Explanation from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation:
See the Gates Foundation site, “Can we really eradicate malaria?”
How many times do they call for a return to DDT?
What do you think?
Eradicate malaria – here’s how
May 24, 2009
3 Comments | 
Africa, Asia, Disease, Health care, Malaria, Politics, Public health | Tagged: Africa, Gates Foundation, Health care, Malaria, Politics, Public health | 
Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
War on malaria: Wall Street Journal and bloggers side with malaria
May 24, 2009It’s spring. Each of the past four years, spring has been the time that the anti-Rachel Carson, anti-environmental protection, anti-environmentalist, pro-DDT groups throttle up their campaigns to impugn Carson and environmentalists, and argue that all we need to do is poison Africa to make the world safe from malaria.
Here’s where Col. Renault joins us from Casablanca to say “Round up the usual suspects.” It’s spring 2009. Henry I. Miller of the Hoover Institution could be along any moment to say we need DDT to fight West Nile Virus, though DDT is not the pesticide of choice even among pesticide professionals.
The Wall Street Journal has become a favorite venue for these poison-the-Earthers as it has left rational policy decisions behind, at least in the editorial and op-ed pages. Steven Milloy’s got a book out slandering environmentalists, Green Hell, and a new blog to promote the book. No doubt someone will trot out Gordon Edwards’ Lyndon-Larouche-tainted claims against Rachel Carson, though none of them check out.
Sure enough, Green Hell blog picks it up repeating the old canard about how a day without DDT is like a day of genocide. You can’t teach a stupid dog new tricks, you know. In a post title that drips with calumny, Milloy says “Greens re-boot African genocide.” They have no case; smears must do the work.
Let’s dissect the WSJ piece, eh?
In 2006, after 25 years and 50 million preventable deaths, the World Health Organization reversed course and endorsed widespread use of the insecticide DDT to combat malaria. So much for that. Earlier this month, the U.N. agency quietly reverted to promoting less effective methods for attacking the disease. The result is a victory for politics over public health, and millions of the world’s poor will suffer as a result.
So much error in so little space! The error-to-word ratio may be a new land speed record.
Were there 2 million deaths per year from malaria, we could say malaria killed 50 million people in the last 25 years. But for many, or most of the past 35 years, the death rate has hovered around 1 million, sometimes lower. That’s still too high for those of us who think malaria should be beaten, but it’s not 2 million a year. WSJ exaggerates the death figures — what else do they exaggerate? If they have a case, why do they need to exaggerate?
WHO never abandoned DDT for specific uses. There was no policy for WHO to reverse in 2006. WHO made it clear that they would continue to use DDT where appropriate, and where local governments would allow. WSJ, new to the business of caring about Africans afflicted by malaria, doesn’t know the history.
DDT’s effectiveness against malaria-carrying mosquitoes began to wane by 1950. By the mid-1960s, many populations of mosquitoes had developed resistance and even immunity to DDT. That was why the World Health Organization (WHO) abandoned its campaign to eradicate malaria. Overuse of DDT, especially in agriculture, led to rapid evolution of resistance among mosquitoes. Without a weapon that worked as DDT had worked before resistance, the campaign could not succeed.
The Journal is simply wrong when it says only less-effective methods are left. DDT’s greatly reduced effectiveness is part of the reason; but research over the past five years, in tests run broadly in several African nations, shows that bednets reduce malaria infections by between 50% and 85%. That is much more effective than DDT in broadcast spraying.
One of the things WSJ fails to mention — maybe they don’t know, there is much demonstration of ignorance in the editorial — is that DDT is not used in broadcast spraying to fight malaria. Such campaigns proved disastrous because they killed off the predators of mosquitoes more effectively than they killed the mosquitoes, and because they often produced harmful results in other ways. Along some African rivers, the spraying campaigns killed off a lot of fish local people used for food. The dangers of DDT have been demonstrated in Africa.
WHO had championed a campaign in the late 1950s and 1960s to eradicate malaria. The strategy was to use DDT to knock down local mosquito populations for six months or a year, and in that time treat humans infected with the malaria parasites so that, when the mosquitoes came back, there would be no pool of malaria infection among humans from which to draw malaria to spread.
Alas, the overuse of DDT caused mosquitoes to develop resistance before the malaria-fighters could get into the field in some places and get the health care components of the campaign to work.
Because of the worldwide resistance to DDT among insects, DDT cannot be counted on as a panacea against malaria in any case. While it was never the panacea, never the sole tool to beat the disease, its role has been dramatically reduced by the rise of resistance to the chemical.
The U.N. now plans to advocate for drastic reductions in the use of DDT, which kills or repels the mosquitoes that spread malaria. The aim “is to achieve a 30% cut in the application of DDT worldwide by 2014 and its total phase-out by the early 2020s, if not sooner,” said WHO and the U.N. Environment Program in a statement on May 6.
Citing a five-year pilot program that reduced malaria cases in Mexico and South America by distributing antimalaria chloroquine pills to uninfected people, U.N. officials are ready to push for a “zero DDT world.” Sounds nice, except for the facts. It’s true that chloroquine has proven effective when used therapeutically, as in Brazil. But it’s also true that scientists have questioned the safety of the drug as an oral prophylactic because it is toxic and has been shown to cause heart problems.
Where was the Wall Street Journal when these studies were proposed, when they were run, and when they were reported? WHO and health care agencies in affected countries carefully worked to find non-DDT solutions to malaria. All programs to fight malaria require good health care systems, to diagnose malaria in victims, accurately as to the form of parasite affecting the victim, and to treat the disease to restore health to the victim and remove that person from the pool of people from whom mosquitoes can draw new malaria to infect others. The results are in. The treatment works. Now comes WSJ to pose questions that have already been answered? They are too late, and wrong.
Most malarial deaths occur in sub-Saharan Africa, where chloroquine once worked but started failing in the 1970s as the parasite developed resistance.
Fascinating. In discussions with the pro-DDTers, resistance of mosquitoes to DDT is generally denied. But here the WSJ cites similar resistance by the parasite. Remember, dear reader, that the DDTers are selective in their use of evidence.
Even if the drugs were still effective in Africa, they’re expensive and thus impractical for one of the world’s poorest regions. That’s not an argument against chloroquine, bed nets or other interventions. But it is an argument for continuing to make DDT spraying a key part of any effort to eradicate malaria, which kills about a million people — mainly children — every year. Nearly all of this spraying is done indoors, by the way, to block mosquito nesting at night. It is not sprayed willy-nilly in jungle habitat.
DDT is more expensive than bednets. DDT is used now only for indoor residual spraying (IRS). Hut walls are treated with DDT to kill or repel mosquitoes after they have already bitten a victim; this prevents the spread of some parasites, at least in the bodies of the mosquitoes killed. IRS requires some expensive work, however. First, analysis of the mosquitoes must be done to be sure DDT is effective; annd second, a professional or highly-trained person must apply the stuff. DDT applications have to be repeated about every six months. They cost about $12.00 each time. IRS may decrease malaria infection by as much as 35% (I’m being liberal).
In contrast, bednets decrease malaria infection by 50% to 85%. They cost about $10.00 for the expensive ones, and they last five years. In tests and in practice in Africa over the past five years, bednets have proven to be a necessary and very effective method to fight malaria. Bednets work without DDT (there are alternative chemicals available for IRS); DDT can’t work without bednets.
There is strong opposition to use of DDT even for IRS, in Uganda, for example, where cotton and tobacco farmers have sued to stop the use. In other areas, local people still fear fish kills. DDT is controversial because of local opposition to it, not because of any environmental group’s action.
And the net result is that DDT is not the cheapest nor most effective method to fight malaria. It is an increasingly expensive, controversial, and decreasingly effective tool.
But here is the bottom line: Unless malaria is wiped out in human hosts, there will always be mosquitoes ready to spread the disease from one infected human to a dozen uninfected humans. The key to eliminating malaria is not killing every mosquito on Earth, as quixotic a goal as that may be; the key is to develop methods of curing humans quickly and well and interrupting the life cycle of the parasite. Drugs are expensive? DDT cannot substitute for drugs, regardless how cheap it is.
WHO is not saying that DDT shouldn’t be used. But by revoking its stamp of approval, it sends a clear message to donors and afflicted countries that it prefers more politically correct interventions, even if they don’t work as well. In recent years, countries like Uganda, Tanzania and Zambia have started or expanded DDT spraying, often with the help of outside aid groups. But these governments are also eager to remain in the U.N.’s good graces, and donors typically are less interested in funding interventions that WHO discourages.
These campaigns have provided little success against malaria — nothing on the scale of success of bednets.
Oddly, one of the greatest roadblocks to the use of DDT in Africa since 2000 was the Bush administration, which refused to allow any U.S. dollars for the purchase of DDT or treatment. There are foggy signs the Bush policies eased in 2008. But again, it may simply be that the opportunity to use DDT is gone. It’s time to move on to fight malaria, and quit tilting at the DDT windmill.
“Sadly, WHO’s about-face has nothing to do with science or health and everything to do with bending to the will of well-placed environmentalists,” says Roger Bate of Africa Fighting Malaria. “Bed net manufacturers and sellers of less-effective insecticides also don’t benefit when DDT is employed and therefore oppose it, often behind the scenes.”
Roger Bate acts as a shill for malaria over recent years. Despite the name of his organization, he stands opposed to any effective means of fighting malaria, and he always stands for poisoning Africa. His claims here are directly contradicted by the results of campaigns run by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, a group which has dedicated its time and an astounding amount of money to beating malaria. Bill Gates has no axe to grind on the issue — the foundation encourages bednets and medical care, and is relatively silent about DDT. The Foundation’s work has saved more lives in the past three years than Roger Bate has in more than a decade of promoting DDT. The Gates Foundation clearly is more credible.
All other serious experts tend to agree with the Gates Foundation path as well.
It’s no coincidence that WHO officials were joined by the head of the U.N. Environment Program to announce the new policy. There’s no evidence that spraying DDT in the amounts necessary to kill dangerous mosquitoes imperils crops, animals or human health. But that didn’t stop green groups like the Pesticide Action Network from urging the public to celebrate World Malaria Day last month by telling “the U.S. to protect children and families from malaria without spraying pesticides like DDT inside people’s homes.”
Pesticide Action Network is probably the only so-called green organization as crazy against DDT as Roger Bate is crazy for DDT. Ignore what they say. Pay attention to what’s really going on. (See comments on PAN.) DDT is dangerous — PAN, for any inaccuracies they may have, are more accurate than the pro-p0ison side.
The National Academy of Sciences did a serious study of DDT in the late 1970s, and in a publication on the future of such chemicals in 1980, NAS said that while DDT was at one time a near-miracle working chemical, it is more dangerous than its benefits justify, and it needs to be eliminated from use. The entire world has been working to protect people from dangerous man-made chemicals. The Persistent Organic Pesticides Treaty of 2001 (POPs) calls for an end to use of dangerous chemicals, and singles out a dozen of the most dangerous. DDT is among the dozen most dangerous. POPs includes a waiver to allow DDT use for fighting disease, so even it does not ban the stuff. History shows that DDT decreases in effectiveness, and we discover new dangers from the stuff almost every year. Since we have effective alternatives, and since DDT use has been hamstrung by litigation in Africa and ineffectiveness in the field, now is a great opportunity to end DDT use with very little harmful effect.
“We must take a position based on the science and the data,” said WHO’s malaria chief, Arata Kochi, in 2006. “One of the best tools we have against malaria is indoor residual spraying. Of the dozen or so insecticides WHO has approved as safe for house spraying, the most effective is DDT.” Mr. Kochi was right then, even if other WHO officials are now bowing to pressure to pretend otherwise.
Kochi was right to call for IRS then — and since we now have effective alternatives to DDT to use in IRS, WHO is right again to call for a reduction in DDT use in 2009. We must take a position based on the science and the data, after all.
DDT is less effective than alternatives, and more expensive. DDT is a killer once released in the wild. DDT is unnecessarily controversial where it might do the most good, and therefore even less effective than it might be. How can the Wall Street Journal come to any different conclusion, if they’re looking at the economics and science? Who would have suspected political string-pulling at WSJ?
Rachel Carson was right. 47 years after Silent Spring is not too soon to eliminate DDT use.
___________
Here’s one indicator of the silly and bizarre exaggerations pro-DDT people tend to use: This guy claims DDT had eliminated polio. In an otherwise over-the-top claim that Rachel Carson is a mass murderer — a claim that is false in all respects — the author goes even farther, claiming DDT effectiveness as a pharmaceutical against a disease like polio where there is no record for DDT’s ever having been used.
____________
Even more flight from reality: Climate Change Fraud blog, a site that appears to be a haven for anti-science, reprinted the WSJ editorial and added a bogus history introduction. And another addition to the Wall of Shame: Black and Right.
7 Comments | Africa, Biology, Cost of Green, DDT, Disease, Green Politics, Health care, History, Malaria, Politics, Science | Tagged: Africa, Cost of Green, DDT, Disease, Green Politics, Health care, Malaria, Pesticides, Politics, Rachel Carson, Science, Silent Spring | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
McLeroy and catfish
May 22, 2009Seen at the TFN blog, Insider:
Call your state senator, Texans! Let them know McLeroy should not be confirmed as chair of the State Board of Education. Find your state senator and how to contact her or him here.
1 Comment | Humor, Politics, State school boards, Texas, Texas Freedom Network, Texas Lege | Tagged: Don McLeroy, Politics, Science, Social Studies, Texas Freedom Network, Texas Legislature | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Man the ramparts: Texans, call your legislators!
May 22, 2009Texans, the information on finding your state representative and state senator are below — call them, today.
In a surprise move, the Senate has moved the nomination of Don McLeroy to the floor for an up-and-down vote.
McLeroy has ushered in a new era of bitter, partisan and divisive politics to the State Board of Education. In the past year he has insulted English teachers, citizens of Hispanic descent, unnecessarily gutted a good mathematics text from the approved list (just to show he can do it), and done his best to butcher science education standards for Texas. He suspended work on new social studies curricula because, in part, he doesn’t like the term “capitalism,” insisting on “free enterprise” instead, contrary to almost all scholarly writing on the topic.
The man is a menace to education. He uses wedge political issues to divide educators from parents, parents from schools, schools from the community, students from teachers, and education from propaganda.
I quote the entirety of the post from Texas Freedom Network’s Insider blog, below, to explain:
UPDATE: Click here to see video of the committee vote.
In a surprise meeting on the Senate floor, the Senate Nominations Committee in Austin has just approved the appointment of Don McLeroy as chairman of the Texas State Board of Education. It appears that McLeroy’s supporters plan to bring his confirmation to the full Senate early next week. Confirmation will require a two-thirds vote.
Committee Chairman Mike Jackson, R-La Porte, had said he would not bring up McLeroy’s confirmation for a vote in committee unless he thought there were enough votes to get it in the full Senate. We don’t know at this point whether opposition from nearly all Democrats and some Republicans has softened, but the signs are alarming.
If you haven’t done so already, it’s critical that you contact your senator and tell him or her that you oppose McLeroy’s confirmation. You can find the name and contact information for your senator here.
Texas Freedom Network President Kathy Miller has released the following statement:
“If the Texas Senate genuinely cares about quality public education, they will reject as state board chairman a man who apparently agrees that parents who want to teach their kids about evolution are monsters. And we’ll see whether senators really want a chairman who presides over a board that is so focused on ‘culture war’ battles that it has made Texas look like an educational backwater to the rest of the country.”
Gov. Perry appointed McLeroy board chairman in July 2007. Since then, the board has turned debates over language arts and science curriculum standards in “culture war” battlegrounds. Chairman McLeroy has also endorsed a book that says parents who want to teach children about evolution are “monsters” and calls clergy who see no conflict between faith and science “morons.” This spring McLeroy led other creationists on the state board in adopting new science curriculum standards that call the scientific consensus on evolution into question and no longer include references to scientific estimates of the age of the universe.
1 Comment | Creationism, Education, Evolution, Politics, Rampant stupidity, Science, Texas, Texas Citizens for Science, Texas Freedom Network, Texas Lege, Textbooks | Tagged: Creationism, Don McLeroy, Education, Education reform, Evolution, Politics, Rampant stupidity, Science, Texas, Texas Citizens for Science, Texas Freedom Network, Texas Legislature, Texas State Board of Education | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Wingnuttery to a higher dimension: Obama’s citizenship
May 20, 2009I can’t believe there are still people out there who argue that President Obama is not eligible to be president, and who still refuse to look at the evidence.
Here’s a measure of how far down in the barrel they have to scrape to keep this issue alive: Check out this blog by a New Mexico paralegal who is a source for World Net Daily. A nation loaded with good Constitutional scholars in law schools, history departments, political science departments and public affairs and management schools, and WND finds an obscure paralegal in New Mexico instead, to get the lowdown on U.S. law on citizenship.
There’s a sucker born every minute, but WND’s philosophy is that anyone can act like a sucker if you work hard enough at it. WND is working very hard.
Other comments at MFB
4 Comments | Accuracy, Barack Obama, Citizenship, Elections, Jurisprudence, Law, Politics, President Obama, Rampant stupidity | Tagged: Dirty Tricks, Electoral College, Obama's Citizenship, Politics, Presidential Election, Rampant stupidity, World Net Daily | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Gun site shoots down flag discussion
May 16, 2009At The Firing Line.com, you can discuss all things firearms. But discussions on patriotic displays are “off topic.”
And, by the way, if you are curious about how to properly fold the Ohio state flag, or any other state flag, you’ll find links to the instructions courtesy of Millard Fillmore’s Bathtub, here.
There’s no requirement that a firearms site allow discussions of flag folding and flag display, but cutting off the discussion seems a little curt, to me.
Ohio and U.S. flags fly at a Cleveland courthouse. Photo by Gretchenaro, Scene in Cleveland
1 Comment | Flag ceremony, Flag etiquette, Patriotism, Politics, State flag | Tagged: Flag etiquette, Folding the Ohio flag, Patriotism, Politics | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
History: May 15, 1963, President’s council vindicates Rachel Carson, warns of pesticide dangers
May 15, 2009President John F. Kennedy’s Science Advisory Council (PSAC) studied Rachel Carson’s best-selling book, Silent Spring, checking it for scientific accuracy. Kennedy read the book himself, but sought expert advice before doing anything. Meanwhile, DDT manufacturers bankrolled an extensive public relations campaign claiming DDT was safe, and suggesting Carson was less than a careful writer and scientist.
On May 15, 1963, PSAC reported: Carson was right. Pesticides were being misused, even abused, and some pesticides like DDT presented significant threats to the environment. “The Use of Pesticides” recommended increased government scrutiny of the safety and efficacy of pesticides, and vindicated Carson’s reporting of science findings.
Library of Congress described the event and its import in America’s Library, “Meet Amazing Americans”:
The Consequences of Silent Spring
Reading Carson’s book changed many people’s ideas about the environment and inspired some to take action. People wrote to their representatives in congress and asked them to do something about the misuse of pesticides. When several senators created a committee to research environmental dangers, they asked Carson to speak to them about pesticides. Carson recommended that the government regulate and reduce pesticide use, and that it ban the most toxic pesticides. She said that a citizen of the United States had the right “to be secure in his own home against the intrusion of poisons applied by other persons.”
President Kennedy understood the importance of Carson’s book. He asked his Science Advisory Committee to research Carson’s claims in Silent Spring. In 1963 the Committee released a report called “The Uses of Pesticides.” It supported Silent Spring. Environmental activists continued to push the government to regulate pesticides. Changes in federal law in 1964 required companies to prove that something did not cause harm before they could sell it. In 1972, activists pushed for and won a ban on DDT, the pesticide that started Carson’s research for Silent Spring. And in 1970 the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was created “in response to the growing public demand for cleaner water, air and land.” Who knows what the world would be like today if Rachel Carson had not written Silent Spring?
Some radicals argue that Rachel Carson’s legacy is tarnished, that she was in error about DDT, and somehow that translates into many deaths as a result of malaria, as if DDT worked against malaria parasites themselves. With such a strong propaganda campaign of disinformation plaguing us today, we do well to pause and remember that Carson’s work was subjected to intense, careful scrutiny by scientists from the start. Carson’s reporting was accurate, and her legacy of environmental protection and saving lives should be celebrated.
Teaching Resource: Role play simulation, “Advisory Committee on Pesticides 1963,” (see especially the list of historic and scientific resources available for study and for the simulation, from Douglas Allchin).
Rachel Carson in the ocean in Florida, 1955 – photo, R. G. Schmidt, USFWS
Updates, January 2013:
More, from 2013:
- New Rachel Carson Biography (Book Acquired, 11.13.2012) (biblioklept.org)
- Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring at 50: Catalog of tributes (timpanogos.wordpress.com)
- Rachel Carson biography, On a Farther Shore, one of best books of 2012 (timpanogos.wordpress.com)
- Margaret Atwood: Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, 50 years on (guardian.co.uk)
- Scientists hate the GOP for a reason (salon.com)
- Still no ban on DDT: Treaty monitors allow DDT use to continue (timpanogos.wordpress.com)
3 Comments | Cost of Green, DDT, Environmental protection, Green Politics, History, Politics, Rachel Carson, Science | Tagged: Biology, DDT, Environmental protection, Green Politics, History, Politics, President Kennedy, Rachel Carson, Science, Silent Spring | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Oh, this will get some attention at the water cooler
May 15, 2009Scouting is one of the most vulnerable victims of wedge politics and attempts to polarize voters. Even among veteran Scouts and Scouters, lines tend to get drawn over what the program should be doing.
Today the New York Times headlines a story, “Scouts Train to Fight Terrorists, and more.”
It’s Explorers, a group which has been distanced from Boy Scouts by moving it to BSA’s Learning for Life programs. These are not traditional Boy Scouts. I suspect that distinction, small as it is, will get blurred quickly.
It will be interesting to watch discussions about Scouts pictured with semi-automatic weapons and bullet-proof vests.
Exploring used to be more closely related to Scouting. Exploring was for kids 14 years and older. I belonged to an Explorer Post in Utah that specialized in kayaking (I was more active at the council level at the time), and I had the grand opportunity to work with a large Explorer Post affiliated with AMR Corp. (American Airlines), where some of our Scouts got significant time in aircraft simulators (in the good old days, when such machines had downtime). It was a great program.
That was then. Today, 14-21-year-old Scouts can join Venture Crews, which can be co-ed. The old Exploring program you remember survives today mostly in Venturing.
10 Comments | Boy Scouts of America, Illegal Immigrants, Immigration, Politics, Terrorism | Tagged: Border Patrol, Boy Scouts of America, Explorer Scouts, Homeland Security, Immigration, Law Enforcement, Politics, Terrorism | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Congratulations, Judge Davidian
April 28, 2009Ben Davidian, Jr., will be sworn in as a judge for the Superior Court for Sacramento County this afternoon. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger appointed him to the post about a month ago.
Texas is testing, so I won’t be traveling.
We wish Ben well in his new post. We are also redoubling our efforts to archive the Ben Davidian stories we have collected over these last 30+ years, for the retirement ceremony. Alan Ingersoll, Evelyn Earl Jeffries, Patty Hulce and I will hold the Davidian archives open for contributions. We’ve already got the files from Bae Gardner and J. D. Williams, from the University of Utah’s Hinckley Institute of Politics, both of whom will be at the ceremony in Sacramento this afternoon.
Congratulations, Ben!
3 Comments | Family, Law, Personal, Politics | Tagged: Ben Davidian, Family, Law, Politics, Sacramento, University of Utah | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Putting the Tea Parties into the history books
April 24, 2009Ghost in the Machine has the story, really, “U.S. History for Dummies.” Well worth clicking over to read it in full.
But I also want to call attention to this brilliant graphic — a sort of photographic political cartoon, and it’s quietly, subtly, savage:
What things in this photograph were paid for by taxes?
Oh, there are a couple of inaccuracies — the phone lines were probably paid for by the telephone company, but eminent domain was used to get the easements in many cases. (Who did the photo and the captioning? Anyone know?)
Ben Sargent was a little less subtle, in the Austin American-Statesman, using that Oliver Wendell Holmes quote we looked at some time ago.
Ben Sargent, Austin American-Statesman, copyright 2009
8 Comments | Dissent, Political cartoons, Politics, Taxes | Tagged: Astro turf, Ben Sargent, Dissent, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Politics, Taxes, Tea Party | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Rachel Carson’s critics: No shame, no morals, no brains
April 18, 2009So, Friday night in Seattle (April 22) the anti-science, anti-environmental wackos will premiere a film. Among other things, the film claims Rachel Carson was wrong about DDT, but her Svengali-fu was so great that she persuaded John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Idi Amin, the National Academy of Sciences and a host of others to ban DDT needlessly, and that millions of people died from diseases the DDT could prevent at low cost and no harm.
The film premieres at an elementary school: Rachel Carson Elementary.
Get it? See the joke?
These wackos, Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney, have no shame about mocking the kids in second and third grade at that school who rightly look on Carson as a heroine and great human. Is it possible to be more cynical than that? Would it be possible for them to be bigger jerks about it?
The screening is sponsored by the right wing, and now clearly anti-science, Washington Policy Center.
McAleer and McElhinney are poster children for the decline of morality in America. They have no shame about bullying elementary school kids in their efforts to sully the good reputation of a great scientist and writer. Judging by their unfair and inaccurate screed against Carson and Al Gore, it appears they lack the moral sense to feel the shame. I can see their next film project now: They’ll do an exposé of how the brutal bank examiners forced bankers to live on only their salaries, foregoing the multi-million-dollar bonuses they deserved — and noting that malaria in Uganda now is worse because U.S. bankers are not compensated highly enough.
John Fund’s blog at the Wall Street Journal site has details.
Irish documentary filmmakers Phelim McAleer and Ann McElhinney have stirred up trouble before by debunking smug liberal hypocrisy. Their latest film, “Not Evil, Just Wrong” takes on the hysteria over global warming and warns that rushing to judgment in combating climate change would threaten the world’s poor.
The film reminds us that environmentalists have been wrong in the past, as when they convinced the world to ban the pesticide DDT, costing the lives of countless malaria victims. The ban was finally reversed by the World Health Organization only after decades of debate. The two Irish filmmakers argue that if Al Gore’s advice to radically reduce carbon emissions is followed, it would condemn to poverty two billion people in the world who have yet to turn on their first light switch.
* * * * * *
The two filmmakers are skilled at using provocative publicity tactics. On April 22, they will hold a public showing of their film at the Rachel Carson Elementary School in the suburbs of Seattle. “Since it was Rachel Carson who touched off the campaign to ban DDT, we thought showing ‘Not Evil, Just Wrong’ there would be appropriate,” says Mr. McAleer.
Local environmentalists will probably not appreciate the gesture and will be appalled that the school agreed to rent out its auditorium to the renegade skeptics. But somebody might point out that it’s not evil, just appropriate, to hold a debate about the real-world consequences of acting on global warming fears.
![[Al Gore]](https://i0.wp.com/s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/HC-FE048_Gore_20051014132846.gif)
The little Seattle Weekly has the good sense to call it for what it is.
As you may already know, April 22 is Earth Day. At noon, inside City Hall, the Seattle City Council will be showing a movie about Rachel Carson, the biologist whose book, Silent Spring, is frequently credited with spurring the modern environmental movement.
Meanwhile that same evening, at Rachel Carson Elementary School in Sammamish, conservative think tank the Washington Policy Center will be showing Not Evil Just Wrong: The True Cost of Global Warming Hysteria. (Tagline: “This is the film Al Gore and Hollywood don’t want you to see.”) It’s by the same folks who brought you that mining industry–funded classic, Mine Your Own Business. We know you’re in your grave. But you can roll over now, Ms. Carson.
That’s good news: The film showing at the Seattle City Council chamber is “A Sense of Wonder,” which will get more viewers in Seattle than the other film will get nationwide. (Presented by the Seattle City Council; 600 Fourth Street, Seattle; contact Phyllis Shulman, 206-684-8816; or see the council’s website; film shows at noon to 1:00 p.m., free admission.)
Of course, there is a little joke on these evil film makers McAleer and McIlhenny: The school isn’t just named after Rachel Carson, by popular vote of the children, it’s also green.
A total of 75 names were submitted by students. Nominees had to meet the district’s requirement of “deceased persons famous for their work in science, the humanities, letters, or education.” This list was narrowed to those that had more than one nomination, which left eight finalists. Those eight finalists were put on a ballot with a description of each nominee. Ballots were mailed to the families of children who will attend the new school next year.
A total of 320 students voted. The top three choices were Carson, Clara Barton and Amelia Earhart. The Lake Washington School District Board of Directors approved the use of any of those top three choices at its May 5 meeting. Shortly thereafter, Principal Mary Cronin received word that permission was granted to use the name of Rachel Carson. Frances Collin, literary agent for her estate, wrote that she believed Miss Carson would have been pleased.
In her writings, Carson encouraged people to discover and help children discover the wonder of the natural world. After earning a master’s degree in zoology, Carson spent 15 years working for the U.S. Government as a scientist and editor. She rose to Editor in Chief of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Her writing in her free time included many essays on the ocean. These essays led to three books about the ocean and a career as a science writer who shared her knowledge as well as her love of nature. One of those books, The Sea Around Us, won the National Book Award.
Carson’s concerns about the misuse of synthetic pesticides led to her book, Silent Spring, which sounded the alarm about the environmental impact of indiscriminate use of such powerful chemicals on nature. First serialized in the New Yorker magazine, it became a runaway best seller. Testifying before Congress in 1963, Carson asked for policies that that would protect against irreversible damage to humans and nature alike, urging study and consideration of safer alternatives.
Carson’s work led to the ban on most uses of DDT in the U.S. and a subsequent worldwide ban on DDT for agricultural use. The DDT ban has been cited as a major factor in the comeback of the bald eagle in the U.S. In 1980, Carson was posthumously awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
The new Rachel Carson Elementary will feature such environmentally friendly features as a green roof, extensive use of daylight and a geothermal heat pump. It is located at 1035 244th Ave. NE in Sammamish.
The school’s good practices contradict the preachings of the film makers. The elementary school kids have more sense than the climate change deniers and DDT-poisoned anti-environmentalists.
Oh. The anti-environmental film is named “Not Evil, Just Wrong.” When the film is done on its producers, it will carry an even shorter title: “Evil and Wrong.”
What would the film makers do if a bunch of 3rd graders from the school showed up at the screening, and in the Q&A after, asked, “Why are you telling such lies about Rachel Carson and Vice President Gore?”
3 Comments | Climate change, DDT, Environmental protection, Science | Tagged: "A Sense of Wonder", DDT, Environmental protection, film, Politics, Rachel Carson, Rachel Carson Elementary, Rampant stupidity, Sammamish, Seattle | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Sometimes Christians should listen to their pastors
April 9, 2009Pastors appear to be much better informed than Christians generally, especially among mainstream Christian denominations, and particularly on issues of science. They understand better that creationism shouldn’t be taught in public school science classes.
On a broad range of issues, mainline clergy affirm equality for gay and lesbian Americans. Roughly two‐thirds of mainline clergy support some legal recognition for same‐sex couples (65%), passing hate crime laws (67%) and employment nondiscrimination protections for gay and lesbian people (66%). A majority (55%) of mainline clergy support adoption rights for gay and lesbian people. Mainline Protestant clergy are strong advocates of church state separation.
A majority (65%) of mainline clergy agree that the U.S. should “maintain a strict separation of church and state.” Mainline clergy are more worried about public officials who are too close to religious leaders (59%) than about public officials who do not pay enough attention to religion (41%).
Mainline clergy are more likely to publicly address hunger and poverty and family issues than controversial social issues. More than 8‐in‐10 clergy say they publicly expressed their views about hunger and poverty often in the last year, and three‐quarters say they addressed marriage and family issues often. Only about one‐quarter (26%) say they often discussed the issues of abortion and capital punishment.
But where is the Methodist church falling down in getting clergy who understand science? If 54% of Methodist pastors don’t think evolution is the best explanation for diversity of life (the question got muddled in the questionnaire, alas), no wonder their congregations are so misinformed. You’d think they’d know better. You’d think the denomination would be truer to its roots of making the minister the best-informed guy in town.
I’m looking at Clergy Voices: Findings from the 2008 Mainline Protestant Clergy Voices Survey, released in March. Public Religion Research conducted the poll. More details from PRR, here.
Mainline clergy views of evolution and its place in public school curriculum are complex. On the one hand, the majority of mainline clergy (54%) do not support the teaching of creationism alongside evolution in public school biology classes. On the other hand, mainline clergy are more evenly divided in their views about the theory of evolution itself. Forty‐four percent of mainline ministers say that evolution is the best explanation for the origins of life on earth, and a similar number disagrees (43%). United Methodist clergy and American Baptist clergy are most likely to disagree. Seven‐in‐ten American Baptist clergy (70%) and a majority (53%) of United Methodist clergy say that evolution is not the best explanation for the origins of life on earth.
One question glaringly missing: Should Christians stick to the facts about science?
Tip of the old scrub brush to Bruce Tomaso at the Dallas Morning News Religionblog.
Leave a Comment » | Creationism, Education, Evolution, Politics, Reason, Religion, Science | Tagged: Church, Creationism, Education, Evolution, Mainline Christianity, Politics, Reason, Religion, Science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Gone but not forgotten: George W. Bush Librarium
April 9, 2009From the same people who brought us Goodnight Bush, some of the attractions at the theme park that is planned for the campus of Southern Methodist University; or attractions that might be planned, if the litigation ever ends.
In a more serious vein:
Leave a Comment » | History, Humor, Libraries, Museums, Politics, Presidents, Texas | Tagged: Books, Humor, Libraries, Library, Politics, President George W. Bush, Satire, Texas | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
FDR takes over
March 31, 2009Leisure Guy, in his leisure no doubt, has some time to look seriously at political criticism and its accuracy. For example, recently he wondered about the claim that FDR didn’t do anything to help the U.S. out of the depression, and perhaps helped prolong it. [I have corrected a minor error; he had FDR being inaugurated in January of 1933. Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the last president to be inaugurated in March; the term was changed to start in January during his presidency.]
This graph is from an interesting post by Paul Krugman, but I was fascinated to see that you can tell when FDR took office. He was elected, as you know, at the end of 1932, and he took office in late January [March] of 1933. Can you find that spot on the graph?
But of course, Right Wingers will tell you that FDR made the Depression worse. Some will even say that FDR started the Great Depression.
Leisure Guy didn’t include a link to Krugman’s post, drat it. It doesn’t appear to be this one, though it covers some of the same territory. Update: Oh, here it is: “Partying like it’s 1931.”
3 Comments | Economics, Employment, FDR, Great Depression, History, John Maynard Keynes, Politics, Presidents | Tagged: Economics, FDR, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Great Depression, History, Keynesian Economics, Politics, Recovery | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Listen in: Texas board considers science standards, and evolution
March 26, 2009Texas Freedom Network is live-blogging the hearings and proceedings from Austin, again today, before the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE). [I’ve changed the link to go to the TFN blog — that will take you to the latest post with latest news.] Testimony yesterday showed the coarse nature of the way SBOE treats science and scientists, and offered a lot of “balancing” testimony against evolution from people who appeared not to have ever read much science at all. The issue remains whether to force Texas kids to study false claims of scientific error about evolution.
As yesterday, Steve Schafersman of Texas Citizens for Science is live-blogging, too, here at EvoSphere.
Schafersman’s list of several ways you can keep up with the hearings still applies:
I will be live blogging the Texas State Board of Education meeting of 2009 March 25-27 in this column. This includes the hearing devoted to public testimony beginning at 12:00 noon on Wednesday, March 25. I will stay through the final vote on Friday, March 27.
Go to the following webpages for further information:
State Board of Education
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index3.aspx?id=1156March 25-26 SBOE Meeting Agenda
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=3994March 25 Public Hearing with Testimony, 12:00 noon
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=4034State Board rules for Public Testimony
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index4.aspx?id=3958#Public%20TestimonyCurrent Science TEKS as revised in 2009 January
http://ritter.tea.state.tx.us/rules/home/sboeprop.htmlFor the live audio feed, go to http://www.tea.state.tx.us/ for the link.
Leave a Comment » | Creationism, Darwin, Education, Evolution, Politics, Religion, Science, State school boards, Texas, Texas Citizens for Science, Texas Education Agency (TEA) | Tagged: Creationism, Education, Evolution, Politics, Science, Texas, Texas State Board of Educaiton, Voodoo science | Permalink
Posted by Ed Darrell
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 
May 21, 2009 at 9:23 pm Question: What do Don McLeroy and a catfish have in common?
Answer: A distant ancestor.
This might help to explain some of the behavior we’re seeing.