Liberal Enviro-Kooks Propagate Outright *FRAUD*!
John A. Quayle
Boss302 at LOCALNET.COM
Thu Nov 13 23:24:28 MST 2003
Insight on the News - Features
The Last Word
By Ralph de Toledano
Parsing the Propaganda of the Junk Scientists
Every 10 years, "scientist" Paul Ehrlich writes a book predicting
that in the next 10 years there will not be enough food to feed a
burgeoning population. Mass starvation will follow and the world will
revert to savagery. Every 10 years, his prior doomsaying is forgotten and
the media and its pundits give his latest prediction space and serious
This is junk science at its most ridiculous and on a par with
fright-wig stories about this food or that product. Take the campaign
against DDT, which led Congress and the Environmental Protection Agency to
ban a great scientific advance. DDT had about eliminated one of the great
scourges of nature: malaria and the anopheles mosquito, carrier of the
disease. Whole regions of the world had been the victims of malaria. In
India, for example, one of its most-fertile regions produced nothing
because its people were struck down year after year by the dread disease.
The "environmentalists" who propagandized against DDT claimed that
it was a poison - that the chemical was killing cattle and wildlife. Of
course they were lying. Not a single death has yet to be attributed to DDT.
Sprayed on crops and ingested by birds such as the eagle, DDT caused a
softening of their egg shells. But this could be avoided by proper
application, effectively destroying the anopheles mosquito. DDT was banned
to the loud huzzahs of the enviros. The result: Literally millions of
people in Asia, Africa and other mosquito-infested regions since have died,
but the junk scientists and the media have kept the widespread return of
malaria very quiet. That's junk science and enviro propaganda for you.
Some years ago, the junk scientists were yammering that America's
children were malnourished. And so they were, not because of poverty but
because they were stuffing themselves with the wrong foods. Studies show
that this mal-nourishment was more prevalent among the middle classes than
among the poor. Without missing a beat, the junk scientists now are
yammering that America is obese, and it's all the fault of McDonald's
because it serves what the cash customers want.
The "global-warming" scam, however, is the most shameless of all
junk-science campaigns, and deliberately so. The fact is that many of those
pushing for the Kyoto Protocol treaty - which by drastically curtailing
essential energy use would be an economic disaster - must know what a fraud
it is, unless they are suffering from Alzheimer's.
Hardly two decades ago, the same global-warming propagandists were
warning all and sundry that the Earth was moving into a new ice age that
would bring Arctic temperatures to the tropics, destroy vegetation and
bring civilization to a standstill. And what was the cause of this imminent
catastrophe? Man-made hydrocarbons. Today, the same enviros are beating
their gums and stirring up their comrades in the media by predicting that
global warming is what will do us in - melting the polar ice caps, causing
catastrophic flooding in low-lying coastal areas, etc., etc. And what is
causing this "global warming"? The same man-made hydrocarbons that were
blamed for the allegedly coming ice age.
The media proclaim that 2,000 scientists support the claims of the
global-warming cabal. But the press, print and electronic, is very silent
about the 17,000 scientists who have signed a petition in opposition to the
Kyoto treaty. The junk scientists cite "statistics" - remember that there
are lies, damn lies and statistics - that in the last 20 years the Earth's
temperature has increased by (shudder) one degree. But satellites and
weather balloons show no atmospheric temperature rise. It is true that
there has been a minuscule trend in temperature increase during the last
300 years, but that began long before present-day industrialization. And
man-made hydrocarbons had nothing to do with it, as every important study
One of the many "solutions" proposed by the enviros and the junk
scientists demonstrates the paucity of sanity in their programs. For
instance, Arthur Robinson, editor of Access to Energy, and Noah Robinson,
both of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, have shown that the
proposal by California's South Coast Air Management District to require all
public vehicles to be powered by electricity, natural gas or other
presumably clean-burning fuels will use "more hydrocarbon fuels than less."
And, they add: "The energy delivered to an electric car requires more
hydrocarbon fuel per mile than does the direct use of hydrocarbon fuel."
How often do you read that an emphasis on the increased use of
truly clean nuclear and hydroelectric power would rid the environment of
those hydrocarbons which so panic the enviros? But such reports would be
politically incorrect. And has the New York Times editorialized on the fact
that most of France's electric power is nuclear-produced, with no harmful
effect on the population?
The Senate made its feelings clear on the Kyoto treaty (which Bill
Clinton had signed but did not dare to submit) by a vote of 98-2. But just
the other day Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.)
attempted to sneak it through the back door by introducing the grandly
named Climate Stewardship Act, which would impose the terms of the treaty
without its ratification. It was defeated soundly on a bipartisan vote, 55-43.
What has made junkmen of two otherwise-sane senators is a logical
question, particularly since one of them is running for the presidency.
Ralph de Toledano is the dean of Washington columnists and a
contributing writer to Insight magazine.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 11/6/2003
More information about the Rushtalk