Hydrogen power: Still a gas after all these years

April 20, 2008

There must have been news conferences, press releases and lengthy stories, but I missed them.  It came as a quiet surprise to stumble across GM’s website talking about a fleet of 100 hydrogen fuel-cell cars, on the road now.

Chevy has launched a test fleet of hydrogen-powered fuel cell Equinox SUVs. This fleet hit the streets of New York City, Washington, D.C., and Southern California.

“Project Driveway” is the first large-scale market test of fuel cell vehicles with real drivers in the real world. Why? Because hydrogen fuel cells use zero gasoline and produce zero emissions. They’re a sustainable technology for a better environment. And they ultimately reduce our dependence on petroleum. Equinox Fuel Cell is an electric vehicle powered by the GM fourth-generation fuel cell system, our most advanced fuel cell propulsion system to date. The electric motor traction system will provide the vehicle with instantaneous torque, smooth acceleration, and quiet performance.

The Equinox Fuel Cell will go nearly 150 miles per fill-up, and reach a top speed of 100 mph. Green Car Journal has given the Chevy Equinox Fuel Cell its Green Car Vision Award. The Equinox Fuel Cell won the award over several nominees, including the Honda FCX Clarity and Toyota Prius Plug-In.

If you live in one of those cities, you may be eligible to test drive one of the vehicles.  Were I there, my application to try one would have been in before I started this piece.

It took 20 years longer than it should have to get hybrid fueled vehicles on the road; hydrogen power lags at least as far back.  To those of us who long ago gave up hoping the Detroit Big 3 might see the light on hydrogen in any form, the news GM has a fleet of fuel-cells in pre-Beta testing is most interesting.  We remember GM’s last foray into electric cars.  Hopes do not rise, at least not great hopes, and not high.

It’s been 31 years since Roger Billings drove a hydrogen-powered internal combustion car in Jimmy Carter’s inaugural parade.  Hope abides, but not forever.  Feathers cannot sustain hope that long, Emily.

Fuel cells provide significant advantages, though.  The need for something like fuel cells should drive a market to make the things work.   [More about fuel cells, hydrogen, and Roger Billings, below the fold.]

Read the rest of this entry »


Saturday jellyfish

April 19, 2008

Jellyfish croceted from newspaper plastic bags, by Barnowl

Pelagia plastica

In the meantime, I’ll post a photo of a jellyfish I crocheted from plastic yarn recently (I’ve felt that I have the brains of a jellyfish when I get home from work lately). It is loosely modeled on Pelagia spp. jellyfish, and I created the yarn from newspaper wrappers that friends at work saved for me. I used the hyperbolic crochet technique for the tentacles, and a simple cap pattern for the bell. All parts were crocheted using a size L hook.

In case you were wondering what to do to keep those plastic bags your newspaper comes in from ending up as junk/food that will kill a turtle in the Gulf of Mexico, I offer this jellyfish, from Guadelupe Storm-Petrel. (I think this may be a Texas blogger.)


An inconvenient parody

April 18, 2008

I found such a fantastically wonderful parody of the way denialists think science works . . .

If it’s not parody, the author should stay alert for men in white with nets.

Maybe the author should just stay alert; who can tell parody these days? This thing is so good that I’ll bet it suckers in dozens of denialists.

It’s what you’d expect, after all. Lightning will strike the same lunacy twice, or three times.


How DDT could work in aggressive breast cancers

April 18, 2008

A Quebec research team finds that DDT’s breakdown product, DDE, could promote aggressive breast cancer growth; news report on forthcoming journal paper.

Other news on cancer and DDT:


Cold showers for intelligent design: ID not even fringe science

April 16, 2008

Experimentalchimp raises some serious questions about how fringe science sometimes stumbles into the stuffier meetings of real science — or, at least, into the gossip columns of real science, with his post, “How Empty Science Becomes Wisdom.

The post discusses a silly proposal made by a fellow in Virginia that perhaps, just maybe, cold showers might fight depression.

Let me introduce you to Nikolai Shevchuk. He’s worked at the Department of Radiation Oncology at Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine. One day Nikolai gets an idea. What if cold showers could treat depression? After all, cold showers get the adrenaline pumping, doesn’t it? So Nikolai gets a few friends together and asks them to try taking a cold shower and seeing if it improves their moods. Nikolai probably likes to take cold showers himself and he feels just fine!

So Nikolai writes down his ideas. There’s not what you’d call a huge amount of evidence for them. Nikolai tries his hardest to think up a mechanism by which cold showers can make you feel good. The adrenaline thing was good, but what if he can invoke some kind of evolutionary mechanism. Hey! Yeah! That’s it! Back when man was a hunter-gatherer chasing after prey, he’d have to swim after it in cold water. So modern man, lacking these environmental stressors must be getting depressed as a result!

It’s not rocket science, but it’ll do.

Nikolai doesn’t want to keep this breakthrough to himself, so he sends it all off to a medical journal. Medical Hypotheses, to be specific. Medical Hypotheses. It sounds so truthy, doesn’t it?

Truthy, indeed. (Right up the alley of Telic Thoughts, no?)

The story about how Shevchuk’s work got picked up by a journal, Medical Hypotheses, and how it migrated to the London Times and farther, may make you giggle. Or squirm.

But it also made me wonder: If this almost-admitted joker in Virginia can get this dubious quality conjecture published in a journal, why is it intelligent design advocates cannot get even a hypothesis published somewhere in more than 20 years of existence.

I didn’t say “20 years of trying,” because I suspect that the ID people are not trying to do even fringe science. (There’s that other joke, too: “Oh, yeah, they’re trying. Verrrrrry trying!“)

I have often said that intelligent design is to biology what cold fusion is to physics and chemistry, only stripped of the extensive experimental backup published in the journals. This points up one of the key problems of intelligent design: There is no intelligence in it. Intelligent design is the vapor ware of biology, too. No hypotheses, no experiments, no observations from the wild, no laboratories, no grants, no attendees at science conferences, only one or two poster sessions (and not by the grad student tyros, but by the greatest minds in ID) — nothing.

ID can’t crack the fringe science journals, because ID lacks the wisp of ideas required to be called fringe science.

Maybe science fiction next? Calling Orson Scott Card!

This contrast between intelligent design and intelligent conversation is so stark that the new ID mockumentary “Expelled!” has had to work hard to make sure scientists of faith do not appear in any way in the movie. Why? Well, Christopher Heard at Higgaion carefully explains, if the movie showed people like Ken Miller, a faithful Christian who happens to be the lead author on the most-used high school and junior college biology textbooks, it would give the lie to the film’s entire premise, that faithful Christians are not allowed into the halls of science.

But to return to the main point: the real reason that folk like Miller and Collins find no place in Expelled is because they do “confuse”—that is, complicate—the simplistic and false dichotomy that the filmmakers wish to construct. When your whole schtick is to pit religious “design proponents” open to the supernatural against atheistic, philosophically materialist “Darwinists,” all those pesky scientists who simultaneously affirm evolutionary biology and a robust Christian faith become very, very inconvenient.

(Heard also features a transcript of part of an interview Scientific American editor John Rennie had with the film’s associate producer of “Expelled!”, Mark Mathis. It really made me laugh for some reason — is it that I’m too deep into grading? Check it out, let me know.)

How did Miller get into the hallowed halls, anyway? He did real science, published it, got his Ph.D., and continues research, academic advising, and teaching.

Why can’t ID do that?

When the cold showers hypothesis gets more respect than intelligent design, it’s time to pull the drain plug on intelligent design.

Maybe Mathis should install cold showers in the lobbies of the theatres that show his movie. People who buy a ticket to the movie may need them, especially after they realize they’ve seen so much of the stuff before, in better venues (and with attribution).

Maybe Mathis, Ben Stein and the entire “Expelled!” team should try the cold showers out first, to see if maybe a cold shower might shock them back to reality.

Tip of the old scrub brush to Expelled! Exposed, for the tip to Heard’s piece.


3rd-5th Science and math teachers: Summer academy

April 15, 2008

Nosing around the blogs of the Dallas Morning News can turn up some interesting stuff.

Do you know a good elementary school math or science teacher in Dallas ISD? They ought to apply for this program, as noted by DMN reporter Kent Fischer:

ExxonMobile Logo.gifExxonMobil sponsors a week-long summer training program for math and science teachers. The deadline to apply is many months away, but you can find out the info by clicking the jump.

The program has a good hook: They encourage students to “nominate” their teachers, to encourage good teachers to apply.

The Mickelson ExxonMobil Teachers Academy recently launched www.sendmyteacher.com that allows students to nominate their teacher to be one of the 100 teachers who will be selected to attend next year’s Academy in Jersey City, NJ. Students can send their teachers an electronic note or print out a certificate to encourage them to apply for the program. Teachers are also able to self nominate for consideration.

Students?  Know a good math or science teacher?  For readers outside of Dallas, of course, any 3rd- to 5th-grade teacher in any school is eligible.

The Academy was started by pro golfer Phil Mickelson and his wife, Amy. They worked with ExxonMobil to create a special learning environment for teachers.

They are joined by math and science experts from the National Science Teachers Association and Math Solutions who teach the teachers at the Academy. They come up with fun ways to learn math and science while playing with balloons, rocket cars and marbles. Anything is possible in math and science!

Applications are due in October 2008 for the 2009 program.


Obama: Science in science classrooms, please

April 14, 2008

We haven’t persuaded the candidates to discuss science policy, though it directly affects health care policy, the war in Iraq, climate change, and housing.  That scrappy little newspaper in York, Pennsylvania got Barack Obama to go on the record against teaching intelligent design, though.

Obama gave about five minutes to a reporter from the York Daily Record, the paper that led the nation in reporting on the Kitzmiller case.  They scooped again:

Q: York County was recently in the news for a lawsuit involving the teaching of intelligent design. What’s your attitude regarding the teaching of evolution in public schools?

A: “I’m a Christian, and I believe in parents being able to provide children with religious instruction without interference from the state.

But I also believe our schools are there to teach worldly knowledge and science. I believe in evolution, and I believe there’s a difference between science and faith. That doesn’t make faith any less important than science.

It just means they’re two different things. And I think it’s a mistake to try to cloud the teaching of science with theories that frankly don’t hold up to scientific inquiry.”

Has either Clinton or McCain gone on the record on the issue yet?

Tip of the old scrub brush to the blogs of the Dallas Morning News.


Jeffrey Sachs: Pricing can’t cure all environmental ills

April 14, 2008

Natural resources people — foresters, river masters, biologists, botanists, agronomists, farmers, rock climbers and miners — understand almost instinctively that wise management of natural resources takes a blend of wisdom in commercial sectors and by government. Still, every once in a while some newly-minted Ph.D. in economics, or some economist who recently learned that governments own 86% of the land in Nevada, put forth a “bold proposal” to let the markets resolve environmental issues. Let pricing do it, they say.

Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University, gives a short interview to the Wall Street Journal’s economics bloggers, in which he details why pricing cannot do the entire job, with examples:

Sachs: Pricing plays a role. Certainly with carbon emissions we need a price. But it’s almost never enough when we’re talking about really big technological changes. When you think of the computer industry and its roots in defense, when you think of the Internet with its root in defense and the National Science Foundation, when you think about drug development and the crucial role of the National Institutes of Health – one major industry after another has always relied, and needed to rely, on a mix of public and private actions.

When we’re talking about something as basic as a sustainable technology this is going to be inevitable. Think about how we’re going to climb out of the mess on nuclear power for example. We need a nuclear power industry in this country but it’s tied up in knots. Pricing by itself isn’t going to do it. There has to be public acceptability, there has to be sense of security that a regulatory framework, safe storage and nonproliferation protection is in place. These are just too complicated to be solved by a price.

For many other things, such as watershed management, there isn’t even a price that turns them into a market. The issues of watershed management involve different rights of upstream and downstream users, and different types of users. [like agriculture, households and industry.] The right price is going to be different. Pricing plays a role, but so does basic science, eminent domain, right of passage and liability.

Sachs is widely experienced in international economics, and in alternative economics. As an advocate of free markets generally, he’s pretty deep into development ideas. You won’t always agree with his opinions, but you’d do well to pay attention to what he says and the data upon which he bases his opinions.

Teachers, this is a short answer that covers a wealth of issues in your economics courses.


Bedbugs, DDT

April 13, 2008

Bedbugs came back.

Common bedbug, Cimex lectularius, University of Minnesota image

Common bedbug, Cimex lectularius, University of Minnesota image

Once a scourge, bedbugs seemed to have gone away, largely, during most of the past 30 years, in most of the western world. International travel and other conducive conditions joined in the perfect storm, however, and bedbug infestation reports are rising in places like New York City.

A significant number of news stories on the topic mention DDT, which was briefly the pesticide of choice against bedbugs. Probably a majority of the blog posts on the topic call for a return of DDT for general use.

This blog is a refreshing exception: New York vs. Bed Bugs, “No DDT, thanks, we’re good.”

Update: In comments, Bug Girl suggests we look at the blog of Bedbugger, and especially this interview with an entomologist.  Take a look — the expert, Dr. James W. Austin of Texas A&M, says bedbugs are about 100% resistant to DDT.


Geologist finds meteor crater – on Google Earth

April 11, 2008

Geologist Arthur Hickman used Google Earth to look at part of Australia he was studying. In the satellite photos provided by Google Earth, Hickman noticed something no one else had seen: An impact crater.

Hickman Crater, Australia

For his alertness, Hickman had the 270-meter crater named after him.


Science funding: Kicking our future away

April 9, 2008

Drat.

We get Charlie Rose’s program late here — generally after midnight. I’m up to my ears with charitable organization duties (“Just Say No!”), work where I came in midstream, family health issues, and other typical aggravations of trying live a well-examined life.

I caught most of an hour discussion on science in America, featuring Sir Paul Nurse, president of Rockefeller University and Nobel laureate, Bruce Alberts, editor of Science, Shirley Ann Jackson, president of  Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Harold Varmus, Nobel winner and president of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, and Lisa Randall, the Harvard nuclear physicist (string theory).

It was a great policy discussion. It had great humor, and great wisdom. And at the end, Rose thanked Nurse and others for helping him put on a 13-part seminar on science policy.

Thirteen parts? And I caught just the last few minutes of #13?

There is the Charlie Rose archives! Here’s the show I caught, “The Imperative of Science.” Great discussion. Scary — Lisa Randall notes that the action in physics has moved to CERN, in Europe, and the search for the Higgs Boson. Varmus and Nurse talk about restrictions in funding that bite at our ability to keep the world lead in education and science. Educators, especially in science, should watch.

Are we kicking away our ability to lead in technology, health care, and other vital economic areas? One cannot help but wonder in listening to these people discuss the difficulty of getting support for critical research during the Bush administration. They each stressed the hope that the next president will be one literate in science.

Pfizer underwrote the series. The entire series is available for viewing at a site Pfizer set up(Signs of change:  Notice that physics is represented by two women; there are signs of hope in American science.)

Go see, from Pfizer’s website on the series:

The Charlie Rose Science Series

  • Episode 1: The Brain — Exploring the human brain from psychoanalysis to cutting edge research.
  • Episode 2: The Human Genome — Exploring the contributions that have been made to science through the discovering and mapping of human DNA.
  • Episode 3: Longevity — An in-depth discussion of longevity and aging from the latest research on calorie restriction, anti-aging drugs, genetic manipulation to the social and economic implications of an increase in human life span. (Longevity News Release)
  • Episode 4: Cancer — A discussion of the latest advances in cancer, from the genetics to cancer prevention, early detection, diagnosis, treatment and management of care. (Cancer News Release)
  • Episode 5: Stem Cells — A roundtable discussion on the latest advances in embryonic and adult stem cell research, their implications, and potential to change the way medicine is practiced.
  • Episode 6: Obesity — An informative dialogue on the growing obesity epidemic, its impact on overall health and the latest research to help understand, treat and prevent obesity. (Obesity News Release)
  • Episode 7: HIV/AIDS — A panel of leading experts addresses current treatment and prevention strategies, and new medical breakthroughs being used in the fight against HIV/AIDS. (HIV/AIDS News Release)
  • Episode 8: Pandemics — An exploration of factors that could create a global pandemic and how the science and public health leaders are addressing the crisis. (Pandemics News Release)
  • Episode 9: Heart Disease — A panel of experts explores the biology and genetics of cardiovascular disease, prevention and treatment, the development of medical, surgical and interventional therapies and steps individuals can take toward a heart-healthy lifestyle. (Heart Disease News Release)
  • Episode 10: Global Health — A roundtable discussion on initiatives aimed at fighting infectious diseases, protecting women and children, and strengthening global public health systems. (Global Health News Release)
  • Episode 11: Human Sexuality — A panel of experts explores major trends in human sexual behavior, sexual desire and satisfaction, and sexual dysfunction issues. (Human Sexuality News Release)

I wish all news programs covered science so well, and made their material so readily available.


Why Rats, Lice and History is a great book

April 7, 2008

Gerald Weissman wrote a solid review of Hans Zinsser’s Rats, Lice and History in the journal Emerging Infectious Diseases. The review appeared two years ago, but I just found it.

It’s hard nowadays to reread the work of de Kruif or Sinclair Lewis without a chuckle or two over their quaint locution, but Zinsser’s raffiné account of lice and men remains a delight. Written in 1935 as a latter-day variation on Laurence Sterne’s The Life and Opinions of Tristam Shandy, Zinsser’s book gives a picaresque account of how the history of the world has been shaped by epidemics of louseborne typhus. He sounded a tocsin against microbes in the days before antibiotics, and his challenge remains meaningful today: “Infectious disease is one of the few genuine adventures left in the world. The dragons are all dead and the lance grows rusty in the chimney corner. . . . About the only sporting proposition that remains unimpaired by the relentless domestication of a once free-living human species is the war against those ferocious little fellow creatures, which lurk in dark corners and stalk us in the bodies of rats, mice and all kinds of domestic animals; which fly and crawl with the insects, and waylay us in our food and drink and even in our love”

If you’ve not read Zinsser’s book, this review will give you lots of reasons why you should.  They don’t write history like this for high schools, though they should:

Despite the unwieldy subtitle “Being a study in biography, which, after twelve preliminary chapters indispensable for the preparation of the lay reader, deals with the life history of TYPHUS FEVER,” Rats, Lice and History became an international critical and commercial success. Zinsser’s romp through the ancient and modern worlds describes how epidemics devastated the Byzantines under Justinian, put Charles V atop the Holy Roman Empire, stopped the Turks at the Carpathians, and turned Napoleon’s Grand Armée back from Moscow. He explains how the louse, the ubiquitous vector of typhus, was for most of human history an inevitable part of existence, “like baptism, or smallpox”; its habitat extended from hovel to throne. And after that Murder in the Cathedral, the vectors deserted Thomas à Becket: “The archbishop was murdered in Canterbury Cathedral on the evening of the twenty-ninth of December [1170]. The body lay in the Cathedral all night, and was prepared for burial on the following day…. He had on a large brown mantle; under it, a white surplice; below that, a lamb’s-wool coat; then another woolen coat; and a third woolen coat below this; under this, there was the black, cowled robe of the Benedictine Order; under this, a shirt; and next to the body a curious hair-cloth, covered with linen. As the body grew cold, the vermin that were living in this multiple covering started to crawl out, and, as … the chronicler quoted, ‘The vermin boiled over like water in a simmering cauldron, and the onlookers burst into alternate weeping and laughter …'”

Add to FacebookAdd to NewsvineAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Furl


Scientists look at origin of life and RNA world issues, the Cambrian, evolution of legs, and human evolution

April 6, 2008

Some scientists are not slowed much by the creationist assault on evolution and other science education.

While we’ve been talking here, people like Andrew Ellington are advancing the science with regard to what we know about origin of life and “RNA world” issues. See “Misperceptions meet state of the art in evolution research,” from Ars Technica. For speed’s sake, and accuracy, I’ll quote extensively from John Timmer’s article at Ars Technica.

Four scientists laid out the state of the art in their respective fields in a session sponsored by the American Association for the Advancement of Science’s Dialog on Science, Ethics, and Religion, in late February 2008, at AAAS’s annual meeting. [Where? I don’t know.] Andrew Ellington spoke about origin of life research, Douglas Erwin explained new findings on fossils from the Cambrian, Ted Daeschler detailed the state of knowledge about how fish turned into tetrapods on land, and John Relethford addressed human evolution.

The discussion of life’s origins was handled by Andy Ellington of the University of Texas – Austin. He started by noting that simply defining life is as much of a philosophical question as a biological one. He settled on the following: “a self replicating system capable of Darwinian evolution,” and focused on getting from naturally forming chemicals to that point.

Ellington noted that chemicals necessary for life can and do form without living things. He said research shows that the first replicating chemicals led to the first reproducing life forms. And finally, he said that RNA activities reveal a lot about how the “RNA World” — before DNA — could function and carry on without DNA, which is in all known life forms today.

RNA ligase ribozyme, from Ars Technica

An RNA ligase ribozyme

[More, below the fold]

Read the rest of this entry »


Pomposity squared: Ben Stein and R. C. Sproul

April 4, 2008

Via Heart of Flesh, a half-hour conversation between Ben Stein and the often-pompous R. C. Sproul of Ligonier Ministries. Sproul had Stein in the studio to promote the mockumentary film Stein stars in, “Expelled!”

Stein continues to reveal the religious nature of intelligent design advocacy, all the time complaining science doesn’t pay enough attention.

At what point does irony veer into hypocrisy? I think that point’s long past for these guys.

Vodpod videos no longer available. from heartofflesh.wordpress.com posted with vodpod

Ω Ω Ω Ω Ω

Anyone vaguely familiar with the science of astronomy, or cosmology, or physics, or biology, may want to get a bullet to chew on before clicking “play.” It’s that bad.

But what is this? Sproul disowns the movie? It may be that the movie, devoid of science as it is, is still too sciency for Sproul. Here’s how Sproul’s writers put it in his blog:

As our readers may already know, Dr. Sproul frequently challenges the unbiblical and irrational theories of Darwinian evolution in print and through lectures. While we were waiting for Mr. Stein to arrive for the interview, Dr. Sproul mentioned to the crew that he took some time in between book projects back in the early 90s. He was doing some recreational reading and ended up writing another book, Not A Chance: The Myth of Chance in Modern Science and Cosmology.

It is important to note that during this free exchange of ideas, not all of the opinions expressed by Mr. Stein in the interview are the views of Ligonier Ministries. Christians should recognize that the argument from design does not necessarily prove the Genesis view of creation. We are not part of the Intelligent Design movement, but certainly share similar concerns for freedom of speech and inquiries into cosmology. Our foremost concern is to uphold the inerrancy and inspiration of the Bible and the authority of our Creator.

Don’t you love it? Super Sproul figures out the laws of chance in physics and chemistry in his spare time, probably in his game room between foosball challenges from the grandkids.

Sproul’s blog also reveals there is another part to this interview.

R. C. Sproul should do a public service some day. He ought to interview P. Z. Myers for an hour, and then interview Ken Miller for an hour (he can disclaim science later in his blog, if he chooses). Better yet, Sproul should have Myers and Miller each spend a week at Ligonier Ministries teaching theologians about biology.

I wager Sproul doesn’t have the fortitude to do something like that. Rants can’t stand the facts. Sproul’s genius is making his rants in a quieter voice, so they don’t sound as irrational as they are.

At about 14:40 into the interview, Stein says “There are very few places where more nonsense is spoken than universities.” First, one wonders why Stein and the movie’s producers want so badly to be seen as part of that university community?

Second, this interview demonstrates Stein’s error — there are lots of places more nonsense is spoken, including anywhere Sproul’s interview with Stein is aired.

In the universities, at least they strive for accuracy and honesty.

ID expelled? No.  Flunked.  Yes.
Buy the bumper sticker!

Cocoa buyers stand against DDT use in Uganda

April 1, 2008

Stephen Milloy can’t even herd his own cats — why should we listen to him?

While Milloy proclaims junk science and loudly impugns the reputation of a dead woman (Rachel Carson), it’s his business colleagues who demand Uganda avoid DDT, not environmentalists.

New Vision in Kampala reports that a local council has rejected DDT use, and told Uganda’s government the reasons why:

Bundibugyo district council has rejected the Government’s programme of indoor residual spraying of DDT.

During a council meeting last Wednesday, the councillors argued that the anti-malaria project would scare away organic cocoa buyers.

According to the LC5 chairman, Jackson Bambalira, Olam and Esko, the cocoa buyers, threatened to stop buying the produce if the area was sprayed with DDT.

“We know that malaria is a number one killer disease in our district but we have no option. The Government should look for another alternative of containing malaria by supplying mosquito nets but not spraying DDT.”

You and I know that indoor residential spraying (IRS) shouldn’t harm crops in any way, even if DDT is the pesticide used. Can the cocoa growers and buyers be convinced DDT won’t get into their products?

How many stories like this have to appear before the anti-environmentalists stop their unholy campaign against Rachel Carson? Complaining, falsely, about evils of environmentalism doesn’t save anyone from malaria, especially when it’s not environmentalists blocking the campaign against the disease.