May 11, 2006

When Radical Environmentalism Kills

What do you call someone who's actions cause the untimely deaths of tens of millions of innocent people? Well, usually we consider them a mass murderer. But some people's simple acts can cause a ripple effect with horrible results.

Take Rachel Carson, for example. You may or may not have heard of this woman. In 1963 she wrote a book called "Silent Spring" that theorized - and it was only a theory, mind you - that the pesticide DDT was having a catastrophic effect on the earth's ecosystem. The title suggested that in the near future, we would no longer be greeted in the springtime with the sound of chirping birds because they would all be dead. She thought DDT destroyed their eggshells.

The radical environmentalist movement, which was then in its early stages, siezed on this theory and politicized it with such ferocity that DDT was eventually banned from use. Here's the problem. Her theories were proven false less than twenty years later. But that wasn't enough to lift the ban. Because by then the Eco-nuts had so ingrained the world with the idea that it was hard to convince it otherwise. Even today, the whackos in the radical environmentalist movement worship her as a saint.

But who payed the price for her bogus claims? The people of the Third World:

"The ban on DDT robbed developing nations of a cheap, safe and effective means of combating malaria, which kills two million people each year.

That tots up to at least 50 million deaths since the bans took effect in the early 1970s. And for what? Even at the time, Carson's claims that DDT was responsible for everything from the thinning of eggshells to cancer in humans looked shaky. By the mid-1980s they had been utterly discredited. Yet by then Carson's claims had achieved the status of holy writ among environmentalists - and among right-on officials in government ministries. Third World nations were threatened with trade sanctions if they even suggested using DDT in fields or homes.

Now, finally, the giant US Agency for International Development is supporting the widespread use of DDT in Africa to combat malaria. The effect is likely to be quite simply breathtaking, for DDT is truly a miracle cure for this deadly mosquito-borne scourge."

Nice legacy, huh? Generating unnecessary hysteria and the deaths of millions.

Oh, but Rachel Carson's intentions were good, were they not? We can't blame her for the fact that 400 million people around the world get infected with malaria every year, can we?

You bet your ass, we can. But she's not alone. Millions of other people with "good intentions" put healthy skepticism aside and helped cause these needless deaths. Oh jeez, how could concern for the environment be bad? It's bad when people accept unproven claims because so many "experts" claim that they're likely to be true - even if they have no solid evidence. Their intentions are good, after all.

And God forbid you question these people. It makes you a greedy, evil, uncaring jerk. And before you know it, everyone who doesn't want to be thought of as a greedy, evil, uncaring jerk signs on to these crack-pot theories de jour. That's how you get unhinged demagogues like Al Gore screaming at the top of his lungs that the world will end in ten years if you don't listen to him.

Posted by: Gary at 09:10 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 570 words, total size 4 kb.

<< Page 1 of 1 >>
16kb generated in CPU 0.0121, elapsed 0.0626 seconds.
113 queries taking 0.0565 seconds, 212 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.