how graemebird elevates his own personal opinion above that of, say, the entirety of science (here’s a big clue: the entire field of geology says the expanding earth hypothesis is just plain silly) without providing even the semblance of evidence and/or proof.
LikeLike
Lets just go through Eds argument. Ed is a failed history teacher posing as a scientist.
“1. DDT is the wrong pesticide to use against dengue vectors. It kills the predators about ten times as effectively as it kills the mosquitoes.
TOTAL IDIOCY AND LYING ON THE PART OF ED.
Consequently, within a couple of weeks the mosquitoes come roaring back, about ten times as bad as they were before. Do you have dengue? Hey, guess what: You just multiplied the vectors that spread it by ten times.
SINCE ED WAS TELLING LUDICROUS LIES IN THE FIRST PLACE HIS INFERENCE THEREFORE IS IDIOTIC.
2. Wasting time with DDT prevents pesticide appliers from getting to the right stuff, so nothing is done with pesticides to slow dengue.
THERE NEED BE NO TIME WASTED. PEOPLE WHO ARE NOT LUNATIC LEFTIST CAN PLAN ACTIVITIES IN PARALLEL.
3. Government agencies who spend time spraying DDT generally don’t get around to doing the non-spray activities that actually prevent dengue. So government prevention programs go by the wayside, too.
THATS JUST ANOTHER LIE. ED LYING CONSTANTLY. AS WE HAVE SEEN WITH FRED SOPER INSECTICIDE USE DOESN’T MEAN ONLY INSECTICIDE USE. TOTAL LIES ON EDS PART IN SUPPORT OF HOLOCAUST DENIAL.
So thats how this moron came up with the total opposite of the truth on my blog. I commented that is was disgraceful that we didn’t have access to DDT. And this moron shows up and reckons that this would mean a catastrophe of infection.
This is how powerful the need to justify the holocaust is. With this sort of loony-toons made up history and science.
LikeLike
All of the above is entirely idiotic.
Totally wrong and idiocy in ever constitutent part of the argument.
LikeLike
Based on these simple premises, I made a projection:
1. DDT is the wrong pesticide to use against dengue vectors. It kills the predators about ten times as effectively as it kills the mosquitoes. Consequently, within a couple of weeks the mosquitoes come roaring back, about ten times as bad as they were before. Do you have dengue? Hey, guess what: You just multiplied the vectors that spread it by ten times.
2. Wasting time with DDT prevents pesticide appliers from getting to the right stuff, so nothing is done with pesticides to slow dengue.
3. Government agencies who spend time spraying DDT generally don’t get around to doing the non-spray activities that actually prevent dengue. So government prevention programs go by the wayside, too.
What’s a good number to figure out how much more dengue there will be? Two times? That seems way too small. Ten times? That’s a conservative estimate.
100 times? That may be more accurate.
Bird offers nothing to suggest DDT would decrease dengue in any way, but complains, again without numbers or logic, or data of any sort, that the projections other make are in error.
Funny that the moron Ed agrees with me. You’re getting it from both sides, Graeme, the morons and the sane average guys. When even the morons know you’re wrong, it’s a clue, Mr. Bird.
Who is this “moron Ed?” He seems like a fine fellow who follows the evidence.
LikeLike
“his expansion theory is incredibly, incredibly daft and has no evidence behind it.”
Thats a flat out lie right there. The opposite of the truth. All known relevant evidence supports the expanding earth theory. So Matt I already know what you’ve done. You gone to wiki and lifted that lie straight from them.
YOu cannot hide from me when you run from science in this way.
LikeLike
Yeah as it turns out the Plate tectonics is an inferior paradigm. Its agreed that the Atlantic wasn’t there 180 million years ago. But the same evidence that shows this tells us also that the Pacific wasn’t there 300 million years ago. You have a responsibility to go with the evidence no matter what social overhead it may cause you. The theory originally comes out of Australia.
LikeLike
Looking at Bird’s blog, it seems the man rejects the scientific theory of plate tectonics and instead embraces Neal Adam’s hypothesis of an expanding Earth.
Now I quite like Neal Adams; his work in the comic book industry has been truly remarkable. However, his expansion theory is incredibly, incredibly daft and has no evidence behind it. Yet graemebird supports it.
I think that is very telling.
LikeLike
No I’m saying the history books are right. And I’m waiting for your alternative history with time-line and causal connections.
I don’t think there is any doubt whatsoever about the history so I’m waiting for your version of is. Year by year. What the environmentalist movement did. How that affected spraying and most of all centralisation of the mosquito extermination effort.
My history of the situation is simple. That it was the result of a wider movement, and that they influenced matters everywhere on the basis of both their non-standard pathological fears, and their wish to massively cut down populations. So that what happened in Sri Lanka was repeated everywhere throughout the world with the same results.
Now you have a different theory go for it.
I wan to hear about your make-believe history. So I’ll be ready for your make-believe history of the energy crisis that you guys have engineered for us as well.
We see how you guys operate every day. So its not a great deal of work extrapolating this destructive people-eradication projects backwards in time.
LikeLike
Mr. Bird, you have not made a case that the history books are wrong. Please do not rave like a madman here – children are watching.
If you were concerned about malaria, you’d be talking about how to fight it (Nothing But Nets works okay). If you were concerned with the facts, you’d not recommend the wrong pesticide for use against dengue in your home territory. DDT isn’t the stuff that works.
Why do you insist on wasting money and on poisoning Australia, and Africa? What do you have against Australia and Africa?
Don’t insult retarded people that way. Shame on you.
LikeLike
Matt I think you better find your alternative theory or admit you were wrong. This holocaust-denial is not the least bit amusing. It stinks.
The moron Ed came on to my site and charged that with spraying there would have been ten times as many death from Dengue fever. In his view spraying increases deaths. The fellow is a clear retard. And clearly very happy with all the killing that Malaria causes.
LikeLike
What about operation Keelhaul. This is another holocaust that people don’t wish to believe. Maybe if you tackle that story you’ll cure yourself of this holocaust-denial.
LikeLike
You do know that 2 kids are dying every minute from this curse don’t you? And you do know also that it was almost wiped out in the early sixties. You’ve seen how the left acts with the global warming racket.
If you cannot join the dots with those three facts alone there really isn’t much hope of you ever being able to understand the most basic matters with regards to history.
LikeLike
I’m waiting for any of you holocaust-deniers to present your alternative history. You appear to be on an endless filibuster. This is very much the case with the global warming racket where hey have found out if they never come up with any evidence it can never be proved wrong.
So lets have it Matt. How is your history superior to the old mans recollections of the environmentalist movement going bad in the sixties.
LikeLike
I can’t speak for ED but I am still waiting for you to present credible evidence which establishes the case you present. Until you do so the Burden of Proof means, basically, Ed does not have to reply to anything.
LikeLike
The World Wild Life Fund is still trying to ban DDT. We need something like war crimes trials for this sort of thing. The leftist pro-eugenicists aren’t going to stop their campaigns of lies and killing unless some of the costs are brought home to them. Serious criminal trials with real long prison sentences. And massive fines.
LikeLike
Its pretty hard to argue with someone who refuses to make a case. We need to have an alternative explanation as to why Malaria deaths were in the millions, went down to the thousands, and back up to the millions again.
Until he comes good with his explanation we have to assume he’s openly in favour of this mass murder. After all his endorsement of that stupid book would seem to indicate that if it was up to him he would repeat the murders all over again.
LikeLike
I’m waiting for Eds alternative history. The one where environmentalist action DIDN’T lead to an explosion in Malaria. And the one where DDT was a carcinogen and was just about the bring the whole nature down with one big case of cancer.
Ed is a trasher of history. But in this case he refuses to even put up an alternative point of view.
LikeLike
*shrugs* At least I have more than a rudimentary grasp of English grammar, which appears to be a lot more than you currently possess.
And for all your bluster thus far, I have yet to see you actually meet any of Ed’s challenges or answer any of his questions with credible evidence. Until you do, you shall be considered the loser of this debate.
LikeLike
“I’ll wager you can’t point out a single scientific error in Rachel Carson’s book. The science is against you.”
Hahahahaha. So you are a full-blown believer as well as being a holocaust-denier. And are you backing all of Al Gores science as well? You reckon Al Gore is on the right track fella?
See here it all is. The lying about history. The absolute contempt for evidence. The pseudo-science. The giant outrageous claims of total devastation. Just as we see it now with the global-warming fraud we saw it then with the DDT demonisation. And the killing of black children continues even as we speak under this cover.
LikeLike
HHAHAHAHAHAHAH Fantastic argument Matt. Marvelous. You just aren’t too bright are you. No you are not.
Lets have your argument for this holocaust-denial version of history you have on the fly. Or lets have a retraction.
LikeLike
Tenuous grip on reality, Matt!
Mr. Bird: “frenzy?”
I’ll wager you can’t point out a single scientific error in Rachel Carson’s book. The science is against you.
LikeLike
I think it is now safe to say that gramebird has been exposed to far too much DDT, to the extent where it has now affected his grip on reality.
LikeLike
Nick what brought you first into this holocaust-denial? How did you come about this mode of thought and what do you think it achieves. All you have to do is look at the numbers of Malaria deaths worldwide. And see how they almost went down to zero and then exploded up again in line with Environmentalist action.
And its not as if we are saying that environmentalists were acting any different than today. The same sort of tactics were used then, with the same bogus-science, and the demonisation of good things.
So when did you first get sold on this holocaust-denial caper?
Can you think of the year?
Was it like a conversion of sorts?
LikeLike
No NIck. You are an idiot. And you a holocaust-denier. Get used to a more honest self-assessment.
Now will one of you put up some sort of argument for your alternate history.
You know how extensive this global warming fraud is thats current now right? Well a similar frenzy too place to do with DDT in the early sixties. And these guys went out and murdered tens of millions of black people by all sorts of measures, just as they now obstruct energy production any chance they get. The mass-murder is current. It is not over. Since a lot of restrictions from that era are still in place. So at the same time as you guys are denying the mass-murder you are all in favour of the restrictions staying in place.
Now what is this alternative history you are advocating. Tell me about it. What happened in your view.
LikeLike
Ed, I do believe that Graeme makes Knocky and Jupe seem like rational human beings.
LikeLike
Graeme, if you think you’re accomplishing anything other then making yourself out to be a brainless jackass you are deluding yourself.
My suggestion to you, child, is that you back off. You simply don’t have the intelligence to win any debate with me and certainly not with Ed.
And you can bother to be moral enough and human enough to apologize for your slander and your defamation of character against me.
But don’t worry..I’m not holding my breath on you being anything other then a brainless twit.
LikeLike
Nick Kelsier has confessed to being a holocaust-denier. It never happened he said. Nobody died. Its all rubbish he calls it. Nothing to see here.
I wonder if anyone here ISN’T a holocaust-denier. You guys are just sickening filth. Lower than squashed insects.
LikeLike
I’ve got nothing to engage with. He is filibustering. The holocaust-denier refuses to justify or describe his alternative history. The actual history is clear enough. What happened was like the energy-deprivation crusade today. Its a full spectrum thing. It not just about one law or one book. The anti-science CO2 nutballs have already stalled new energy production and set us up for a disaster. They’ve already caused global food riots and hunger despite bumper crops.
So Ed the holocaust-deniers whole historical argument is to try and claim that I’m claiming it was all about a sheilas book or a single US law. Other than that he refuses to justify his holocaust-denial at all.
At least some of these latterday nazis will put up a story. Black people not important enough even to make excuses for.
LikeLike
And once again Graeme surrenders the debate by spouting that “holocaust denier” nonsense. Pity that Graeme can’t engage in intelligent debate.
LikeLike
Here is a fellow who was old enough to see these lunatics as this DDT hysteria was happening. We know the holocaust-deniers modus operandi because we see then today with these new human eradication program. They’ve decided that CO2 is the problem. So the first hysteria was about the lifesaver DDT. And this on is about the life-giver CO2.
The holocaust-deniers story makes no sense. The claim is that there campaign was restricted only to a ban in the United States. This is Ed lying again. We see now all the myriad ways the anti-CO2 hysteria is with us. We see the bad science being taught in school, affecting all levels of government. It would be as if Ed is claiming that I’m blaming the whole thing on Al Gores crap scientifically-incompetent movie. But we are talking about an entire movement here. And its fundamentally a eugenics movement. Ed just hates African blacks. Get used to it.
LikeLike
Oh yes…youtube is a credible source for anything.
Graeme…pay attention.
Every single time you spout that “holocaust-denier” nonsense you are in effect shouting at the top of your lungs “I lose. I lose. I lose.”
It’s like whoever first calls someone Hitler in a debate is surrendering the debate.
LikeLike
I notice the common trope that the holocaust-deniers use. They claim that we are saying a ban on DDT in the US MAGICALLY affected what was done overseas. But thats not what anyone claimed. What happened is that the bad in the USA and the mass-murder overseas were part of the same hysteria and environmentalist action everywhere.
Lets have your retraction of your alternative historical interpretation:
How is your history different then this fellows above holocaust-denier.
LikeLike
Can you show any link between the environmentalist movement and the US not building more and more nulcear reactors?
In the same way as the environmentalist movement didn’t manage to wipe all nuclear reactors off the face of the earth, nonetheless they have managed to slow down the building of new reactors, and they have managed to obstruct them being built here in Australia.
But supposing in twenty years time it had become clear that energy-deprivation will have killed 100’s of millions of people. You could be bleeding innocent in this exact same way. You could be saying “Nuclear ban. What nuclear ban? There was no nuclear ban. Look the US had nuclear power continuously since the sixties”
Its just the same thing here. You lie and deny that there was a ban. But it was a worldwide campaign that took many forms this anti-DDT hysteria.
And you are in denial of it all. A holocaust-denier. And a trasher of history. A science incompetent who ought not be let anywhere near the kids.
I’ll tell you what. You prove that you are not incompetent in your job of history Professor by talking about the Roosevelt Presidency and with particular reference to Operation Keelhaul.
It will be a chance to set your story right, or further reinforce your status as holocaust-denier.
LikeLike
So. We meet again, Mr. Bird.
1. You continue to try to call me a “Holocaust denier” though my site shows the opposite, but you’ve done nothing against Holocaust denial at your site. I observe, again, it appears you are doing some projecting.
2. Though you cannot show any link between Ceylon’s stopping the use of DDT and any action by any environmental group, you deny the story malaria fighter extraordinaire Fred Soper told, that it had nothing to do with anything other than Ceylon’s own governmental incompetence. Despite his denying your claim, you’ve now posted Fred Soper’s story at some length at your blog, wishing to bask in the glow of a real malaria fighter. Weird. Crank sciencey.
3. You can’t show that DDT was ever banned in Ceylon. But you claim a ban in the U.S. magically affected Ceylon. This despite Ceylon being at least 10,000 miles away from the U.S., and this despite Ceylon’s having stopped DDT use nine years before the U.S. ban on use in the U.S. went into effect. The time travel requirements of your fantasy don’t seem to have affected your zeal for getting the facts wrong, not in any way.
4. Despite your fact chain making no sense, you continue to insist I should depart from the well-established history of Rachel Carson, DDT use, and malaria, and propose something perhaps as crackpotted as your ideas? Bugger off, Bird. Just because you’re acting crazy, I don’t have to follow your act.
5. Did you read that forum at Randi’s site? They’ve got your number. Does that bother you?
LikeLike
So right there the loaust denier is admiting that there is a series of bans on this stuff. As soo as the anti-DDT historia happened the mass-murder going started. There was no one measure they had just as there is no one action the same lunatics take to discourage nuclear power. Look DDT is being used all the same they would say. You could alibi your mass-murder by making excuses of this sort. “What anti nuclear ban. Nuclear power was going all the time.
Ed has ye to put up his alternative theiry. How does his make-believe history differ from this mans.
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=132385&page=3
LikeLike
Maybe not legally, but you must be getting it from somewhere to be able to be drinking it like you do. What else could possibly explain your extensive brain damage?
LikeLike
Looking at your blog and your ravings here, that sounds like very good policy to me.
LikeLike
I agree with Matt. It looks like Ed has won this debate handsomely.
LikeLike
Looking at the contents of this thread, I am forced to agree with DH. Ed has so far won, mostly due that he has been able to back up his arguments with evidence and not unsubstantiated insults.
LikeLike
No. Ed’s run rings around you. Your argument doesn’t stand up to the most basic scrutiny.
LikeLike
“Current Status
Since 1996, EPA has been participating in international negotiations to control the use of DDT and other persistent organic pollutants used around the world. Under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme, countries joined together and negotiated a treaty to enact global bans or restrictions on persistent organic pollutants (POPs), which includes DDT, known as the Stockholm Convention on POPs.
The Convention includes a limited exemption for the use of DDT to control mosquitoes which are vectors that carry malaria – a disease that still kills millions of people worldwide. ”
So a flat out lie from this holocaust-denier. A global effort to ration its use and control access to DDT is on the fly. This means that it is not manufactured nor used in a whole string of countries where this might have been possible.
This is what you get when you are taking your facts from the Deltoid Dwarf. Holocaust-denier Tim Lambert. One of the most evil little men in Sydney.
I’ve met him you know. He’s despicable.
LikeLike
No I won the argument. Ed will not give us his alternative history and now he’s taken to lying and claiming that there never was any restrictions on DDT.
Its absolutely typical holocaust-denial. There never was these concentration camps. Hitler knew nothing about them. Only several thousand people died. You cannot prove anything. These are all myths by whoever. These are the sort of things holocaust-deniers claim.
Ed is just acting like the holocaust-denier that he is.
Ed is saying that there never was restrictions on DDT even though he himself cannot buy or manufacture and neither can you or I.
LikeLike
I think Ed’s pretty clearly won this one hands down. Another victory over dumb Birdian anti-science.
LikeLike
So now are you claiming their was absolutely no hindrance to your average person buying DDT. And that there were no international agreements getting in the way of its use and manufacture, in aid programs or elswhere.
You see I’m convinced that you are now just following Tim Lamberts lying.
Right to this day you and I cannot buy DDT. Nor can we manufacture it. So your whole case is now based around lying and wordgames.
LikeLike
“There has never been a central authority controlling the use of DDT. Never. DDT was available from a half-dozen different U.S. manufacturers, cheap, through 1984.”
Thats a lie right there. Of the Lambert kind. I cannot go down to the hardware store and buy DDT. All over the world people find themselves in this position.
Now would you like to retract that lie?
LikeLike
Lets have your alternative history or lets have your retraction.
I take it that even now you do not wish to have the environmentalists measures reveresed.
This is what you teach the children no doubt. That with the technique of filibuster you can make up any history you like.
LikeLike
Aid programs were international and many of them coming from the US. We see the change in behaviour in 1963 once the Environmentalist movement came into being.
This is bad history on your part. You are claiming that the book had to be translated into all these different languages. Then these people had to read it. Then they had to start acting idiotically.
This is characteristic of a bad historian who is not going with the reality of the day. The reality of the day is you had all these Americans running aid programs and advising everyone with Black nations newly independent. A lot of these aid programmes were run through the UN. So a change of policy at the UN and in the US and Britain was all it took for the killing to take off.
Which is what happened.
You are basically just using the Hume-Nuke and have no alternative history. Why has liberty in manufacture and use not been returned if your crowd reckons they are not to blame.
LikeLike
I suppose one needs to point out the errors:
I pointed out to you that it is physically impossible for events to have unfolded as you claim. By 1963, Carson’s book had not had time to become the Bible for every ruler, governor, president and tinhorn dictator in Africa. I issued a simple challenge to you that would save your honor, but which you have not met(and I suspect you cannot meet it, even if you understand it): There is no link between any action on the part of the not-yet-existing environmental movement and the cessation of use of DDT in Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) in 1963. None whatsoever. Ceylon stopped using DDT for other reasons, having nothing whatever to do with a concern about the harms of DDT. That’s noted in the Gladwell piece I linked to above, and in the other references I’ve given you. You not only have failed to provide a rebuttal, you’ve not offered any support at all for your point. You lose.
Are you really that stupid, Mr. Bird? Why would the government of Ceylon wish to do breed better citizens, and what possible use would stopping DDT use have in getting them to that goal?
I mean, really, Mr. Bird — there must be some plausible cause-and-effect relationships in your claims for anyone to take them seriously. You’re not making sense at all.
There has never been a central authority controlling the use of DDT. Never. DDT was available from a half-dozen different U.S. manufacturers, cheap, through 1984. DDT has been available for more than 30 years (maybe more) from manufacturers in the Peoples Republic of China, and in India. India and China have been over-producing the stuff for years, competing in delivering massive quantities of the stuff cheaply to anyone who has a check book.
Are you really so blind as to fail to see there is no centralization possible? Can you really be that blind?
But, fatally for your argument, DDT remained unregulated except in Sweden for nearly a decade until the U.S. banned broadcast spraying of it inside the U.S., in 1972 — and it remained unregulated in most of the rest of the world until 2001. You’re really toking too hard on that stuff if you are claiming, as you must do to make this argument work, that a 1972 ban on spraying DDT on cotton in Texas, caused Ceylon to stop using DDT against mosquitoes in 1963. Can’t you read a calendar? Doesn’t your map show Ceylon more than 10,000 miles from Texas?
Planned by God and Albert Einstein? The time travel required to make your conspiracy work is probably impossible even for God.
Your argument is so utterly, completely stupid, Mr. Bird, that I cannot believe any seriously brain-damaged person could not see through it. Do you really expect normal people to believe it?
Damnation. You really are map-challenged. Stopping DDT use in Ceylon killed Africans? The non-use of DDT off the coast of India sucked DDT right out of Africa?
I admit your claims are so stunningly stupid that they might make some people hit with them, unconscious, and they might drool in their slumber.
But you’re projecting once again, Mr. Bird. That drooling twit you see is your reflection.
Kindly chill out for a while. Take a vacation from this site, for your own good.
LikeLike
Bird, you’re a hoot!
Got any evidence, Mr. Bird? No? Still? So you’re just sputtering in your own spittle and bile? Fantastic!
Did you bother to search my site for references to David Irving? No, of course not — you’re incompetent (no, I didn’t say “incontinent,” though the effluent level is rather high on the excrement side, from you). You can’t be bothered to check facts — how could make stuff up so fantastically if you were ever bound to actual events?
But you know what? You’re committing libel. You’re making up stuff that is not only wrong, but potentially damaging to others’ reputations.
Enough of the childish pranks. Take a break. Go get a breath of fresh air. In fact, put a bag over your head — you’re hyperventilating.
LikeLike
That’s a joke coming from you Bird, given your known hugs and kisses for the brave lads of the Waffen-SS.
LikeLike
Just to serve you full warning of what I’m saying about you on my site.
LikeLike
https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2009/04/11/ddt-nutcases/#comment-70827
Let me link to this incompetent history teacher. Ed is a liar. A holocaust-denier. And a trasher of history. He’s a science incompetent and that doesn’t help his historical interpretation either.
Basically its as if David Irving hadn’t even so much as written a book to argue for his case. This holocaust-denier Ed refuses to put up a case for his alternate history.
So thats what leftists do. They refuse to argue a case and then when you argue the case for authentic known history they simply put on their David Hume Super-Skeptic hat and implicitly use the Bart Simpson excuse. “YOU CAN’T PROVE ANYTHING” is what Ed is saying. Tens of millions of black kids dead and out comes the Hume-Nuke. You cannot prove anything. They would have died anyway. No we are not giving the liberty back for people to deal with their problems. But this mountainload of dead people would have died anyhow.
This is the grave damage government involvement in the education process has caused. About the only thing an idiot holocaust-denier like Ed learns is the one-sided Hume-nuke. I mean the fellow is just a nazi pig when it comes down to it. With his crude nazi version of science and his lying about history. Like any good nazi would.
LikeLike
The Environmentalist pack-animal cannot even come up with a feeble excuse for his holocaust-denial.
LikeLike
Clearly I’ve won the argument. The key year is 1963. Thats when the environmentalist movement got going. It was a return to Eugenics. Eugenics in disguise. Quickly they piggy-backed on certain fears to do with widespread chemical use in agriculture. Then the centralisation of DDT use began. The results were an immediate and catastrophic turnaround in the way Malaria was combated and in the freedom to use DDT and other pesticides.
This was all planned and carried out over decades. And the results are as well known and undeniable. The mass-murder of Africans by these Environmentalist Pack-Animals. Holocaust-enablers and holocaust-deniers. Of whom Ed is one. I’ve seen White Supremacists who make more of an accounting of themselves then this compulsive liar and historical crank ED.
And to think these retarded drooling twits like Ed are lying to the children each day.
LikeLike
“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.”
A flat out lie. But we would expect nothing more from a trasher of history and a holcaust-denier.
You cannot hide tens of millions of murdered black people under your floorboards Ed. You are a nutjob. A crank. A fullblown tin foil hat dummy.
LikeLike
Lets have your evidence Ed. Holocaust-denier.
LikeLike
So your filibuster continues holocaust-denier.
And still no retraction. You are a trasher of history and a fullblown nutjob. As well as being a zombie and a mindless follower of idiocy. An anti-historian.
I’ve won the argument and largely by default.
LikeLike
Troll of the year? Heck, Bird’s in the running for the Robert O’Brien trophy at Dispatches from the Culture Wars, just on the basis if his posts here.
The Graeme Bird Trophy. It’s a grand idea. My dog is working on the thing even as we speak.
LikeLike