Jennifer: Hey some blogs get rough don’t they? What new blog science has it roots in creationism?

Ho Hum: Reading the latest drag on life (Seeds of Change ) from Bill Mollison was quite worth while but I wonder if he’s given up smoking yet.

Liam: All these new alliances have roots in the old US stock exchange.

For the lay person to derive a basic understanding of the man-made chlorine based chemicals requires much intensive study into chemical toxicology. Clearly Jennifer is not au fait with this research.

She has trivialised the ecological, animal and human impacts of DDT -a chlorine based chemical, similar to the persistent organic pollutant, PCDD (dioxins.)

Recently, scientists have discovered a biomagnification of DDT of more than 200,000 times in an estuary on Long Island in the US, despite the fact that DDT was banned in the early 70's.

Only at the end of last year, doctors in Vietnam, warned citizens living near the ignominious Bien Hoa military base not to drink the water, eat the fish or grow fruit and vegetables as a result of the Americans dumping dioxins (agent orange) on the citizens of Vietnam some 40 years ago.

Children are still presenting at Vietnamese hospitials with hideous physical deformities, inherited as a result of parents and grandparents' exposure to agent orange. Washington has advised they will not be compensating those Vietnamese affected by dioxins.

And here in our "developed" nation, the federal government's Product Stewardship (Oil) has seen industry burning uncontrolled, untested waste oil, as a fuel, over unsuspecting communities where dioxins are spewing out ten fold in excess of the international recommended maximum emission, contaminating other states, the atmosphere, soils, waterways and the entire food chain.

The federal government describes its stewardship as "recycling."

Traces of chlorinated chemicals have been discovered in the ice caps and snow in remote areas such as the Arctic and Antartica.

These chemicals are chlorinated hydrocarbons containing chlorine atoms, with the emphasis on CARBON. Get it?

Such is the ignorance of the liberal and labor governments who are culpable of contaminating the masses, where both parties are imbued with the ethos of development and large-scale projects, incapable of grasping the depth of public concern for environmental protection.

There is an interesting article in Saturdays "Good Weekend" supplement The Age SMH.
What DDT supporters don't tell, INSECT RESISTANCE which can become total in 6-7 years. This is well known in rural areas and is a continual problem for farmers and chemical companies, even with modern chemicals and was chronicled by Racheal Carson.
There is evidence that the spraying of DDT and other chemicals has actually increased the potency of malaria, because the weaker strains were killed off by DDT, and now resistant super bugs have built up and the problem which was manageable is now a lot worse.
It is estimated to eradicate malaria, we would have to spray the inside walls in 8 out of 10 houses in infected areas, a logisical impossility, DDT is still used in developing countries through the use of DDT impregnated bednets and has not been banned for use.
Dr Alan Lymbery, a parasitologist at Murdoch Universityand Professor Andrew Thompson wrote " To (solely) blame a reduction in DDT useage for the death of 10-30 million people from malaria is not just simple-minded, it is demonstrably wrong.

I am still rather dubious about this whole Rachel Carson/DDT/Malaria thing. I did a bit more checking on Senator Tom Coburn's mean-spirited blocking of the bills to honour Rachel Carson. Have a look here. http://coburn.senate.gov/ffm/index.cfm?FuseAction=LatestNews.NewsStories&ContentRecord_id=b46c952e-802a-23ad-498f-4406252b12f8 Coburn cites www.rachelwaswrong.com , a website is brought to you by the good folk at the Competititve Enterprise Institute. www.cei.org

I note that the Institute published an anti-Carson article in 1996, one of the earliest I can find http://www.cei.org/gencon/025,01518.cfm I particularly like the Institute's assertion that there are only "hypothetical risks associated with such compounds as dioxin, DDT and PCBs." Mind you, the Competitive Enterprise Institute was still touting for the tobacco industry as late as 1994 (good collection of links here http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Competitive_Enterprise_Institute ) so obviously they don't let the science get in the way of a good pitch for their clients.

I still contend that there is an orchestrated campaign against Rachel Carson. If you don't want dioxin on your Weet-Bix or PCBs in your coffee, I would suggest a cautious approach to the work of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. Junk science indeed.

JJ: SourceWatch sometimes misses the hub of the arguments in the most righteous campaigns for “free” thinking and strictly commercial enterprise. There is another web at work on issues like ‘intelligent design versus natural selection’

“Most of the creation scientists' work consists of criticisms of the data that support evolution or geology” see Wiki

My notes: On ‘theory versus fact’

Claims of bias in science and the media are everywhere particularly right wing blogs.

On ‘quote mining’

Creation “science” is all about selective reuse of good science that dares to understand the more complex relationships in nature. Rarely are they working from direct experience.

IPCC reports are a good case where core climate models are constantly blasted apart.to find the most conflicting senarios. Hey; even “model” evolution in regular science becomes a disgusting practice.

This is an unhealthy mix of business interests and learning.

Quite right, Johnj.

How interesting that the Dr Coburns in this world are out to defame the deceased Rachel Carson.

She had little to do with the International Treaty, signed in May 2001 to ban the following chemicals:

Hexachlorobenzene, PCB's, chlordane, dieldrin, DDT, endrin, toxaphene, chlordane, aldrin, heptachlor, dioxins/furans and mirex.

Perhaps the "Dr Coburns" are plotting to see how they can posthumously lay the blame for the 2001 bans on Rachel Carson.

Despite the 2001 ban on PCB's, industries in my area were permitted to burn waste oil, containing PCB's up to 50ppm until 2003. "No guidelines in Australia yet", declared the unethical Department of Environment, in its defence of the influential but equally unethical pollutant industries!

And the requirement for the waste oil industry to monitor for PCB's is still not enforced!

During the Basel Convention on hazardous waste, the US, Canada and Australia were the bad guys, behaving badly and protesting at a consensus of some 130 countries for international solutions to the mitigation of hazardous waste.

Australia, a signatory to the POP's convention, requested an exemption, to continue the use of mirex (by-products dioxins and furans.)

The NT growers continue to use this stuff on mangoes - oh yummy! The current extension can also be renewed for another five years. How interesting that other countries have discontinued the use of mirex, but Australia, the "clever country" can't!

Currently there remains some 10,000 tonnes of hexachlorobenzene at Botany bay, lanquishing in sheds and purported to be the largest stockpile in the world. It has contaminated Sydney waters with dioxins etc. and despite some twenty years, solutions for the destruction of this man-made chemical have not yet been realised.

Though I understand that one country alone, Germany, has offered to burn this chemical for a price - so let's dump it on another nation -who cares!

The "Jennifers" of this country wish only to maintain the status quo, representing the recidivist polluter and their zeal for profits, without regard for the already heavily compromised environment and human health.

But we're on to you Jennifer!