Rachel Carson's Alarmist Legacy

(National Review Online)  This column was written by Iain Murray.

---

Rachel Carson, author of "Silent Spring," the 1962 book that launched the modern environmental movement, was born a century ago this week, and it is no wonder that green activists are celebrating her legacy. She practically invented the environmental alarmist strategy that has been so successful in pushing a radical environmental agenda. (I won't go into Carson's contribution to the ongoing malaria epidemic in many poor countries owing to her demonization of DDT; for more on that, see here, here, and here.) Her paradigm has been disastrous for rational political discourse. It is a template for bypassing debate and ignoring consequences.

Here's how it works.

First, identify your cause and the laws you want to see enacted. In the environmentalist's blinkered view of the world, everything is connected linearly, not in the multifaceted manner of the real world. Therefore, in the green' view, the removal of a problem will not cause other, unforeseen, problems. For Carson, the problem was the impact of pesticides on bird life; the elimination of pesticides would solve that problem. No other considerations — such as the impact DDT restrictions had on malaria control — could be allowed to come into play. A modern example of this idea is the notion that fossil fuels can be removed from the energy supply to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions without adverse consequences.

Second, create an apocalyptic scenario. The whole point of Carson's "Silent Spring," embodied in the title, was to paint a picture of a world without avian life — that is, a world without birdsong. This simple, evocative message horrified readers, shocking them on a visceral level. Environmentalist-stoked fears about "Frankenfoods" resulting from out-of-control biotechnology follow this model.

Third, claim there's a threat to children. For those unmoved by fears of a birdless world, this should suffice. Carson said in her book that, "A quarter century ago, cancer in children was considered a medical rarity. Today, more American school children die of cancer than from any other disease." Her statistics were misleading — the actual rate of cancer among children is unchanged since the 1900s, but cancer's incidence relative to other diseases has increased as medical technology has vanquished many of those other diseases.

Fourth, don the mantle of science and dismiss any evidence that contradicts your position. Carson used statistics and scientific data to provide a seemingly empirical basis for her alarmist claims. The spin continued even when the EPA's own scientists concluded that, "DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man ... DDT is not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man ... The use of DDT under the regulations involved here [does] not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife." Yet evidence doesn't matter; the authority of claiming to represent science "proves" that action is needed. Even hotly disputed scientific claims, such as those concerning the effects of endocrine disruptors (substances that can disrupt the production of certain human hormones) on human health, can provide a seemingly invincible case when asserted in the right way.

Fifth, use the previous three steps to create a clamor that rules out rational debate. With a potential catastrophe, a threat to the innocent, and a ream of supposedly empirical data on your side, you have a recipe for urgent action — though one based on emotion and uncritical acceptance of assertion. Public policy is not (nor should it be) a rational process — emotion and acceptance of authority often drive it — so in recognition of that, modern democracies have created checks and balances. Yet, as the case of DDT shows, the alarmist model can often overcome these checks. If you can also destroy the credibility of your political opponents through ad hominem attacks, so much the better.

Finally, once your measures have been adopted, defend them ruthlessly. The alarmist model relies on its successes being unassailable. Critical examination threatens to reveal that measures advanced by alarmists may be unwarranted, ineffective and, in many cases, positively harmful. Once one such measure is repealed, people may think twice about passing more like it.

The world may finally be waking up to the unintended consequences of restrictions on pesticide use — though not in time to prevent millions of unnecessary deaths. The World Health Organization has called on environmentalists "to help save African babies as you are helping to save the environment" and endorsed increased use of DDT to fight malaria. Now people need to wake up to the harm caused to the political process by Rachel Carson's other legacy, the paradigm of alarmism.


By Iain Murray
Reprinted with permission from National Review Online

[dscsiii]

See this link:

http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/articles/summ02/Carson.html

J. Gordon Edwards was the man who wrote the article above, and was the man accurately described in an earlier post.

All you misanthropic tree huggers can chew on this: almost 100,000,000 people have died or gravely suffered from insect-borne diseases, many of which had been nearly eradicated by the use of DDT, since the world-wide ban. Rachel Carson's real legacy in falsely demonizing DDT is one more akin to mass murder- which suits the, again: misanthropic- tilt of the radical environmental movement's agenda. As for the effectiveness of mosquito nets, well.. would you walk around in a tent in 105 degree heat all day in the tropics?

PS: the real cause of the decrease in the pelican population featured in her book turned out to be a common bacteria which cause a thin egg shell. Look it up for yourself. The birds didn't come back because of banning DDT, and in fact they never left!

[sverre5-2009]

Frankly, I find this article to be disrespectful to the legacy of Rachel Carson, and Rachel Carson herself. Without the dedication and bravery she exhibited in those last years of her life, environmental standards in the US would be much lower than they are today, and many species of birds would be struggling alot more than they are now. Rachel Carson dedicateded those last years of her life to what she believed was right, and stood up against the agricultural industry and many members of the government. Her legacy is one that has greatly benefited America, and will continue to do so.

[drdr59]

What a bunch of typical moronic right wing claptrap. They are so sad, angry and morally bankrupt that they have to stoop to dredging up and twisting long accepted scientific conclusions, hoping the majority will have forgotten what it was all about in the first place. While they are probably right about the majority being easily misled (Bush is the proof of that), they show such moral depravity to constantly prey on the weaknesses of the masses to sell their garbage.

[ubrew12]

Yeah, lets all rely on the pesticide companies to evaluate the human and environmental dangers of their products fairly. NRO must think we're all boobs.
NRO:"With a potential catastrophe, a threat to the innocent, and a ream of supposedly empirical data on your side, you have a recipe for urgent action %u2014 though one based on emotion and uncritical acceptance of assertion."
I'm sorry, was he referring to the invasion of Iraq?

Malaria control = mosquito netting. Duh!!

[down-ndirty]

"J. Gordon Edwards, a professor emeritus at San Jose State University in California, drank a spoonful of DDT in front of his entomology classes at the beginning of each school year, to make the point that DDT is not harmful to human beings." Posted by billibek at 05:32 PM : Jun 02, 2007
--------------

I find nothing is his bio about this. Do you have a verifiable source?

[billibek]

'ainttaken' scribbled: "I would like to hand Mr. Murray an ice cold glass full of DDT. The symbol of this country, the Bald Eagle, would love to see him at least take a sip."

Here's data for you: J. Gordon Edwards, a professor emeritus at San Jose State University in California, drank a spoonful of DDT in front of his entomology classes at the beginning of each school year, to make the point that DDT is not harmful to human beings.

He died of a heart attack the age of 84 while climbing a mountain.

[billibek]

'ainttaken' scribbled: "I would like to hand Mr. Murray an ice cold glass full of DDT. The symbol of this country, the Bald Eagle, would love to see him at least take a sip."

Here's data for you: J. Gordon Edwards, a professor emeritus at San Jose State University in California, drank a spoonful of DDT in front of his entomology classes at the beginning of each school year, to make the point that DDT is not harmful to human beings.

He died of a heart attack the age of 84 while climbing a mountain.

And you're a twit.

[swingalong]

Typical National Review garbage. "An alarmist legacy," indeed. All she did was say DDT was killing all the birds. It was. They banned it, and the birds came back. If not for Carson, there would definitely be no Brown Pelicans or Peregrine falcons left. They were on the brink of extinction. You can trust the National Review to tell you that the world is 6000 years old and that acid rain is a myth, etc. etc. There is nothing so absolutely idiotic on the very face of it that you won't be able to read in the pages of this brainless publication. Maybe if Bush could write, he could do and article for them: he called global warming "bad science" as if he ever read a book. Just because trash publications like the National Review publish this twaddle doesn't mean that science has no merit or that reality isn't something we should value.

[diamtool]

and the world is 2000 years old, flat, and at the center of the universe.
There! that will do it for science class today kids!

[diamtool]

we have a new type of science in America.

political junk science- a whole new field!
say what the government wants you to say and you can be a famous scientist too!
great career path for dropouts from science academy.
just avoid facts or controversy surrounding Big Biz-- and you are IN!