Human Nature

Six years into the Bush Administration, it's basically the ant wars all over again. At key agencies, a disregard for inconvenient evidence seems today to be a prerequisite. A memo prepared by the Democratic staff of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform in mid-March, for example, revealed that officials of the White House Council on Environmental Quality had made more than a hundred and eighty changes to a status report on global warming, ... Full Story »

Posted by Julian Friedland

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Oliver Jones
4.6
by Oliver Jones - Oct. 1, 2008

The hook for this short news-analysis piece is Rachel Carson's 100th birthday. It reviews some contemporary government denial behavior in the context of the era in which Carson wrote _Silent Spring,_ and draws effective parallels

See Full Review » (10 answers)
Joel Kulenkamp
4.2
by Joel Kulenkamp - Oct. 1, 2008

Interesting attempt to commemorate the 100th birthday of Rachel Carson, but the premise is a tad hazy; is she getting blamed for the fire ants?

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Michael D. Lowe
4.5
by Michael D. Lowe - Oct. 1, 2008

On the contrary Rachel Carson was and is one of the heroes of the environmental movement. No one is the scientific community advocates the resumed use of DDT. This is a terrible chemical & it's effects on the ecosystem are well documented & explicitly spelled out in the article. The article is well sourced & factual. The current administration's penchant for ignoring & warping scientific data has been extensively reported in many publication including the OMB own in house investigations. It's a good quick read.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
Veronica Barlee
3.6
by Veronica Barlee - Oct. 1, 2008

An interesting, if somewhat meandering, opinion piece noting Rachel Carson's 100th anniversary and exploring a critical topic: political interference or departmental zeal trumping sound environmental management.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Julian Friedland
4.1
by Julian Friedland - Oct. 1, 2008

More on how the administration has been distorting science. Some nice details in here without being too lengthy and with little gratuitous venom.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Terry Baiko
4.6
by Terry Baiko - Oct. 1, 2008

A well developed arguement about how human arrogance plays in Washington, whether through blind ignorance (USDA) or intentional ignorance (Bushies).

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Fran Meaney
1.7
by Fran Meaney - Oct. 1, 2008

Rachel Carson is responsible for many millions of death from malaria in Africa. Her acolytles today defending the "ecosystem'" clearly do not place human life as a priority. That goes for the author of this slanted article.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Roland F. Hirsch
1.0
by Roland F. Hirsch - Oct. 1, 2008

This polemic ignores the fact that Rachel Carson is reviled today by scientists for her role in ending the use of DDT. The UN estimates that 800,000 children alone die of malaria each year, children who would be protected by use of DDT. Ecological and medical research strongly supports this conclusion. The picture presented of the Bush administration’s record on science is equally ill-informed. Knowledgeable people consider this administration to have one of the best records on science policy of any in several decades, perhaps back to the late 1940s-early 1950s. There is an outstanding science advisor, who has served longer than any previous holder of that position. The leadership in the key science agencies is outstanding and ... More »

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Randal Murray
4.8
by Randal Murray - Oct. 1, 2008

An excellent, short piece providing context for the recent scientific revisionism while recognizing Rachel Carson, author of "Silent Spring" on what would have been 100th birthday.

See Full Review » (7 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.7

Good
from 16 reviews (50% confidence)
Quality
3.8
Facts
3.6
Fairness
3.3
Information
3.6
Sourcing
3.6
Style
4.2
Accuracy
3.5
Balance
2.7
Context
3.7
Popularity
3.7
Recommendation
3.6
Credibility
4.3
# Reviews
5.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help