Doug Ross Journal "The new leadership of the EPA proposed yesterday that the White House declare carbon dioxide a health danger. Carbon dioxide, which plants absorb and animals exhale, would be ruled a pollutant.
"It is a lie and fraud. You can't live without carbon dioxide and you can't live without water. Never mind that almost all greenhouse gas is water vapor." . . .
The post then moves to the consequences wrought by banning DDT:
"What does the hard left, environmentalist believe? I want you to know that they are responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of children all over Africa and Southeast Asia. Because they successfully banned DDT.
"DDT saved hundreds of millions of lives. DDT was used in the United States to destroy malaria."
. . .
"In 1970, the National Academy of Sciences wrote in a report that ''to only a few chemicals does man owe as great a debt as to DDT'' and it credited the insecticide with preventing as many as 500,000,000 human deaths.
"But all of that changed in 1962, when Rachel Carson -- a rabid opponent of pesticides -- succeeded in spreading widespread hysteria about DDT's effects on wildlife and especially children. In her book Silent Spring, Carson decried the use of DDT.
"It is a lie and fraud. You can't live without carbon dioxide and you can't live without water. Never mind that almost all greenhouse gas is water vapor." . . .The post then moves to the consequences wrought by banning DDT:
"What does the hard left, environmentalist believe? I want you to know that they are responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of children all over Africa and Southeast Asia. Because they successfully banned DDT.
"DDT saved hundreds of millions of lives. DDT was used in the United States to destroy malaria."
. . . "In 1970, the National Academy of Sciences wrote in a report that ''to only a few chemicals does man owe as great a debt as to DDT'' and it credited the insecticide with preventing as many as 500,000,000 human deaths.
"But all of that changed in 1962, when Rachel Carson -- a rabid opponent of pesticides -- succeeded in spreading widespread hysteria about DDT's effects on wildlife and especially children. In her book Silent Spring, Carson decried the use of DDT.
. . . "She claimed DDT resulted in birth defects and mental retardation... and, yet, not one case has ever been proven. Not one.
"Thus, it is a sickening irony that Carson's focus on children helped kill the use of DDT, when malaria causes the deaths of millions of children in the developing world. You see, the developing world is the target of the Enviro-Statist. For it is there that the Statist can more easily shape policy and control lives.
"And the mainstream media gobbled up Carson's lies. The Environmental Defense Fund and the Sierra Club brought litigation to pressure the government to ban DDT.
"An administrative law judge heard the case for months -- and ruled against the extremists. He said that DDT was not a carcinogenic hazard to man; that it was not a mutagenic hazard to man. He said the use of DDT does not have deleterious effects on freshwater fish, organisms, wild birds, or othe wildlife, let alone human beings.
"But the judge's ruling was rejected by the EPA administrator in 1972, William Ruckleshaus. He attended no hearings and reportedly never read the relevant documents. Evidence was later discovered that Ruckleshaus had a fatal conflict-of-interest: he served as a fundraiser for the Environmental Defense Fund, the very group spearheading the anti-DDT campaign. " . . .
"Thus, it is a sickening irony that Carson's focus on children helped kill the use of DDT, when malaria causes the deaths of millions of children in the developing world. You see, the developing world is the target of the Enviro-Statist. For it is there that the Statist can more easily shape policy and control lives.
"And the mainstream media gobbled up Carson's lies. The Environmental Defense Fund and the Sierra Club brought litigation to pressure the government to ban DDT."An administrative law judge heard the case for months -- and ruled against the extremists. He said that DDT was not a carcinogenic hazard to man; that it was not a mutagenic hazard to man. He said the use of DDT does not have deleterious effects on freshwater fish, organisms, wild birds, or othe wildlife, let alone human beings.
"But the judge's ruling was rejected by the EPA administrator in 1972, William Ruckleshaus. He attended no hearings and reportedly never read the relevant documents. Evidence was later discovered that Ruckleshaus had a fatal conflict-of-interest: he served as a fundraiser for the Environmental Defense Fund, the very group spearheading the anti-DDT campaign. " . . .
