Most of you won’t remember or probably have never even heard of the “Silent Spring” by Rachel Carson that was published in the ’60’s. Its main focus was on the use and alleged overuse of DDT for crop protection and general application for pest control for all manner of botanical life. She posited that DDT was deadly and had become so pervasive that our very existence was at risk or at a minimum all our children would have three legs. It covered all manner of other woes created by a modern industrial society and predicted our doom unless we retreated to more Eden-like life. Well, the Left took up the cause and DDT was indeed banned for decades based on her alleged science which was supposedly confirmed by the vast majority of scientists. Trouble was there wasn’t really any science behind her allegations and in recent years on the very back pages as opposed to her front page assertions of decades ago the error was acknowledged and further acknowledged that the poorest in the world suffered the most by lack of DDT to increase crop production.
Likewise it was settled science for decades from at least the ’70’s that all cholesterol was deadly. Every food manufacturer around went to great lengths to develop butter and all manner of food stuffs that were low in cholesterol or even free of it. We were all warned to cut out that steak and buttered potato. Again on the back pages recently you may have noticed that now we learn that in fact that was wrong. You can enjoy your eggs and bacon without undue worry it seems after all. The Left also adopted this theory and it was agreed by the “scientific community”.
Now its the turn of the vitamin supplements. We’ve been taught that science tells us we need all these special diets or pills to be healthy and that only the rich or 1% get access to those supplements. The height of the concern is very evident in the current Federal push of O to control diets in the schools. But did you notice in the last month that now research shows that too many of those supplements actually increases the risks of cancer?
The hard sciences are much more trustworthy when it comes to agreeing upon “settled science”. That would be fields such a physics or astronomy for example. Usually they will say they are still working on an issue and the implications for the future. They are not so prone to sweeping generalizations and projections about future human behavior.
Science and the scientific method are wonderful. But when politicians get involved be sure you truly believe they are acting on science and not ideology. Especially when there is an entire “industry” built around one particular view of an issue. Are they grants, professorships and lots of bureaucratic jobs dependent on one special view of an issue? If so be very careful. Examine the facts and take the rhetoric cautiously. This applies to any matter. I can recall when we were all going to die simply because we built some nuclear power plants. Many very famous scientists from around the globe predicted this as a scientific fact. Check on YouTube news clips from the ’60’s. Last I checked we are still here. The bigger worry you should have is how many of us will there be down the road but we’ll save that for another day.
“It gives me great pleasure indeed to see the stubbornness of an incorrigible non-conformist warmly acclaimed” Albert Einstein. olcranky.wordpress.com