Let's Celebrate EARTH DAY!!!

correct but you didn't go far enough, chem major! In the environment mercury become MethylMercury which is an organic compound and highly toxic, especially to unborn children and young children.
When mercury makes its way from the ground to the ground water to the lakes, streams and oceans it is injested by fish and accumulates in their bodies. This is why eating the bigger fish - shark, tuna and swordfish have the greatest risk.
http://www.mercuryfacts.org/
This link I posted before debunks the fish and mercury myths. Yes, bio-accumulation occurs in the large predators in the food chain, but the scare is outrageous. Using the FDA standard dose, you are still OK eating two servings of fish (tuna, etc.) a week based on mercury levels. That site above also found that mercury levels in fish have declined over the last 10 years. Go look in that site more provided by a chem major.


While an able bodied grown man may not be affected by mercury in the environment - it is very harmful for women of child bearing age and young children.
See above.


Remember the DDT fuss? DDT wasn't banned because it was harmful to humans. It was banned because the eggs of birds who were exposed cracked and the chicks failed to develop. DDT was significantly responsible for the near demise of the Bald Eagle.

You youngsters should check out "Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson. It was a groundbreaker.
Already did several weeks on Silent Spring and DDT in my environmental course. If I was in Africa, I'd be doing the same they are now. The lives of thousands are worth some soft eggs when it comes to malaria. We also were just irresponsible in the developed world with DDT. Used correctly, its extremely effective and doesn't get dumped into the environment.
 
Mercury and fish: There is no doubt that high levels of mercury can and do poison children, born and unborn. Fully agree that there is not a risk by sticking with the FDA/EPA/CDC suggestions for fish consumption. It is a matter of public health. We try and decrease mercury emmissions to keep the streams, lakes, rivers and oceans free of mercury so the fish are not poisoned so the childen who eat those fish will not suffer irreversable neurological damage.
Same with lead.

DDT & Malaria - DDT was appropriately banned from agricultural use. Our agricultural ecomony has not suffered for it. It is NOT banned for spraying the walls of a house to control malaria and it can be part of an effective control program but not an easy solution. There are some barriers that do prevent it's use in some countries.

Glad to hear the next generation is reading "Silent Spring" hard to believe it's almost 50 years old.
 
Mercury and fish: There is no doubt that high levels of mercury can and do poison children, born and unborn.

High levels of mercury poison anyone. The moral of the facts? Fish don't have enough in them to poison mothers or their unborn children unless the fish were grown in a mercury pool...Tuna, swordfish, and other large fish species found in the open ocean are safe for consumption.

Fully agree that there is not a risk by sticking with the FDA/EPA/CDC suggestions for fish consumption. It is a matter of public health. We try and decrease mercury emmissions to keep the streams, lakes, rivers and oceans free of mercury so the fish are not poisoned so the childen who eat those fish will not suffer irreversable neurological damage.
Same with lead.

See above. Plus, the FDA suggestions for fish consumption are erroneous if you read current studies on mercury in fish and the effects of consumption on pregnant women.

DDT & Malaria - DDT was appropriately banned from agricultural use. Our agricultural ecomony has not suffered for it. It is NOT banned for spraying the walls of a house to control malaria and it can be part of an effective control program but not an easy solution. There are some barriers that do prevent it's use in some countries.
This is a good summary of the Wikipedia article it came from. However, ALL DDT USE in the United States is BANNED by the EPA. http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/ddt/01.htm
26 counties completely ban it and its main use is in equatorial nations with high risk for malaria (ie, nations in sub-saharan Africa). http://www.pan-uk.org/pestnews/Actives/ddt.htm
 
This is a good summary of the Wikipedia article it came from. However, ALL DDT USE in the United States is BANNED by the EPA. http://www.epa.gov/history/topics/ddt/01.htm
26 counties completely ban it and its main use is in equatorial nations with high risk for malaria (ie, nations in sub-saharan Africa). http://www.pan-uk.org/pestnews/Actives/ddt.htm

Not quite correct hornet...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT_in_the_United_States

Look near the bottom. It is still used in special cases to fight the occasional outbreak of bubonic plague in the US.

I can't find my notes right now, but I do believe there is a process to get permission from the EPA to use it dealing with the plague. Basically, when a necropsy of an rodent detects the plague, they dispatch trained personnel to dust holes (and then crush the hole to seal in the poison) of rodents in the area where the infestation was found. It is the one chemical with certain kill on the critters that carry the disease. This happens every few years.

My late father worked a a facility that shared a yard with what was at the time the last place in the US to distribute DDT (primarily for overseas, but when ordered by an EPA approved government agency to them to).
 
My Calculus teacher (former US Navy submarine Executive Officer) told me a story today about Earth Day...

Apparently one year the Navy decided instead of doing the normal 3 hours of cleaning on 'field day' (field day is the one day of the week where they cleaned a lot, everyone despises it), they cleaned for 8 hours.

Said it was the Navy's way of creating a generation of sailors who hated Earth Day :yllol: :thumb:
 
Not quite correct hornet...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT_in_the_United_States

Look near the bottom. It is still used in special cases to fight the occasional outbreak of bubonic plague in the US.

I can't find my notes right now, but I do believe there is a process to get permission from the EPA to use it dealing with the plague. Basically, when a necropsy of an rodent detects the plague, they dispatch trained personnel to dust holes (and then crush the hole to seal in the poison) of rodents in the area where the infestation was found. It is the one chemical with certain kill on the critters that carry the disease. This happens every few years.

My late father worked a a facility that shared a yard with what was at the time the last place in the US to distribute DDT (primarily for overseas, but when ordered by an EPA approved government agency to them to).

Got to watch out for that plague! yikes. LMAO.
 
Did you know Earth days founder was a murderer who had to be extridited back to the US from France.

Not quite.
The man credited with founding Earth Day was US Senator Gaylord Nelson, WI. A US Navy Veteran.
After earning a law degree from UW-Madison in 1942 and serving in the Navy during World War II, Nelson rose through the state's political ranks. As a state senator from 1949 to 1959, then as governor from 1959 to 1963, he repeatedly called attention and applied public policy to issues of land protection, wildlife habitat, and environmental quality.
His most far-reaching accomplishments occurred on a larger stage. Elected to the U.S. Senate in November 1962, Nelson became its leading environmentalist. He championed landmark laws including the Wilderness Act, the National Trails Act, the National Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, and the National Environmental Education Act. He also introduced the first federal legislation to mandate fuel-efficiency standards in automobiles, control strip mining, and ban the use of phosphates in detergents as well as use of the pesticide DDT and the defoliant 2,4,5-T.
Throughout his career, Nelson respected and befriended colleagues on both sides of the political aisle. His integrity and determination, combined with his folksy, personable style, enhanced his success at building bipartisan support for his initiatives.
Nelson is best known as the founder of Earth Day. An astonishing 20 million Americans participated in the first observance on April 22, 1970. American Heritage magazine described the event years later as "one of the most remarkable happenings in the history of democracy." Today, Earth Day is an annual observance that has grown to a week or more in many locales.
http://www.nelson.wisc.edu/legacy/

Ira Einhorn was a lot of things but being founder of Earth Day is not one. It was a claim that he made.

Thanks goaliedad for the ddt input.

Hornetguy - your "scientific source" , mercuryfacts.org is not exactly objective.
MercuryFacts.org is a project of the Center for Consumer Freedom, a nonprofit coalition dedicated to promoting personal responsibility and protecting consumer choices..............

The Center for Consumer Freedom is supported by restaurants, food companies and more than 1,000 concerned individuals.

At least the EPA/CDC/FDA gets their research from unbiased Univeristies and government research centers.
 
Not quite.
The man credited with founding Earth Day was US Senator Gaylord Nelson, WI. A US Navy Veteran.

http://www.nelson.wisc.edu/legacy/

Ira Einhorn was a lot of things but being founder of Earth Day is not one. It was a claim that he made.

Thanks goaliedad for the ddt input.

Hornetguy - your "scientific source" , mercuryfacts.org is not exactly objective.


At least the EPA/CDC/FDA gets their research from unbiased Univeristies and government research centers.


All due respect JAM but on both points you're making, how are your source's accurate and all other are not? I've read many articles stating that Einhorn was the MC of the first Earthday and it makes perfect sense that Environmentalists try to distance themselves from him...now.

This is just one of many you can pull up on a Google search:

"Earth Day is a time to honor the bold progressives who managed the astonishing feat of mainstreaming antihuman nihilism by packaging it as "environmentalism." Prominent among them is Ira Einhorn, who was instrumental in establishing Earth Day. When the first one took place in 1970, Einhorn was master of ceremonies."

Same thing with the DDT issue, how many millions died from soft shells?
 
Einhorn liked to claim he "founded" Earth Day.
He was an activist and environmentalist and a cohort of Abbie Hoffman. The murder of which he was convicted in abstentia occurred in 1977 - 7 years after the first Earth Day.

Many many respectable sources credit Senator Nelson with the first Earth Day.
If you are old enough to remember the first Earth Day - it was not ONE celebration. He may have been master of ceremonies at one but this doesn't mean he "founded" it.
Here are some sources for you.
http://earthday.wilderness.org/history/
http://www.edfdad.addr.com/NBCkatzman4unicorn.html
The videotape was a copy of the one hour Cronkite CBS News Special Report on Earth Day that aired on April 22, 1970. This documentary was developed by CBS producer Bernard Birnbaum and a dozen CBS correspondents and research staff over a several month period thirty years ago. It makes no mention of Einhorn, but it includes extensive coverage of Earth Day in Philadelphia and across the U.S.
http://www.amgot.org/einhorn/eday.htm
http://wilderness.org/content/gaylord-nelson
http://www.doj.state.wi.us/kidspage/fun_facts/earthday.htm


Same thing with the DDT issue, how many millions died from soft shells?
millions of what? birds? not sure what you are asking.
 
Yeah JAM I do remember that Earth Day I was in elementry school being scared to death by the Eco-Nuts. The had a movie tellig us how we would die buried in a mountain of trash or worse we would never make it to the year 2000 because of the rapidly progressing ICE AGE:thumbdown:
 
Right, I'm sure those are completely unbiased and the government is completely knowledgeable.
You know, hornetguy perhaps if you were pursuing your Chem degree at one of our fine Research Universities you would witness first hand the credible research that occurs. Be my guest, however, proceed with the "conspiracy theories". Hard to believe that the AFA will graduate a Chem major who falls for voodoo science.

DS52262 - yep! I remember the Population clock and the population explosion display. It was pretty scary and we were sternly warned to not have more than one child, if any! Haha - I ended up having 4 kids.
 
millions of what? birds? not sure what you are asking.

I'm sorry for not being clear, sometimes I just assume other people think in terms of humans first. My reading over the years tends to make me follow this school of thought, in the article below. While Dr. Williams is not a scientist, I'll take his word and studies over Senator Nelson (also not a scientist) and his brilliant career as an Eco extremist. I also say, follow the money, Nelson has manufactured himself a career over this business, and it's no shock that Bill Clinton awarded him in 1995, heck, Algore was working on his scam at that time and you know ducks needed to be placed in order.

Here is a a great article by Dr. Williams, one of my hero's.

"Wrongful ban on DDT costs lives
The fact that DDT saves lives might account for part of the hostility toward it.
by Walter Williams
Jewish World Review
July 2004



Ever since Rachel Carson's 1962 book "Silent Spring," environmental extremists have sought to ban all DDT use. Using phony studies from the Environmental Defense Fund and the Natural Resources Defense Council, the environmental activist-controlled Environmental Protection Agency banned DDT in 1972. The extremists convinced the nation that DDT was not only unsafe for humans but unsafe to birds and other creatures as well. Their arguments have since been scientifically refuted.

While DDT saved crops, forests and livestock, it also saved humans. In 1970, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences estimated that DDT saved more than 500 million lives during the time it was widely used. A scientific review board of the EPA showed that DDT is not harmful to the environment and showed it to be a beneficial substance that "should not be banned." According to the World Health Organization, worldwide malaria infects 300 million people. About 1 million die of malaria each year. Most of the victims are in Africa, and most are children.

In Sri Lanka, in 1948, there were 2.8 million malaria cases and 7,300 malaria deaths. With widespread DDT use, malaria cases fell to 17 and no deaths in 1963. After DDT use was discontinued, Sri Lankan malaria cases rose to 2.5 million in the years 1968 and 1969, and the disease remains a killer in Sri Lanka today. More than 100,000 people died during malaria epidemics in Swaziland and Madagascar in the mid-1980s, following the suspension of DDT house spraying. After South Africa stopped using DDT in 1996, the number of malaria cases in KwaZulu-Natal province skyrocketed from 8,000 to 42,000. By 2000, there had been an approximate 400 percent increase in malaria deaths. Now that DDT is being used again, the number of deaths from malaria in the region has dropped from 340 in 2000 to none at the last reporting in February 2003.



In South America, where malaria is endemic, malaria rates soared in countries that halted house spraying with DDT after 1993 -- Guyana, Bolivia, Paraguay, Peru, Brazil, Colombia and Venezuela. In Ecuador, DDT spraying was increased after 1993, and the malaria rate of infection was reduced by 60 percent. In a 2001 study published by the London-based Institute for Economic Affairs, "Malaria and the DDT Story," Richard Tren and Roger Bate say that "Malaria is a human tragedy," adding, "Over 1 million people, mostly children, die from the disease each year, and over 300 million fall sick."

The fact that DDT saves lives might account for part of the hostility toward it. Alexander King, founder of the Malthusian Club of Rome, wrote in a biographical essay in 1990:

"My own doubts came when DDT was introduced. In Guyana, within two years, it had almost eliminated malaria. So my chief quarrel with DDT, in hindsight, is that it has greatly added to the population problem."

Dr. Charles Wurster, one of the major opponents of DDT, is reported to have said,

"People are the cause of all the problems. We have too many of them. We need to get rid of some of them, and this (referring to malaria deaths) is as good a way as any."

Spraying a house with small amounts of DDT costs $1.44 per year; alternatives are five to 10 times more, making them unaffordable in poor countries. Rich countries that used DDT themselves threaten reprisals against poor countries if they use DDT.

One really wonders about religious groups, the Congressional Black Caucus, government and non-government organizations, politicians and others who profess concern over the plight of poor people around the world while at the same time accepting or promoting DDT bans and the needless suffering and death that follow. Mosquito-borne malaria not only has devastating health effects but stifles economic growth as well.
_______________

About the Author: Born in Philadelphia in 1936, Walter E. Williams holds a bachelor's degree in economics from California State University (1965) and a master's degree (1967) and doctorate (1972) in economics from the University of California at Los Angeles. He teaches economics at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia.
________________________________________________

Slick Willies part:
THE PRESIDENTIAL MEDAL OF FREEDOM

"The Presidential Medal of Freedom is the highest honor given to civilians in the United States…Twenty-five years ago this year, Americans came together for the very first Earth Day…They came together…because of one American - Gaylord Nelson. As the father of Earth Day…He inspired us to remember that the stewardship of our natural resources is the stewardship of the American Dream. He is the worthy heir of the tradition of Theodore Roosevelt…And I hope that Gaylord Nelson's shining example will illuminate all the debates in this city for years to come."


President "Slick Willie" Clinton, 9/29/95
__________________________________________

Cleaned it up real nice having Clinton pronounce Nelson as the Founder of Earth Day, it would have been ~inconvenient for them to place up on a pedestal a murderer especially since they were in the process of extraditing him from France at that time. I guess that makes me a believer of voodoo science too lol
 
Last edited:
You know, hornetguy perhaps if you were pursuing your Chem degree at one of our fine Research Universities you would witness first hand the credible research that occurs. Be my guest, however, proceed with the "conspiracy theories". Hard to believe that the AFA will graduate a Chem major who falls for voodoo science.

DS52262 - yep! I remember the Population clock and the population explosion display. It was pretty scary and we were sternly warned to not have more than one child, if any! Haha - I ended up having 4 kids.

I witness credible research here at a level most universities can't reach because we have instrumentation many universities lack.

And thanks for the insults. I don't practice pseudo-science and hardly am alone among the educated chemists that reside at this fine institution. What's your education in again? :rolleyes:
 
Not quite.
The man credited with founding Earth Day was US Senator Gaylord Nelson, WI. A US Navy Veteran.

http://www.nelson.wisc.edu/legacy/

Ira Einhorn was a lot of things but being founder of Earth Day is not one. It was a claim that he made.

Thanks goaliedad for the ddt input.

Hornetguy - your "scientific source" , mercuryfacts.org is not exactly objective.


At least the EPA/CDC/FDA gets their research from unbiased Univeristies and government research centers.



Senators can be murderers too.....hmmm I can think of one right now!

Finkle is Einhorn, Einhorn is Finkle, Finkle is EINHORN....Einhorn is a man!

This seems like something that can't hurt the military to participate in as long as there isn't anything more pressing to do.
 
JAM if you remember the movies then you should understand what a hoax this modern environmentalist movement is. They are the modern incarnation of the communist party. They seek control through panic and legislation. The Cap and Trade issue being pushed today is just one shining example.
 
This is why I ~only read the Wall Street Journal:

"Cap and trade is the tax that dare not speak its name, and Democrats are hoping in particular that no one notices who would pay for their climate ambitions. With President Obama depending on vast new carbon revenues in his budget and Congress promising a bill by May, perhaps Americans would like to know the deeply unequal ways that climate costs would be distributed across regions and income groups.


APPoliticians love cap and trade because they can claim to be taxing "polluters," not workers. Hardly. Once the government creates a scarce new commodity -- in this case the right to emit carbon -- and then mandates that businesses buy it, the costs would inevitably be passed on to all consumers in the form of higher prices. Stating the obvious, Peter Orszag -- now Mr. Obama's budget director -- told Congress last year that "Those price increases are essential to the success of a cap-and-trade program."

Hit hardest would be the "95% of working families" Mr. Obama keeps mentioning, usually omitting that his no-new-taxes pledge comes with the caveat "unless you use energy." Putting a price on carbon is regressive by definition because poor and middle-income households spend more of their paychecks on things like gas to drive to work, groceries or home heating.

The Congressional Budget Office -- Mr. Orszag's former roost -- estimates that the price hikes from a 15% cut in emissions would cost the average household in the bottom-income quintile about 3.3% of its after-tax income every year. That's about $680, not including the costs of reduced employment and output. The three middle quintiles would see their paychecks cut between $880 and $1,500, or 2.9% to 2.7% of income. The rich would pay 1.7%. Cap and trade is the ideal policy for every Beltway analyst who thinks the tax code is too progressive (all five of them).

But the greatest inequities are geographic and would be imposed on the parts of the U.S. that rely most on manufacturing or fossil fuels -- particularly coal, which generates most power in the Midwest, Southern and Plains states. It's no coincidence that the liberals most invested in cap and trade -- Barbara Boxer, Henry Waxman, Ed Markey -- come from California or the Northeast.

Coal provides more than half of U.S. electricity, and 25 states get more than 50% of their electricity from conventional coal-fired generation. In Ohio, it totals 86%, according to the Energy Information Administration. Ratepayers in Indiana (94%), Missouri (85%), New Mexico (80%), Pennsylvania (56%), West Virginia (98%) and Wyoming (95%) are going to get soaked.

Another way to think about it is in terms of per capita greenhouse-gas emissions. California is the No. 2 carbon emitter in the country but also has a large economy and population. So the average Californian only had a carbon footprint of about 12 tons of CO2-equivalent in 2005, according to the World Resource Institute's Climate Analysis Indicators, which integrates all government data. The situation is very different in Wyoming and North Dakota -- paging Senators Mike Enzi and Kent Conrad -- where every person was responsible for 154 and 95 tons, respectively. See the nearby chart for cap and trade's biggest state winners and losers.

Democrats say they'll allow some of this ocean of new cap-and-trade revenue to trickle back down to the public. In his budget, Mr. Obama wants to recycle $525 billion through the "making work pay" tax credit that goes to many people who don't pay income taxes. But $400 for individuals and $800 for families still doesn't offset carbon's income raid, especially in states with higher carbon use.

All the more so because the Administration is lowballing its cap-and-trade tax estimates. Its stated goal is to reduce emissions 14% below 2005 levels by 2020, which assuming that four-fifths of emissions are covered (excluding agriculture, for instance), works out to about $13 or $14 per ton of CO2. When CBO scored a similar bill last year, it expected prices to start at $23 and rise to $44 by 2018. CBO also projected the total value of the allowances at $902 billion over the first decade, which is some $256 billion more than the Administration's estimate.

We asked the White House budget office for the assumptions behind its revenue estimates, but a spokesman said the Administration doesn't have a formal proposal and will work with Congress and "stakeholders" to shape one. We were also pointed to recent comments by Mr. Orszag that he was "sure there will be enough there to finance the things that we have identified" and maybe "additional money" too. In other words, Mr. Obama expects a much larger tax increase than even he is willing to admit.

Those "stakeholders" are going to need some very large bribes, starting with the regions that stand to lose the most. Led by Michigan's Debbie Stabenow, 15 Senate Democrats have already formed a "gang" demanding that "consumers and workers in all regions of the U.S. are protected from undue hardship." In practice, this would mean corporate welfare for carbon-heavy businesses.

And of course Congress is its own "stakeholder." An economy-wide tax under the cover of saving the environment is the best political moneymaker since the income tax. Obama officials are already telling the press, sotto voce, that climate revenues might fund universal health care and other new social spending. No doubt they would, and when they did Mr. Obama's cap-and-trade rebates would become even smaller.

Cap and trade, in other words, is a scheme to redistribute income and wealth -- but in a very curious way. It takes from the working class and gives to the affluent; takes from Miami, Ohio, and gives to Miami, Florida; and takes from an industrial America that is already struggling and gives to rich Silicon Valley and Wall Street "green tech" investors who know how to leverage the political class.



Please add your comments to the Opinion Journal forum."
 
Back
Top