Newsgroup sci.environment 108525

Directory

Subject: Re: PHOTON BELT, THREE DAYS Of DARKNESS, COMING SOON -- From: kfoster@rainbow.rmii.com (Kurt Foster)
Subject: Re: The ban on CFCs and conspiracy theories -- From: Leonard Evens
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Cadmium emission -- From: Seth Fehrs
Subject: A Great Offer of a Geographic Information System -- From: nac@zap.io.org (The International NAC Society)
Subject: Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy -- From: yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky)
Subject: Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy -- From: yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky)
Subject: Re: Environmentalists responsibility for human deaths (was Re: Major problem with climate predictions ) -- From: Leonard Evens
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: ozone@primenet.com (John Moore)
Subject: Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy -- From: brshears@whale.st.usm.edu (Harold Brashears)
Subject: re: bioengineering -- From: wrbrown@iastate.edu (William R Brown)
Subject: Looking for listserv postings/ websites concerning environmental jobs -- From: ted.smith@cdmg.uucp.netcom.com (Ted Smith)
Subject: Re: Tragedy, war in central Africa -- From: icebel@public.gb.co.cn
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: tobis@scram.ssec.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis)
Subject: Re: Christianity and indifference to nature (was Re: Major problem with getting philosophical late at night) -- From: yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky)
Subject: Threat to climate data -- From: rmichael@nwu.edu (Bob Michaelson)
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: Leonard Evens
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions, WARNING: LONG BORING POST -- From: mfriesel@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: Greenpeace harms the environment yet again -- From: mfriesel@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: Groundwater Remediation -- From: "Herdsman"
Subject: Re: Greenpeace harms the environment yet again -- From: "Manus J. Cooney"
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: andrewt@cs.su.oz.au (Andrew Taylor)
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: mfriesel@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: Major problem with western 'lifestyle' -- From: mfriesel@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: andrewt@cs.su.oz.au (Andrew Taylor)
Subject: Re: The Limits To Growth -- From: Jay Hanson
Subject: Re: Auckland bus underground => health costs? -- From: colin@pacbell.net (Colin Campbell)
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce Scott TOK )
Subject: Re: Mountain Bikers Arrested in Grand Canyon -- From: "R.D. Frazier"
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce Scott TOK )
Subject: Re: The Limits To Growth -- From: jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: "Mike Asher"
Subject: Re: Environmentalists responsibility for human deaths (was Re: Major problem with climate predictions ) -- From: "Mike Asher"
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions -- From: bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce Scott TOK )
Subject: Re: Environmentalists responsibility for human deaths (was Re: Major problem with climate predictions ) -- From: "D. Braun"

Articles

Subject: Re: PHOTON BELT, THREE DAYS Of DARKNESS, COMING SOON
From: kfoster@rainbow.rmii.com (Kurt Foster)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 15:44:51 GMT
photonblt@aol.com wrote:
:           (Excerpted from "You Are Becoming a Galactic Human" by 
:           Virginia Essene and Sheldon Nidle, channeling Sirian Council 
:           members): 
:                "The photon belt, a huge torroid shaped object composed 
:           of photon light particles, was first discovered by your 
:           scientists in 1961 near the vicinity of the Pleiades by 
:           satellite instrumentation. The reality is that your solar 
:           system and the photon belt are moving toward each other [and 
:           will merge sometime between March, 1995, and the end of 
:           1996, or soon thereafter]. 
:[big cut]
     This is raving lunacy.  Photons (EM radiation) can't be detected till
arrival.  The Pleiades are > 200 light-years away (the star Alcyone is
listed in my Field Guide as 240 ly away).  Photons "in the vicinity" of
the Pleiades around 1960 won't arrive here to be detected, till around
the year 2200; whether the Pleiades even exist "now", nature forbids our
knowing till around 2236.
     There's a whole SPHERE of photons leaving ANY star -- namely, the
star's light.  And, of course, photons move at the speed of light.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: The ban on CFCs and conspiracy theories
From: Leonard Evens
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 09:12:56 -0600
Don Baccus wrote:
> 
> In article <32814019.1215F689@math.nwu.edu>,
> Leonard Evens   wrote:
> 
> >It was my suggestion that
> >something similar happened in connection with CFCs and chemical
> >companies.   This is not a bizarre off the wall theory I dreamt up one
> >night but the conventional wisdom as best I can determine.
> 
> And, indeed it fits a world view which assumes corporations work in
> their own self-interest, which includes attacking research or data
> which threatens their bottom line.  That same self-interest, though,
> makes it likely that they'll accept overwhelming scientific consensus.
> At worst (if you wish to assume they have no sense of conscience at all,
> which I don't) acceptance leads to a quicker competitive reaction in
> the marketplace (by the development of alternatives) than denial, when
> an industry is not monopolized.  I think this line of thought works
> for many industries, and those where it fails include special cases
> like the tobacco industry where addiction aids the marketer.
> 
> >This is
> >not very surprising, and it doesn't really explain why they opposed any
> >action up to one point and then switched.
> 
> If the science behind CFCs was really bad, and a ban unwarranted, such
> a switch would be exceedingly risky, in business terms.  They'd risk
> losing credibility in their business at large, if it could be shown they'd
> ignored science in a crude attempt to capitalize on an environmental scare.
> DuPont sells many, many different kinds of chemicals, and if they were
> caught out being so blatantly loose with science in their self-interest,
> they'd be harmed in many fields.
> 
> It reminds me of the DDT scenario, where the manufacturer claimed stridenty)
> (as Mike does today) that it was harmless, until the sciencific evidence
> was too overwhelming to ignore.
> 
> >  The usual explanation, as
> >mentioned above, is that as a chemical company they were convinced by
> >their own chemists of the validity of the science.
> 
> And, as a company, are bright enough to realize that a science-based
> corporate endeavor abandons science with real risk to the long-term
> viability of the entity.
> --
> 
> - Don Baccus, Portland OR 
>   Nature photos, site guides, and other goodies at:
>           http://www.xxxpdx.com/~dhogaza
Mostly all I can say in response is `ditto, ditto'.   But let me add
that there are those one the  far left who consider corporations the
source of all evil.   Corporations are mostly morally neutral but can be
expected to promote their own interests, which may not be those of
society as a whole.  Hence, we need checks on their considerable power.
The exact balance and where those checks should be is what much of
politics in the last century in this country has been about.   But more
basically, corporations are one aspect of human social organization and
one way our species impacts on the biosphere.   But the human species
was affecting the biosphere in significant ways, including destroying
whole species, long before there were any corporations.  Hence, looking
for devils and angels is not an appropriate way for our species to
respond to the problems which face us.  Human beings are capable of both
altruism and the pursuit of self interest.   That is the way we
function, and our societies can probably not function without both.
But we will need a bit more altruism if we are to solve the
environmental problems ahead, and how to attain it is not clear.  In the
end we may fail, but I am not ready to give up yet. 
-- 
Leonard Evens       len@math.nwu.edu      491-5537
Department of Mathematics, Norwthwestern University
Evanston Illinois
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy)
Date: 07 Nov 1996 15:37:02 GMT
Even if fusion power were a long shot, it would be worth the trivial amounts
of money that are spent on it.
-- 
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/
During the last years of the Second Millenium, the Earthmen complained
a lot.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Cadmium emission
From: Seth Fehrs
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 11:29:33 -0500
Get this crap off alt.pave.the.earth.
Scott Hinman wrote:
> 
> hanson wrote:
> >
> >(snip)
> > a) The uncontrolled Cad tank analyzed to 1.5 oz/gal NaOH, 12.5 oz/gal NaCN
> > and 2.8 oz/gal Cadmium. In this "uncontrolled" experiment the emissions
> > were measured via collection of the mist, 8" over the bath's liquid surface
> > and yielded 24.8 ugr (micrograms) Cadmium. Question 1: How much total
> > Sodium (ugr) must have accompanied this collected Cadmium amount (24.8
> > ugr)?
> 
> Converting NaOH and NaCN to just Na, this tank contains 6.726 oz/gal
> Na.  One is forced to assume that the ratio of Na to Cd in the mist
> remains the same as that in the tank, so Na is (6.726/2.8)*24.8
> = 59.6 ugr.
> 
> Carrying out the same calculation for the next tank, I get
> 12.4 ugr of Na.
> 
> Is there missing information here, or are you claiming that
> the regulatory people couldn't pass high school chem?
> 
> Regards,
>   Scott
-- 
Seth J. Fehrs                                      At large member
FEHRS002@MC.DUKE.EDU                               NC Libertarian Party 
Programmer Analyst, DUMC                           Executive Committee
Return to Top
Subject: A Great Offer of a Geographic Information System
From: nac@zap.io.org (The International NAC Society)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 11:08:48 -0500
===============================================================================
|                                                                             |
|       Great News!                                                           |
|                                                                             |
|       You can buy a US$999 GIS with only US$39 before Nov. 20, 1996!        |
|                                                                             |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Contents                                                                   |
|                                                                             |
|  Introduction                                                               |
|  Major features                                                             |
|  Discount information                                                       |
|  Order information                                                          |
===============================================================================
Introduction
   NAC Geographic Products Inc. has developed a geographic information system 
   called NACGIS Version 2.0 for Windows 95 and Windows NT, which has 
   implemented the great invention: the Natural Area Coding System.  Based on 
   the Natural Area Coding System, NACGIS has introduced a ten-character 
   Universal Geographic Identity for every geographic object in the world.  No 
   matter what size it is.  Every geographic object in the world from a 
   continent to a parking meter can be statistically uniquely identified by its
   Universal Geographic Identity (UGID).
Major features:
   1. Automatic assignment of UGID's to all geographic objects.
   2. Automatic links between a graphic object in the map file and its 
      associated document in the document database.  You can use both text 
      searching and mouse clicking on the graphic object to retrieve the 
      document for reading and editing.
   3  Supports transparency which allows you draw transparent graphic objects 
      with all pictures underneath shown in a mixed color.
   4. Graphics editor's features:
      a) Drawing tools:
         NACGIS Version 2.0 procides two sets of drawing tools: 
          i)  Mouse direct drafting on the screen with your specified default
              line color, line type, line thickness, brush color, brush 
              pattern, font type, font size, font color, layer number, etc. 
         ii)  Graphic object set-up dialog boxes to create accurate pictures.  
              The dialog boxs allow you input exact coordinates for polyline 
              nodes and polygon vertices and layer number, text escapement 
              angle, layer number, specify whether it is a polyline or smooth 
              curve and a polygon or an area, whether it is transparent, and 
              set up pen, brush and font parameters.  You can insert or delete 
              nodes or vertices at any location of a polyline or a polygon.  
              A polyline, polygon, simple picture or a group picture can be 
              converted to each other by simply clicking a botton on the dialog
              boxes.   
         NACGIS Version 2.0 can draw polylines, curves, polygons, areas, simple
         pictures (ractangle, circle, ellipse, regular polygons, stars, etc.), 
         text objects, bitmap objects and group pictures (from an art gallery 
         database).
      b) Manipulation tools:
         NACGIS Version 2.0 provides the following graphic objects manipulation
         tools:
         i)  Mouse and arrow keys direct draging and resizing
        ii)  Manipulation dialog box which allows you move an graphic object or
             a group of graphic objects a specified distance or to a specified
             location, exactly stretch it in x- and/or y-directions, rotate it 
             a specified angle arround a specified pivot, and mirror it in x- 
             and/or y-directions with a specified symetric center.
       iii)  Alignment dialog box which allows you align a group of graphic
             objects to the left, center, right, top, middle, bottom.
        iv)  Group objects tool which allows you to create group pictures (only
             one set of a group picture's data will be stored in the memory 
             but can be shown in as many places as you want, which will greatly
             simplify your drawing and save memory). Once the group picture is
             created, you can also add it to the art gallery database of the
             software for later use. 
         v)  Delete, Erase All, Undo, Cut, Copy and Paste tools
        vi)  Grid generator which can automatically generate the appropriate 
             level of the NAC grids.
   5. Map viewing tools
      NACGIS Version 2.0 provides the following map viewing tools:
         i)  Theme layers dialog box allows you select the visible layers for 
             the current map.  It can store 120 different theme layers.
        ii)  Zoom In and Zoom Out tools allows you zoom in as many time as you 
             want and zoom back to the origanal picture.
       iii)  Split panes of a winow, multiple windows of a document and 
             multiple windows of multiple documents.  NACGIS Version 2.0 allows
             you to view different parts of a map in different panes or 
             windows, view different scales in different panes, and
             compare different maps in different windows.
        iv)  Display of the cursor's coordinates in Longitude/Latitude, UTM and
             NAC simultaneously on the status bar of the frame window.
         v)  Coordinate systems
             NACGIS Version 2.0 supports three types of coordinate systems: 
             Longitude/Latitude system, UTM system and user-defined system.  
             You can import a map file in one coordinate system and export it 
             in another system (Longitude/Latitude <=> UTM).
        vi)  Window setting
             You can set the scroll window size, window background color, the 
             coordinates of the top left corner of the window and suitable 
             scale to create the best view for the map. 
   6. Document editor's features
      NACGIS Version 2.0 also provides a powerful document editor which allows 
      you to read and edit the attached document of a graphic object.  The 
      attached document is named by the UGID of a geographic object, which can 
      cantain text contents with all kinds of fonts, font styles, sizes and 
      colors, bitmaps, and all other objects created by OLE servers such as 
      Excel Charts and Worksheets.
   7. Help file
      NACGIS Version 2.0 provides a powerful help system which has the 
      following features:
         i)  Context help
             Whenever you need help for a dialog or a menu command, you can get
             the help topic immediately by pressing F1.  You can also press the
             button with an arrow and a question mark on the toolbar and the 
             move the cursor to the item about which you need help and
             click the left button of the mouse to get the help topic.
        ii)  Tooltips
             NACGIS Version 2.0 provides tooltips for all menu commands and 
             buttons.  When you move the cursor to a toolbar button, you will 
             see a yellow box with simple help text beside the cursor and a 
             bit more detail help text on the status bar of the frame window.  
       iii)  Topics, index and word search
             NACGIS Version 2.0 allows you to search help content by topics, 
             index and simply a word.
   8. Print, print preview and printer set-up
      NACGIS Version 2.0 provides you all the useful features for print, print 
      preview and printer set-up.  It allows you print black/while or color 
      map, and a large map into small pieces which can be connected together 
      to get a large map.  You can also print any part of a map if you set the 
      window size, the coordinates of the top left corner of the window and the
      appropriate scale of the map. 
   9. Support of file types
      NACGIS Version 2.0 mainly support its own map document files with the
      extension ".nac". However, it can import and export three types of text
      files: lists of polyline nodes coordinates, lists of polygon vertices
      coordinates and lists of text objects (text contents, insert point
      coordinates and escapement angle).  In the future vertions, we will add
      dxf files.  NAC Geographic Products Inc. also provides you various map
      documents at good prices.
Discount information
   NAC Geographic Products Inc. would like to offer you a special discounted
   price for the license of using NACGIS Version 2.0.  The standard price for
   the license for a single person using NACGIS Version 2.0 in one computer is
   US$999.  If you are using the software at home for non-business purposes,
   you can get 50% discount.  Once you have bought one license of the software,
   you will get a 80% discount for the license for a future version of the same
   sfotware. There is a special discount price now. If you buy the license 
   before November 20, 1996, you need to pay only US$39 + US$5 shipping fee 
   ( + 7% GST if in you are in Canada).  After then, the price will rise 
   everyday (about US$5.3 a day) until it reaches US$999.
Ordering information
   You can order the license by sending us the international money order
   (or a check if you are in Canada) or tell us the information of the VISA
   credit card (Credit card number, holder's name, expiration date and issuing
   bank name). The price is determined by the date you send out your order. 
   If you use credit card, you can also order it through Email, fax or phone.
   Please include the exact name, company, address, phone, fax, email for each
   licesee because the name and address will be embedded into the software.
   Our address is
                  NAC Geographic Products Inc.
                  509-50 Stephanie Street
                  Toronto, ON M5T 1B3
                  Canada
                  NAC: 8CHK  Q87P
                  Phone and fax: (416) 979 9306
                  Email:         nac@io.org
                  Web:           http://www.io.org
If you are doing land planning, NACGIS will be your great assistant!
If you are working on transportation, NACGIS will be your first assistant!
If you are managing natural resources, NACGIS will provide you the convenience!
If you are working on environment protection, NACGIS will be your power tool!
If you are doing marketing, NACGIS will give you extra hands, eyes and ears!
If you are managing real estate, NACGIS will let you get rid of tedious work!
If you like fishing, NACGIS will help you record the best fishing spots!
If you are a bird watcher, NACGIS will tell you where birds live and move to!
If you are learning geography, NACGIS will be your helpful teaching assistant!
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy
From: yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 16:29:51 GMT
A.J. (alnev@midtown.net) wrote:
: On 5 Nov 1996 12:27:53 GMT, jwas@ix.netcom.com(jw) wrote:
: Are you clinically insane,
This is one hypothesis that has been suggested. Also that "jw" is a 
malfunctioning replicant dropped to this planet by the dreaded "Greys". 
Ecologically,
Yuri.
: or do you really believe that "trillions"
: of people can be supported when we've already got problems 
: with less than 1% of that number?  Are you aware that a billion is a
: thousand million and a trillion is a thousand billion?  You are either
: a complete idiot, or your posts have been an ongoing joke.  Please
: come clean.   They say ad-hominem attacks are petty, but I'm afraid
: your ludicrous statements offer no other recourse.  Please at least
: answer this simple question (about the "trillions" nonsense). 
--
           **    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto   **
  -- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Most of the evils of life arise from man's being 
unable to sit still in a room    ||    B. Pascal
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy
From: yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 16:35:57 GMT
Mike Asher (masher@tusc.net) wrote:
: I'm sure they said the same thing in the 12th century: "You really think
: the earth can support *billlions* when the few million we have today are
: all starving to death?"
But I think our understanding of ecology has evolved somewhat since then, 
no?
: Of course, we do support billions today, and in far greater ease and
: comfort than those few million on the 12th century.   Why is that, A.J. ?
You project the ignorance and fatalism of our age on the people of the 
future. I think the people of the future will enjoy a far superior 
lifestyle with much smaller global population.
Ecologically,
Yuri.
--
           **    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto   **
  -- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Most of the evils of life arise from man's being 
unable to sit still in a room    ||    B. Pascal
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Environmentalists responsibility for human deaths (was Re: Major problem with climate predictions )
From: Leonard Evens
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 09:31:55 -0600
Adam Ierymenko wrote:
> 
> In article <55mo72$rmt@newsy.ifm.liu.se>,
>         redin@lysator.liu.se (Magnus Redin) writes:
> >> If you want to know more about non industrial civilisation you
> >> should study the latest findings of the relevant authorities,
> >> otherwise don't pontificate on subjects you know nothing about.
> >
> >It is tough to live thru the winter in Sweden, Finland, Canada, etc
> >eithouth good housing and an industrial society helps a lot with that.
> >I assume you propose to "depopulate" those countries?
> 
> I suggest that those who oppose the industrial revolution study history.  Pay
> particular attention to the continuous inter-tribal warfare of most native
> american and other primitive tribes, and the Orwellian-type religious
> dictatorship that existed in the "civilized" world.
> 
> There were (and still are) a few isolated peoples who lived in a primitive way
> and were peaceful and had a relatively good standard of living.  They lived in
> areas of the world that are particularly conductive naturally to human beings,
> and were relatively peaceful so they didn't create lots of problems for
> themselves.  They were in the minority.  Most of the world was busy lining up
> in rows and shooting each other down, or scalping each other, or sacrificing
> their children in mindless religious ceremonies, etc.
> 
> Also, take a look at the mortality rate and average life span.  Again, with
> a few possible exceptions due to particularly good genetics or environment,
> most people didn't live that long.
> 
> Of course, I suspect most of these people understand this and don't care
> because they care more about animals and water and inanimate objects (and
> the "intrinsic value" of these things) than people.
I agree with the point you made that life on earth before the industrial
revolution was not an idyllic Eden.   I also believe that the industrial
revolution has added significantly to human health. longevity and
comfort.   It has been a boon for our species, but it has also given us
the capability to engage in acts of extreme destruction.  Nothing of the
magnitude of the second world war occurred before the advent of modern
industrial society.   So our current capabilities have enhanced our
ability to affect the biosphere, but much of what we do is without
intent and without thought of the consequences.  So one does not have to
be an `opponent of the industrial revolution' to be concerned about such
issues.
-- 
Leonard Evens       len@math.nwu.edu      491-5537
Department of Mathematics, Norwthwestern University
Evanston Illinois
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: ozone@primenet.com (John Moore)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 09:54:01 -0700
On Wed, 06 Nov 1996 20:33:10 +0000, "sdef!" 
wrote:
>John Moore wrote:
>I disagree with both of you, (what a surprise}
>I agree that they have had a constructive relationship. But constructive 
>(or benficial) only for technology. Science is the study of things, and 
>this is diverted into technological lines, so the tools become more and 
>more sophidsticated and more and more remote and specialised. The 
>biggest loss science has had lately is the loss of public understanding. 
>this is due to the remote regions it is delving into, and the 
>incompleteness of its vision as it only studies that which benefits 
>technology.
Nah, the biggest losses are caused by:
	-a federal budget bloated by social spending which is putting
extreme pressure on *all* other funding
	-an education system, and a media environment, that leaves
people more and more ignorant of the basic ideas behind science. Most
people don't even know the difference between science and engineering,
and could not define either profession.
>
>As for the other gushing praise for progress, Corporate videos make me 
>ill, and this sounds like one.
Gee, since I often do technical support of sales, I guess I should
feel flattered.
Except, that those videos make me ill also!
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Ecological Economics and Entropy
From: brshears@whale.st.usm.edu (Harold Brashears)
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 16:46:00 GMT
mfriesel@ix.netcom.com wrote for all to see:
>I state:
>
>I'd like to recommend that, before this 'I understand entropy and you 
>don't' argument goes too far,  everyone take a deep breath, pretend 
>you don't know anything, and pick up and read Yourgrau, van der Merwe, 
>and Raw's book 'Treatise on Irreversible and Statistical 
>Thermophysics'.  They discuss the various formulations of entropy, 
>although not all in the same place, and they talk a lot so you can 
>skip the mathematics if you want and still get something out of it.  
>If you want to absorb the math, it is incisive yet clear because of 
>the quality of presentation.  Then you can take up this thread again 
>and at least have a common set of definitions to work with.
I have to thank you, it is clear that Hanson is not using the
established definitions of entropy.  I did not realize this before he
sucked me into the argument.  A more elementary text is "Chemical
Thermodynamics", by Watt.  A nice little introduction text is
"Elementary Chemical Thermodynamics", by Mahan, if you can find it.
Until I see evidence that Hanson has read one of these texts, I am
bowing out.
Regards, Harold
----
"An obstinate man does not hold opinions, but they hold him."
	---Alexander Pope (1688 - 1744)
Return to Top
Subject: re: bioengineering
From: wrbrown@iastate.edu (William R Brown)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 16:56:10 GMT
i believe that bioengineering groups should be forced to tell the truth 
on their food and product labels so that the public would be informed as 
to what food and produces they are digesting, there is enough 
enviormental falsehoods and mismanagement that relates to our 
general health  
-- 
ray brown
wrbrown@iastate.edu
Return to Top
Subject: Looking for listserv postings/ websites concerning environmental jobs
From: ted.smith@cdmg.uucp.netcom.com (Ted Smith)
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 14:55:00 GMT
aleshin@acsu.buffalo.edu wrote:
 >Subject: Looking for listserv postings/ websites concerning environmental job
A>Hello everybody!
A>Please help.  I am looking for employment related information sources on the
 >internet.  Especially, I am interested in areas of Water Quality Engineering,
 >Ecosystem Modeling, GIS, Water Resource Management, and Regulatory
 >Control/Policy Making.  I will appreciate any information on this subject.
 >Thank you.
See http://www.calweb.com/~tcsmith/ores/jobs/
  -- Ted
---
 * QMPro 1.52 * Has anyone seen my pocket? I lost my Pocket Computer!
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Tragedy, war in central Africa
From: icebel@public.gb.co.cn
Date: 7 Nov 1996 17:09:42 GMT
>   mfriesel@ix.netcom.com writes:
>  charliew wrote:
>  > 
>  > Magnus,
>  > 
>  > you will not be able to "get through" to these zealots.
>  > They already have their minds made up.  That's too bad.  If
>  > they could pull their heads out of their rear-ends long
>  > enough to look around and observe their surroundings, they
>  > might get a good feel for cause and effect.
>  > 
>  > Keep the mind-set of these zealots in mind.  While they are
>  > deluded, they are definitely not stupid.  Some of their
>  > arguments are eloquent, so they occasionally convince
>  > unsuspecting individuals that they are right.
>  > 
>  > Have a nice day.
>  > 
>  'It is black!' screams the pot, referring to the kettle.
>  hello
>>>>
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: tobis@scram.ssec.wisc.edu (Michael Tobis)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 17:21:33 GMT
Don Baccus (donb@rational.com) wrote:
: In article <55rb52$akr@spool.cs.wisc.edu>,
: Michael Tobis  wrote:
: >Bruce Scott TOK (bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de) wrote:
: >: Adam Ierymenko (api@axiom.access.one.net) wrote:
: >: : The ozone hypothesis and global warming are both highly politically charged
: >: : issues.  There is a lot of ideology mixed up in the debate.
: >: Maybe you can give specific examples.  The above does not describe any
: >: research environment I've ever seen.
: >Of course it doesn't, but it does describe some organizations that are quite
: >willing to put on white coats and pretend to be research institutions. The
: >question as to how the lay public is to make the distinction is not a trivial
: >one.
: Well, then, if you're right you should be able to tell us specifically
: which of the organizations are poseurs, right?
: You've ducked, not answered, the question.  
: Get specific.
This is exactly the center of my main axe to grind on this newsgroup.
It's a difficult question that requires nontrivial answers. I certainly
don't have an easy answer. The best I can come up with is an independently
constituted review group that's generally trusted. It's not easy to see
how to fund such a thing and have it maintain its trust. As I've said,
Consumer Reports is the closest thing I know of. By the way, Consumer
Reports *has* supported the IPCC position.
: >Furthermore, while this is rare among the disciplines you might recognize
: >to be sciences, political motivation is certainly not unheard of historically
: >in scientific disciplines, nor is it absent in many contemporary faculties
: >that have some scientific pretensions, notably in the social sciences
: >such as some sociology faculties on the one hand and some economics faculties
: >on the other.
: But climatology is not a social science, so it is hard to see why you
: bring this up (whether your premise be true or false).
I am broadening the issue here, to show how attacks on climatology, while
I believe them to be false, are not so obviously false that a casual
dismissal is sufficient to ignore them. Since I am in fact a climatologist,
you may conclude that I do find something of value in the field.
However, I also conclude that convincing the public of this is not
a trivial task, and the question of how much the public payroll should
reward me for justifying my work rather than doing it is a serious
one as well.
mt
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Christianity and indifference to nature (was Re: Major problem with getting philosophical late at night)
From: yuku@io.org (Yuri Kuchinsky)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 16:50:17 GMT
I agree with A.J. The anthropocentrism of _most_ Christians is quite
obvious. "We're the center of the universe". "We can use and abuse
anything in the world of Nature..." This is the kind of attitude that
propels our civilization to calamity of ecological scarcity and
overpopulation. 
To be fair, there're many passages in the Bible that convey respect for 
Nature and all living creatures. But these passages will remain ignored by 
your typical "Bible-thumper".
Let us respect both humans and Nature, and hope that they will be able to 
live in peace and balance some time in the future. Surely it is not 
happenning now...
Yuri. 
A.J. (alnev@midtown.net) wrote:
: On Tue, 05 Nov 1996 22:39:06 +0000, "sdef!" 
: wrote:
: >No wonder we believe the world was made for us. No wonder we worship
the great : >homo sapiens. We never see anything else. The moon and stars
are blocked from : >view by a sterile sodium glow, which obsessively
lights up every dark corner : >where a stranger might lurk. A stark
reminder of the fact that though we have : >eliminated every large
predator from our home environment the worst threat of : >all comes from
our own fellow humans.  : >More and more we view the world through a
screen, tv, windscreen computer : >screen... Like a gas chamber in a
chemistry lab, like we need to be isolated : >from it, protected. 
: You can thank the Bible (specifically Genesis) for much of this
: mentality.  Dig into the motives of most anti-environmentalists and
: you will find "Christian values" pertaining to Man's role in nature.
: I'm not implying that all Christians feel this way, but you won't hear
: atheists claiming we have a "God given right" to trample any species
: that impedes our population growth.  Rush Limbaugh's chapter on
: ecology in his first book flat-out states that he's a Creationist, and
: we know what follows from that.
: People who take the following passage literally are not inclined to
: care when Man clashes with an "inferior" species.
: "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, be fruitful, 
: and MULTIPLY, and replenish the earth, and SUBDUE it: and 
: have DOMINION over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of 
: the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." 
: (Genesis 1:28)
--
           **    Yuri Kuchinsky in Toronto   **
  -- a webpage like any other...  http://www.io.org/~yuku  --
Most of the evils of life arise from man's being 
unable to sit still in a room    ||    B. Pascal
Return to Top
Subject: Threat to climate data
From: rmichael@nwu.edu (Bob Michaelson)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 16:13:21 GMT
_Nature_ reports in its October 24, 1996 issue (page 653) on an issue of
concern to anyone who depends on large observational databases.  The
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) could well establish new
copyright laws that would present barriers to access of these databases.
The following is exerpted from the Nature article. This article, written by
Colin Macilwain, is also available at the _Nature_ web site 
(http://www.america.nature.com/) -- access to the site is free but
users do need to register.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Researchers across the world could lose access to important
databanks under new database copyright rules being considered by the
World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), scientific leaders in the
United States warned last week. 
The critics say that, in order to use data under the proposed rules,
astronomers, climatologists, oceanographers and others who rely on free
access to large observational databases would have to seek permission and
perhaps to pay. The proposed rules are said to have originated in Europe
and have already been endorsed by the US Department of Commerce. 
But US government lawyers say that the concerns are misplaced. According
to one of them, Keith Kupferschmid of the US Patent and Trademark Office
(PTO), scientists will get free access to data anyway under the proposed
law, because their using it will not do "substantial harm" to the commercial
interests of the database compiler. 
Leaders of the US scientific establishment have written to Michael Kantor,
secretary of commerce, criticizing the proposed new rules. They want the
United States to withdraw its support and to prevent their endorsement at a
planned WIPO meeting in Geneva in December. 
In the letter, Bruce Alberts, president of the National Academy of Sciences,
William Wulf, president of the National Academy of Engineering, and
Kenneth Shine, of the Institute of Medicine, say that the proposed changes
would "significantly inhibit researchers seeking to reuse and combine data for
publication or for research". 
The changes were endorsed by the commerce department "without any
debate or analysis of the law's potentially harmful implications" for science
and technology, the letter says. It points out that, although the unintended
consequences appear "very grave", no effort was made to consult the
scientific community. 
The proposals would assign the copyright on the contents of a database to
whoever compiled it, require users to ask for permission to use the contents,
and set up a basis for payment for use. Critics say that the law would apply
to all privately generated datasets, as well as to public datasets from
countries that wished to restrict access. 
Climate scientists are particularly worried that cash-strapped weather
services in some countries could use the rule to extract fees from researchers
who need access to their weather records. According to John Barton of the
law school at Stanford University, the privatization of satellite and other
data-gathering operations will place an increasing quantity of vital data in 
the hands of organizations that will be inclined to use the new law to charge
scientists for access. "The entire community ought to be very upset about
this," says Wulf. 
Stephen Berry, a chemist at the University of Chicago, attacks the proposal
for failing to include any "fair use" provision of the type that currently 
allows  free use of documents and databases for research. In the worst 
scenario, he  says, the proposal would allow a commercial database compiler to 
"co-opt" publicly accessible data and claim copyright on it. 
[material deleded]
                Colin Macilwain 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Davud Lide, a chemical physicist formerly with the National Institute of
Standards and Technology and now Editor-in-Chief of the _CRC Handbook of 
Chemistry and Physics_ and of several other major reference sources posted
a message on the listserv CHMINF-L on November 1 saying that:
>This is a serious issue which the scientific information community should
>follow closely. The PTO will hold an open meetin on Nov. 12 and has asked
>for written comments by Nov. 22 (see Federal Register, Oct. 17, Vol. 61, 
>No, 202, p. 54159).  Whetever the merits of the proposed WIPO treaty, it
>seems clear that more time shoud be allowed to get input from all interested
>parties.
Bob Michaelson
rmichael@nwu.edu                                                              
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: Leonard Evens
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 09:00:40 -0600
Mike Asher wrote:
> 
> > Bruce Scott TOK (bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de) wrote:
> > : Adam Ierymenko (api@axiom.access.one.net) wrote:
> >
> > : : The ozone hypothesis and global warming are both highly politically
> charged
> > : : issues.  There is a lot of ideology mixed up in the debate.  There
> are quite
> > : : a few who *want* these things to be true in order to push a certain
> ideology,
> > : : and there are a lot of others who don't *want* them to be true in
> order to
> > : : push a different ideology.
> >
> > : Maybe you can give specific examples.  The above does not describe any
> > : research environment I've ever seen.
> >
> 
> Of course, Bruce's own research environment--plasma fusion physics-- is
> quite 'politically charged', though I doubt he'll admit it.  9 out ot 10
> physics Ph.D's you ask will say that it is an collosal boondoggle, sucking
> billions in research dollars out of more productive areas, and that the one
> constant in fusion physics is the claimed 25-year ETA to breakeven (been
> the same since the late-50's).
> 
> Of course, the fusion experts themselves paint a different story, and are
> frantically trying to stop the hemmorhaging of research funds.    And,
> though I'm on their side, I must point out that they can hardly claim to be
> objective-- though they all do.
> 
> A similar situation exists with certain atmospheric chemists and
> climatologists, who are raking in big research grants off their doomsayer
> prophecies.  Note that I'm not passing judgement on their correctness, just
> observing that their statements should be scrutinized before swallowing.
> 
> Disclaimer:  That '9 out of 10' figure I don't pretend is a
> statistically-correct sample.  I just happen to have asked 11 Ph.D's their
> opine  in the past month.  (The 11th wouldn't give me a solid answer either
> way.)
> 
> --
> Mike Asher
> masher@tusc.net
One note.  Mike Asher informed me
-- 
Leonard Evens       len@math.nwu.edu      491-5537
Department of Mathematics, Norwthwestern University
Evanston Illinois
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions, WARNING: LONG BORING POST
From: mfriesel@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 10:16:51 -0700
Harold Brashears wrote:
> 
> Price fixing is most readily accomplished by a government, or at the
> least with the connivance and help of a government.  I cannot recall
> any price fixing which lasted without government support, can you?
I note:
Actually, the above assertion seems to require some clarification.  
What industry has existed in a society lacking a government?  If an 
industry in a society with a government fixes prices, it must be 
allowed to do so by the government.  Government support for price 
fixing may take two forms, in the extreme:  Preventing other interests 
from interfering, and not interfering itself with the industry.
Harold continues (see original for context):
> 
> Who do you define as "free marketers"?  An intelligent business
> executive, working for a large firm, does generally prefer a >stronger,
> more intrusive government, which he may then influence to his
> advantage.  Frequently done by reducing foreign competition with
> tariffs and domestic competition with regulation.  This is a part of
> the reason big business gave so much money to Democrats, since they
> believe Democrats are more likely to prefer a larger, more intrusive
> government.
I note:
Big business certainly gave money to Democrats and to Republicans, the 
amount depending in part depending on who they think will have the 
political muscle although neither is left out in the cold.  What 
business wants out of government is a tool to accomplish business' 
ends.  It wants control of the government to keep government from 
interfering in the busness's profitable activities while using the 
government to create more opportunities for profitable activities.  
Businesses want a government that is intrusive in the affairs of the 
their competition and which will eliminate roadblocks to business 
expansion, but also that does not intrude in the businesses internal 
affairs.
Harold continues:
> 
> There are probably quite a few "free marketers", as you define the
> term, but many, if not most, will ask for government regulation and
> protection when threatened.  Did you think they were different than
> everyone else?
I note:
Not a bit.  That's why I think your analysis is somewhat...incorrect.
He continues:
> 
> But to compare them to the communists who only professed to want
> communism is probably not an accurate representation of either.  It
> demeans the suffering of the oppressed people in the communist world,
> and exxagerates the sin of the "free marketers".
I note:
It's important to look beyond the labels we typically use to 
categorize various social organizations of note.  One-party government 
is a one-party government whether we're talking about the old USSR or 
the modern US, although this example is for illustration only.  Slave 
labor and indentured servitude is the same thing whether practiced by 
agrarian institutions under the Roman Caesar or the pre-civil war US,  
whether by industrial institutions in imperial Japan and the USSR, or 
US coal mine interests or Nike.  It is the behavior of the 
institutions, not the labels we attach to them, that is important.
Harold continues:
> 
> How would you conceive of this happening without a strong government
> to enforce it?  I think the primary function of a government in a free
> society is the encouragement of competition, not price fixing.
I respond:
By maintaining a weak government unable to counter it, but having the 
power to control those who would oppose it.  The purpose of government 
in a free society it would seem is to take that path which is most 
effective in establishing and maintaining the welfare of the general 
public, welfare including the maximum amount of personal freedom 
consistent with the achievement of prioritized social objectives.
Harold continues:
> 
> I find it hard to conceive of a nongovernmental (not protected by
> government or a part of government) which has, as its source of income
> (profits), the "destitution of other people", with the exception of
> tort attorneys or other government parasites.  A private enterprise
> functions best by the production of wealth.  A free market functions
> as the protection of the consumer.
I reply:
An unregulated 'free market' hardly protects anyone.  Creating demand 
is a major part of any strategy of an established industry, while 
responding to demand via new industry incorporates inevitable delays.  
Don't think this is more than the tip of the iceberg, it is not.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Greenpeace harms the environment yet again
From: mfriesel@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 10:22:38 -0700
Harold Brashears wrote:
> 
> Well, if I were him, I would be happy, since at least that spares him
> your personal attacks.
> 
I reply:  nahh, what's the point.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Groundwater Remediation
From: "Herdsman"
Date: 7 Nov 1996 18:06:45 GMT
Andrew,
You need to tell us the contaminants of concern.  For example GAC may be
cost effective for some chemicals but UV/Ox may be cost effective for
others.  Air strippong may or not work at all.
-- 
http://home.sprynet.com/spry/herdsman/
-- 
http://home.sprynet.com/spry/herdsman/
Andrew Vignes  wrote in article
<55jk3v$567@news1.iamerica.net>...
>   I am doing some work with groundwater remediation.  I need to 
> know the major tecnologies being used - specifically during the 
> water filtration portion of remediation.  I'm looking at the 
> pros and cons of each, costs, and situations which might select 
> for one or the other.
> 
> 
> Thanks for the help,
> Andy
> 
> 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Greenpeace harms the environment yet again
From: "Manus J. Cooney"
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 13:34:01 -0500
Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
-- CANDU reactors can do the job today, with no reactor modification,
with
> a full core loading, and with a zero (or negative) coolant-void reactivity
> effect.  It's only drawback is that it's N.A. (Not American). :-)
> 
I agree with all of what you say, but is it not true that light water
reactors, as well as proposed graphite/helium reactors  could be loaded
also with Pu.- full or partial load and still have an overall negative
power coefficient?   Also, and perhaps I should recall, but just what
were the announced reasons for stopping use of Pu here in USA. 
Reprocessing accidents?? Diversion of fuel?  My memory tells me it came
about in "Carter" administration here in USA.  M.J.Cooney
NUCLEAR POWER is safe, clean and cost competitive and widely
misunderstood."
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: andrewt@cs.su.oz.au (Andrew Taylor)
Date: 8 Nov 1996 00:17:07 +1100
In article <01bbcb6b$bb67c5a0$89d0d6cc@masher>,
Mike Asher  wrote:
>Paul Ehrlich is a fraud and a charlatan.  He wouldn't know a scientific
>method if it bit him on the rump.   Every claim and prediction he's ever
>made has turned out to be 180 degrees out of whack.  But you like him
>because he spouts what you want to hear.   One of my favorite Ehrlich
>predictions is the one claiming US population would shrink to 22 million by
>1999 (that's three years from now).  Of course, that was after he predicted
>the starvation of 3 billion people worldwide by 1980.  And isn't he the one
>who also predicted that residual DDT (whether or not we stopped use) would
>kill all the algae in the sea, and deprive us of 40% of our oxygen?
I'd like references for these claims.
In the Population Bomb Ehrlich refers to a paper in Science
demonstrating DDT inhibits photosynthesis in some species of marine
diatoms.  He notes the volume of oxygen in the atmosphere is such that
even if we drastically reduce photosynthesis it will have little effect
on atmospheric oxygen levels.
The Population Bomb certainly does not contain a prediction of the
starvation of 3 billion people by 1980 or the US population shrinking
to 22 million
My guess is Mike Asher was recently given 2 books:
1) Usenet Posting for Dummies  
2) The Readers Digest Compendium of Anti-Environmental Propaganda.
Andrew Taylor
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: mfriesel@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 10:28:08 -0700
John Moore wrote:
> 
> Nah, the biggest losses are caused by:
>         -a federal budget bloated by social spending which is putting
> extreme pressure on *all* other funding
I interject:
Actually paying the interest on Reagan's debt is putting tremendous 
pressure on all other funding.  Debt, by the way, that is not an 
investment yielding a return to the general public.
More JM:
>         -an education system, and a media environment, that leaves
> people more and more ignorant of the basic ideas behind science. 
I note:
Despite all efforts of the left and so-called Liberals to correct the 
matter, I would say.
More JM:
Most
> people don't even know the difference between science and engineering,
> and could not define either profession.
I ask:
What is your definition?
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with western 'lifestyle'
From: mfriesel@ix.netcom.com
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 10:35:06 -0700
John McCarthy wrote (the incomplete sentence):
> 
> savage attempts to convince people that our lifestyle is
> unsustainabile by mere bombastic rhetoric.  It won't work in
> sci.environment, but it has been very successful in getting fools to
> donate money to Greenpeace.  The more bombastic the rhetoric and the
> more violent the accusations and the more dramatic the demonstrations,
> the more money they get.
I reply:
I am still amazed that the only people I see with truly bombastic 
rhetoric on sci.environment are yourself and other right-wing 
Republicans, who seem to have identified this newsgroup as a primary 
target for their little assault.  Sort of makes me want to re-up with 
GP - foolishness in your book seems to more-and-more have the 
attributes of wisdom in mine.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: andrewt@cs.su.oz.au (Andrew Taylor)
Date: 7 Nov 1996 23:35:12 +1100
In article <32846703.257920323@nntp.st.usm.edu>,
Harold Brashears  wrote:
>The problem we run into when we blindly extend expertise from one
>field into another is well illustrated by Erlich.  His expertise of
>butterfly populations do not extend to people, simply because
>butterflies are not people.
>
>Had Erlich attempted to extend his butterfly expertise to tuna
>populations, the scientific community would have quite properly
>questioned the relevance of his training to the field.  Because he
>instead chose to write about "ecology", many people are willing to
>forgive his consistent errors.
Let me explain again slowly.  Ehrlich expertise is much more general
than butterflies, he has done valuable work on ecology and evolution.
For example, [1] is very well known work.  Butterflies indeed
provide the data but it addresses basic questions about evolution.
Whether Harold Brashears likes it not, these questions and [1], are
very relevant to tuna, humans and all other life.
>Because he instead chose to write about "ecology", many people are
>willing to forgive his consistent errors.
Ecology has similar standards to many other fields of scientific
study.  I doubt that Harold Brashears knows anything about ecology and
I doubt that he has read any of Ehrlich's papers  on ecology.  Let
alone knows of any errors in them.
Andrew Taylor
Return to Top
Subject: Re: The Limits To Growth
From: Jay Hanson
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 08:46:34 -1000
Mike Asher wrote:
-> > Several resources are held in fixed supply by the model. These
-> > include the amount of available land and the stock of depletable
-> > resources. In addition, the supply of food is fixed relative to
-> > the supply of land. The combination of exponential growth in
-> > demand, coupled with fixed sources of supply, necessarily implies
-> > that, at some point, resource supplies must be exhausted. The
-> > extent to which those resources are essential thus creates the
-> > conditions for collapse.
-> 
-> Sound conclusion, based on false premises.
Please elaborate (cite sources).
Jay
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Auckland bus underground => health costs?
From: colin@pacbell.net (Colin Campbell)
Date: Thu, 07 Nov 1996 20:10:19 GMT
bsandle@southern.co.nz (Brian Sandle) wrote:
>An early respondent on the thread said he takes more medication when 
>going near the diesels, though he said he is quite resistant to it? I 
>didn't quite understand.
That was me.  I take the increased meds as a precaution.  When I am on
tanks (yes, US army M1 Main Battle Tanks) I am exposed to _huge_
amounts of diesel exhaust, fuel vapors, cordite, dust, etc.  Since I
am mistreating my lungs by doing so, I increase my meds even though my
triggers appear to be grass/pollen and some perfumes.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce Scott TOK )
Date: 7 Nov 1996 18:41:55 GMT
sdef! (savage@easynet.co.uk) wrote:
: John Moore wrote:
: > 
: > On Tue, 05 Nov 1996 08:40:58 -0700, mfriesel@ix.netcom.com wrote:
: > 
: > >Science and engineering have had a very constructive, if somewhat
: > >adversarial relationship - engineers are excellent builders as a rule,
: > >using known laws and principles to build machines and devices.
: > >Scientists use these devices to conduct research.  This is in essence
: > >what you state below.  An idealization, but true I believe.  What's
: > >missing more and more is the opportunity for either to do much
: > >innovative work.
: > 
: > I disagree. There is tremendous opportunity for both. The rapid
: > developments in semiconductors, information technology and genetic
: > engineering provide a fertile ground for engineers - the rate of
: > innovations in these areas is very high. The existence of better and
: > better research technologies allows scientists to explore many more
: > areas.
: I disagree with both of you, (what a surprise}
: I agree that they have had a constructive relationship. But constructive 
: (or benficial) only for technology. Science is the study of things, and 
: this is diverted into technological lines, so the tools become more and 
: more sophidsticated and more and more remote and specialised. The 
: biggest loss science has had lately is the loss of public understanding. 
: this is due to the remote regions it is delving into, and the 
: incompleteness of its vision as it only studies that which benefits 
: technology.
: As for the other gushing praise for progress, Corporate videos make me 
: ill, and this sounds like one.
As long as it is understood that not all scientists are in it for this
reason and not all of us spout the PR nonsense, no problem.
Weapons-lab type fusion PR is the laughingstock of this Institute.
Nobody here has such illusions.
--
Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott, Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik, bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de
Remember John Hron:       http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hron-john/
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Mountain Bikers Arrested in Grand Canyon
From: "R.D. Frazier"
Date: Wed, 06 Nov 1996 07:49:47 -0800
Dale wrote:
> 
> Rob Gray wrote:
> >
> >
> 
> > I am a conservationist who supports the rights of all
> > sportsmen including hunters, 
> 
>
> I find it difficult to see the consistency between someone who claims to
> be a conservationist, yet they support hunting.  This suggests to me a
> lack of genuineness in these claims of being a conservationist.
> 
> Dale
According to my dictionary (American Heritage), a convservationist is "one who
practices or advocates the preservation of natural resources."
In the same dictionary, natural resources are defined as "a material source
of wealth that occurs in a natural state, such as forests or minerals."  No mention
of animals.
Based on these definitions, a hunter could in fact be a conservationist (e.g., Ducks
Unlimited).
R.D.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce Scott TOK )
Date: 7 Nov 1996 19:01:12 GMT
A couple of minor points...
Michael Tobis (tobis@scram.ssec.wisc.edu) wrote:
: Bruce Scott TOK (bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de) wrote:
: : Adam Ierymenko (api@axiom.access.one.net) wrote:
: : : The ozone hypothesis and global warming are both highly politically charged
: : : issues.  There is a lot of ideology mixed up in the debate.  There are quite
: : : a few who *want* these things to be true in order to push a certain ideology,
: : : and there are a lot of others who don't *want* them to be true in order to
: : : push a different ideology.
: : Maybe you can give specific examples.  The above does not describe any
: : research environment I've ever seen.
: Of course it doesn't, but it does describe some organizations that are quite
: willing to put on white coats and pretend to be research institutions. The
: question as to how the lay public is to make the distinction is not a trivial
: one.
Exactly this is what the corporate PR machines have learned how to
exploit.  The young tobacco researchers who thought they were supposed
to find the truth and then report it found out way too late what was
expected of them.
One way to learn about these things is to follow the money.  Does a
"scientific" organisation get all its money from intrested business, and
does it publish most of its findings in trade journals?
If so, it is probably a PR front.  But most people don't know anything
about this.  Just a few years ago I didn't either and I probably would
have sounded a lot like Mr Asher in these arguments.  One thing which
woke me up was the flap about how some of the initial climatology
findings were being manuipulated by the Bush administration.  I only
knew about it because the scientist who wrote a major report to the
Government at the time called "foul" in the Americal Geophysical Union's
weekly news journal (EOS, 1988 or 1989; I couldn't possibly find it
now).  I knew enough about the science of climate, if not the details,
to learn what was going on.  But without a specific example like that I
might not have woke up, either.
: Furthermore, while this is rare among the disciplines you might recognize
: to be sciences, political motivation is certainly not unheard of historically
: in scientific disciplines, nor is it absent in many contemporary faculties
: that have some scientific pretensions, notably in the social sciences
: such as some sociology faculties on the one hand and some economics faculties
: on the other.
Economics is especially abominating to me.  There _are_ economists who
understand well what the mathematics of limited resources are (I got a
text from one the last time I visited the US), but these aren't the
people you see on your TV screen.  I wonder why? :-)
Same goes for demography and the historical examples of the impact of
growing numbers on a culture's surroundings and technological base.
When CNN does a report on Easter Island and its past you don't hear
anything about the holocaust which engulfed it in the 17th and 18th
Centuries, not to mention the relevant lessons.
: Most challenging of all is the classification of ecologists on this scale.
: Ecologists tend to feel the permanent loss of biological information with
: a particular keenness, which is to be expected. The ones I have met do not
: feel compelled to separate their descriptive tasks as scientists and their
: prescriptive tasks as citizens. I think this is unfortunate.
The problem is that it takes a lot of effort to sit in the middle.  You
get shat on from both sides.  Many people find themselves unappreciated,
and then pick a side.
: On the other hand, we have nuclear engineers, whose self-interest may
: or may not color their evaluation of the risks of the systems they design.
: It's far from clear who is to evaluate their evaluations.
The problem with an industry like that is that it is so specific and
therefore so narrow.  There aren't many people who deeply train in such
a field without wanting to be there and further it in the first place.
There is a certain selection process -- part of it is quite intangible
but you can feel it nonetheless.  I've seen that happening even during
short at visits to Los Alamos.  The atmosphere of the place selects for
people who want to be there doing what the lab does, with no
reservations. 
: While these questions can be overdrawn (and have been so quite severely
: in the case of stratospheric ozone chemistry, and probably only slightly less
: severely in climate science) I think it is a real mistake to trivialize
: the question of how knowledge is acquired by science and conveyed to
: society. Aside from a small discussion by C.P.Snow that's becoming quite
: ancient now focussing on the British development of radar in WWII
: (Snow, Charles Percy, _Science and Government_ -- Cambridge, 
: Harvard University Press, 1961) I don't know of anyone who's given the
: matter the level of consideration it deserves.
Well, there is a growing number of serious treatments of the effects of
industry's PR in both obfuscating the issues and in directly damaging
the reputation of science in the public eye.  I'm lapping it up, not
least because I am really tired of taking blame in certain circles for
what the Capitalists do in our name.
a good place to start reading:
    _Toxic Sludge is Good for You_ by J Stauber and S Rampton
    Common Courage Press, 1995
    http://www.coolbooks.com/~outpost/pubs/comco/toxic.html
--
Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott, Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik, bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de
Remember John Hron:       http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hron-john/
Return to Top
Subject: Re: The Limits To Growth
From: jmc@Steam.stanford.edu (John McCarthy)
Date: 07 Nov 1996 15:33:11 GMT
The feedbacks of the Limits to Growth model do not include saturation
of demand for any commodity.  This is a basic problem with the
Forrester style simulations.  According to such models beef production
could rise until each beefeater consumed a cow a day.
-- 
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/
During the last years of the Second Millenium, the Earthmen complained
a lot.
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: "Mike Asher"
Date: 7 Nov 1996 19:43:56 GMT
Andrew Taylor  wrote:
> Mike Asher  wrote:
> >Paul Ehrlich is a fraud and a charlatan...   One of my favorite Ehrlich
> >predictions is the one claiming US population would shrink to 22 million
by
> >1999 (that's three years from now).  Of course, that was after he
predicted
> >the starvation of 3 billion people worldwide by 1980.  And isn't he the
one
> >who also predicted that residual DDT (whether or not we stopped use)
would
> >kill all the algae in the sea, and deprive us of 40% of our oxygen?
> 
> I'd like references for these claims....
> 
> The Population Bomb certainly does not contain a prediction of the
> starvation of 3 billion people by 1980 or the US population shrinking
> to 22 million
"The Population Bomb", written in 1968, predicted only the death of a few
hundred million.  I quote from my copy:
"The battle to feed humanity is over.  In the 1970s, the world will undergo
famines.  Hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death in
spite of any crash program embarked upon now."
This turned out to be wrong, but he persisted.  He predicted a another
global famine in 1985.  After that failed to materialize, he predicted the
population of the US will shring to about 22.5 million before 1999, due to
famine and global warming.    He predicted killer smogs in Los Angeles,
perpetual oil shortages and rising sea levels swamping cities in the 1980s.
Ehrlich has also said on numerous occasions that he advocates the reduction
of population by force, and the the US has had too much ecomic growth.  His
program includes the following proposals:
   - Institution of the Chinese Communist system of compulsory abortion.
   - The abandonment of 'polluting labor-saving devices'.
   - The cessation of business air travel.
   - The rich and intelligent should not propagate, as they promote
overproduction.
   - Tax breaks for people that have themselves sterilized.
Erhlich's inaccurate prophecies are numerous. In 1968 he said: "My
examination of the trend of India's grain production over the last eighteen
years leads me to the conclusion that the present 1967-1968 production...is
at a maximum level."  By 1992 it had increased it 112%.   .   In 1988, he
predicted a drop in world grain production, and was again proven wrong.  He
forecast that, by 1984, the U.S. will "quite literally, be drying up", due
to severe water shortages.  Again wrong.  Erlich acknowledges his mistakes,
but says he is only wrong on the time scale.
Ehrlich's mistakes have been somewhat costly. In 1990, Professor Simon, a
longtime debunker of Ehrlich's claims, received payment on a $1000 bet made
with Mr. Ehrlich a decade earlier, in which Mr. Simon took the position
that strategic minerals would become cheaper, not exorbitantly expensive as
Ehrlich claimed
It appears that Ehrlich is moderating in his old age, however.  His most
recent lecture series at Stanford contains only the prediction that a
billion people "could" die before 2020.  Why does Ehrlich, a butterfly
specialist, consider himself an expert on these matters.  His own words are
illuminating for the fallacies they contain:
"...one studies butterflies as an experimental system to help us understand
the world and the way people fit into the world....The evolution and
ecology of butterflies and of people just sort of naturally go together
because it's the same system. We're all subject to exactly the same laws."
References
Holdren, ]. P., and P. R. Ehrlich. 1974. Human population and the global
environment. Am. Sci. 62:282-292. 
Ehrlich, P. R., and H. A. Mooney. 1983. Extinction, substitution, and
ecosystem services. BioScience 33(4):248-254.
Ehrlich, P. R. 1986. The Machinery of Nature. Simon and Schuster.
Daily, G.C. and P.R. Ehrlich. "Population, sustainability, and Earth's
carrying capacity: a framework for estimating population sizes and
lifestyles that could be sustained without undermining future generations."
BioScience 42: 761-71.
Meffe, G. K., A. H. Ehrlich, et al. (1993). "Human population control: The
missing agenda," Conservation Biology 7(1): 1-3.
--
Mike Asher
masher@tusc.net
"Giving society cheap, abundant energy ... would be the equivalent of
giving an idiot child a machine gun." 
-Paul Ehrlich, ``An Ecologist's Perspective on Nuclear Power'', May/June
1978 issue of Federation of American Scientists Public Issue Report 
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Environmentalists responsibility for human deaths (was Re: Major problem with climate predictions )
From: "Mike Asher"
Date: 7 Nov 1996 18:46:12 GMT
gdy52150@prairie.lakes.com wrote:
> 
> some facts that you have deliberitly chose not to use.At the time of
> the ban in the US DDT was a known carcinogentic, tumorigentic,and
> teragentic. In addtion today it is also a known endocrine blocker,
> these toxins will be the next large battle and in all likelyhood be as
> large a problem as ozone depletion or global warming.
Sorry to disturb you with the facts, but I've posted (yet again) a list of
study results on the human results of DDT.  They are unanimous: DDT in
expected doses, or even far-larger-than expected doses is harmless.
A summary of the 19 research studies quoted below is:
 - Humans exposed to large, longterm doses have had little
   or no symptoms.
 - DDT has not been shown to be a human carcinogen.
 - DDT does not cause chromosomal damage
 - DDT does not cause liver damage
 - Dermal irritation from DDT is minor and presents no health risks
One study noted a possible increase in one lung cancer, but made no
determination as the study group was exposed to other contributory factors.
Note that the OSHA guidelines list DDT as class B2, a probable human 
carcinogen.   This is given to any substance that has been shown to have
a positive carcinogenic profile in any other animal species.  
===== BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGES =====
DERMAL EXPOSURE ... HAS BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH NO ILLNESS & USUALLY NO
IRRITATION. ... EVEN SUBCUTANEOUS INJECTION OF COLLOIDAL SUSPENSIONS OF
DDT IN SALINE SOLUTION UP TO 30 PPM CAUSED NO IRRITATION. ... ONE STUDY
REPORTED THAT DDT-IMPREGNATED CLOTHING CAUSED A SLIGHT, TRANSIENT
DERMATITIS, BUT THE METHOD OF IMPREGNATION WAS NOT STATED & THE ABSENCE
OF SOLVENT WAS NOT GUARANTEED. OTHER MORE THOROUGH STUDIES OF
DDT-IMPREGNATED CLOTHING HAVE FOUND IT NONIRRITATING. (HAYES, WAYLAND J.,
JR. PESTICIDES STUDIED IN MAN. BALTIMORE/LONDON: WILLIAMS AND WILKINS,
1982. 198)
Virtually all fatalities reported in the literature have resulted from ...
intentional ingestion of DDT in various toxic solvents. The toxicity of
these solutions is greater than that of either DDT or the solvent alone. 
(DREISBACH, R.H. HANDBOOK OF POISONING. 12TH ED. NORWALK, CT: APPLETON
AND LANGE, 1987. 99)
... THERE IS NO DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE THAT DIETARY ABSORPTION OF DDT, ALONE
OR IN COMBINATION WITH INSECTICIDES OF ALDRIN-TOXAPHENE GROUP, HAS CAUSED
CANCER IN GENERAL POPULATION. NO EVIDENCE ... PRESENTED THAT DDT HAS
CAUSED CANCER AMONG MILLIONS OF INDIVIDUALS (ALMOST ENTIRELY MEN) WHO
HAVE BEEN OCCUPATIONALLY ENGAGED FOR AS LONG AS 35 YEARS IN MFR &
HANDLING OR SPRAYING ... DDT (AS DUST, SOLN & SUSPENSION) IN ALL PARTS
OF WORLD & UNDER ALL POSSIBLE CLIMATIC CONDITIONS. (CLAYTON, G. D. AND F.
E. CLAYTON (EDS.). PATTY'S INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE AND TOXICOLOGY: VOLUME 2A,
2B, 2C: TOXICOLOGY. 3RD ED. NEW YORK: JOHN WILEY SONS, 1981-1982. 3697)
The peripheral lymphocytes of workers occupationally exposed to DDT were
examined and no increase in chromosomal aberrations was observed when
compared to an unexposed cohort. In one small group of severely exposed
workers, a small increase in chromatid aberrations was found. In general,
a positive correlation was observed between DDT levels in the plasma and
time of exposure. However, there was no relationship between the plasma
level of DDT and the frequency of chromosomal aberrations. (RABELLO MN ET
AL; MUTAT RES 28: 449-54 (1979))
HYPERSENSITIVITIES, SUCH AS DERMATITIS, ANAPHYLAXIS, & FATAL
PERIARTERITIS NODOSA & APLASTIC ANEMIA, HAVE BEEN REPORTED, BUT THEY ARE
RARE. WHETHER DDT OR OTHER INGREDIENTS IN COMMERCIAL MIXT HAVE BEEN
RESPONSIBLE HAS NEVER BEEN DETERMINED. (GOODMAN, L.S., AND A. GILMAN. 
(EDS.) THE PHARMACOLOGICAL BASIS OF THERAPEUTICS. 5TH ED. NEW YORK:
MACMILLAN PUBLISHING CO., INC., 1975. 1014)
No increase in chromosomal aberrations were observed in human ...
lymphocyte cultures exposed to 1, 10, or 100 ug/ml DDT based on the
analysis of 25 metaphases per culture. (HART HM ET AL; XENOBIOTICA 2: 567
(1972))
There was no evidence of liver disease or abnormalities in liver function
tests in 31 chemical workers who in the course of their work had ingested
the equivalent of 3.6 to 18 mg of DDT daily for 16 to 25 years. Serum
concn of DDT & its metabolites in 10 patients were 20 times greater than
in the normal population. (REYNOLDS, J.E.F., PRASAD, A.B. (EDS.)
MARTINDALE-THE EXTRA PHARMACOPOEIA. 28TH ED. LONDON: THE PHARMACEUTICAL
PRESS, 1982. 835)
Observation of tumors (generally of the liver) in seven studies in
various mouse strains and three studies in rats. DDT is structurally
similar to other probable carcinogens, such as DDD and DDE. HUMAN
CARCINOGENICITY DATA: Inadequate. ANIMAL CARCINOGENICITY DATA:
Sufficient. **QC REVIEWED**(U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S
INTEGRATED RISK INFORMATION SYSTEM (IRIS) ON
P,P'-DICHLORODIPHENYLTRICHLOROETHANE (DDT) (50-29-3) FROM THE NATIONAL
LIBRARY OF MEDICINE'S TOXNET SYSTEM, AUGUST 29, 1994)
In humans, ingestion of 20 gr. of DDT in the form of a 10 % dry mix with
flour has induced symptoms that persisted for more than 5 weeks,
(DREISBACH, R. HANDBOOK OF POISONING. 12TH ED. NORWALK, CT: APPLETON AND
LANGE, 1987 99)
Severe scrotal pain followed the local use of dicophane application for
pubic lice in two patients. Long term effects .. were not noted.
(REYNOLDS, J.E., PRASAD, A.B. (EDS. MARTINDALE-THE EXTRA PHARMACOPOEIA.
28TH ED. LONDON:
THE PHARMACEUTICAL PRESS, 1982 835)
DDT/DDE HAS NOT ... DEMONSTRATED A SELECTIVE TOXIC EFFECT ON EYES. PURE
DDT DISSOLVED IN PURIFIED KEROSENE WAS TESTED ... AT 0.01% ON HUMAN EYE &
CAUSED NO DISCOMFORT OR IRRITATION ... RARE INSTANCES HAVE BEEN REPORTED
OF OCULAR IRRITATION FOLLOWING CONTAMINATION OF THE EYE BY POWDERS
CONTAINING DDT, & IN ONE INSTANCE CHRONIC SUPERFICIAL PUNCTATE KERATITIS
WAS ASSOC WITH FATAL POISONING FROM LONG EXPOSURE TO THE DUST, BUT IT IS
PROBABLE THAT CONSTITUENTS OTHER THAN DDT WERE RESPONSIBLE, OR THAT THERE
WAS HYPERSENSITIVITY. ... IN EXPERIMENTAL EXPOSURE OF TWO MEN TO SKIN
CONTACT WITH DDT ONE DEVELOPED MANY COMPLAINTS INCL "YELLOW VISION" FOR
LESS THAN AN HR ON 2 OCCASIONS. (GRANT, W.M. TOXICOLOGY OF THE EYE. 3RD
ED. SPRINGFIELD, IL: CHARLES C. THOMAS PUBLISHER, 1986. 305)
EVIDENCE ... THAT SIGNIFICANT POISONING OR DISTURBANCE OF EYES OR VISION
IS UNLIKELY FROM PROLONGED OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY
STUDY OF 35 MEN EXPOSED FOR 11-19 YR TO LARGE AMT OF DDT IN ITS MFR, WITH
BODY FAT CONCN OF DDT & ITS ISOMERS & METABOLITES RANGING FROM 38-647
PPM, CONTRASTING WITH AVG OF 8 PPM FOR GENERAL POPULATION. AMONG THESE
MEN & IN OTHER EMPLOYEES OF MFR PLANT, NO INSTANCES OF CLINICAL POISONING
WERE RECOGNIZED. ... NONE OF 35 PATIENTS IN ... STUDY HAD EYE COMPLAINTS.
(GRANT, W.M. TOXICOLOGY OF THE EYE. 3RD ED. SPRINGFIELD, IL: CHARLES C.
THOMAS PUBLISHER, 1986. 306)
... ALMOST CONTINUOUS DAILY EXPOSURE TO AEROSOLS SUFFICIENT TO LEAVE
WHITE DEPOSIT OF DDT ON NASAL VIBRISSAE OF VOLUNTEERS PRODUCED MODERATE
IRRITATION OF NOSE, THROAT, & EYES. EXCEPT FOR THIS IRRITATION DURING
EXPOSURE, THERE WERE NO SYMPTOMS ... TESTS /ARE REPORTED/ IN WHICH
VOLUNTEERS WERE EXPOSED TO DDT DISPERSED INTO AIR ... BY VOLATILIZING
UNITS OR BY CONTINUOUSLY OR INTERMITTENTLY OPERATED AEROSOL DISPENSORS.
IN SOME INSTANCES, SLIGHT ODOR & SOME DRYNESS OF THROAT WERE NOTICED ...
. (HAYES, WAYLAND J., JR. PESTICIDES STUDIED IN MAN. BALTIMORE/LONDON:
WILLIAMS AND WILKINS, 1982. 198)
... STUDIES OF DDT IN VOLUNTEERS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED ... TO SEARCH FOR
POSSIBLE EFFECTS OF DOSES CONSIDERED TO BE SAFE. IN 1ST OF THESE STUDIES,
MEN WERE GIVEN 0, 3.5, & 35 MG/MAN/DAY. THESE ADMIN DOSAGES, PLUS DDT
MEASURED IN MEN'S FOOD, RESULTED IN DOSAGE LEVELS OF 0.0021 TO 0.0034,
0.038 TO 0.063, & 0.36 TO 0.61 MG/KG/DAY, RESPECTIVELY, EXACT VALUE
DEPENDING ON WT OF EACH INDIVIDUAL. SIX VOLUNTEERS RECEIVED HIGHEST
DOSAGE OF TECHNICAL DDT FOR 12 MO, & 3 RECEIVED IT FOR 18 MO. A SMALLER
NUMBER OF MEN INGESTED LOWER DOSAGE OF TECHNICAL DDT OR 1 OF DOSAGES OF
p,p'-DDT FOR 12 TO 18 MO. NO VOLUNTEER COMPLAINED OF ANY SYMPTOM ... SAME
RESULT WAS OBTAINED IN 2ND STUDY IN WHICH SAME DOSAGES WERE GIVEN FOR 21
MO & VOLUNTEERS WERE OBSERVED FOR MINIMUM OF 27 ADDNL MO. (HAYES, WAYLAND
J., JR. PESTICIDES STUDIED IN MAN. BALTIMORE/LONDON: WILLIAMS AND
WILKINS, 1982. 195)
Alveolar-cell carcinoma of the lung has been reported in 5 patients with
granulomatous disease of the lungs associated with the inhalation of DDT
powder. In 4 studies, tissue levels of DDT were reported to be higher in
cancer patients than in subjects who died from other causes; no
significant difference was found in 4 other studies, 1 of which was
confined to cancer of the breast & incl some living patients. Serum DDT
levels appeared to be elevated in another study of 9 cancer patients, but
the study is difficult to interpret. In 2 case-control studies of
soft-tissue sarcoma, & in 3 of malignant lymphoma, relative risks for the
assoc of these diseases with exposure to DDT were 1.2, 1.3, 1.6, & 1.8,
respectively. Some of the men in these studies had also been exposed to
chlorophenoxy herbicides & chlorophenols, for which there were higher
relative risks. (IARC. MONOGRAPHS ON THE EVALUATION OF THE CARCINOGENIC
RISK OF CHEMICALS TO MAN. GENEVA: WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION,
INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER,1972-PRESENT. (MULTIVOLUME
WORK).,P. S7 186 (1987))
Excess of leukemia (particularly chronic lymphocytic leukemia) were noted
in 2 studies. A case-control study of colon cancer showed no increased
relative risk for exposure to DDT. A small excess of deaths from cancer 
(3 observed, 1.0 expected) was found in forestry foremen exposed to DDT,
2,4-D & 2,4,5-T. In two other studies of men involved in production /
manufacture of DDT, there was no incr in mortality from cancer overall 
(standardized mortality ratio (SMR), 68 & 95, respectively), although in
1, mortality from resp cancer was increased slightly (SMR, 156; 95%
confidence interval, 74-286). Possible incr. in lung cancer mortality was
also observed in agricultural workers who had used DDT & a variety of
other pesticides & herbicides, but a small case-control study of lung
cancer deaths in orchardists showed no excess. Studies of pesticide
applicators, who used DDT as well as a number of other pesticides, showed
excesses of lung cancer. In 1 of these studies, the risk for lung cancer
increased with duration of holding a licence to nearly 3-fold among those
licenced for 20 or more years. Exposure to multiple pesticides in these
studies prevents a clear evaluation of the cancer risk assoc with DDT
alone. (IARC. MONOGRAPHS ON THE EVALUATION OF THE CARCINOGENIC RISK OF
CHEMICALS TO MAN. GENEVA: WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, INTERNATIONAL AGENCY
FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER,1972-PRESENT. (MULTIVOLUME WORK).,P. S7 186 
(1987))
Three case studies ... of alveolar-cell carcinoma were performed among
men occupationally engaged in 2,4-D handling/manufacture ... mortality
rates were within control limits.   (HAYES, WAYLAND, PESTICIDES 
STUDIED IN MAN. BALTIMORE/LONDON: WILLIAMS AND WILKINS, 1982) 
No effect on unscheduled DNA synthesis was observed in SV-40 transformed
human cells with concentrations up to 1,000 uM DDT either with, or
without S-9 microsomal activation. (AHMED FE ET AL; MUTAT RES 42: 161 
(1977))
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Major problem with climate predictions
From: bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de (Bruce Scott TOK )
Date: 7 Nov 1996 19:37:36 GMT
John McCarthy (jmc@Steam.stanford.edu) wrote:
: Even if fusion power were a long shot, it would be worth the trivial amounts
: of money that are spent on it.
It is important for people to realise this.  It is really a very small
piece of the total research budget -- some $230 M/yr in the US, about
what solar energy research gets.  Compare that to the full DOE budget
which is of order 100 times larger.  Even in terms of computations, we
are very envious of what the general relativity groups and the climate
researchers are able to get their hand on.
In the second case that is just.  Climate chemistry and physics is of
paramount importance just now.
This "boondoggle" Mike Asher talks about is called ITER.  He went on his
noble tirade without noting the finite level of opposition within our
field against spending some $12B, albeit over 15-25 years.  A lot of us
think this is unwise, that as presently configured ITER has too large a
chance of being a dud (performing possibly worse, not better, than JET
and TFTR) and that global computations are coming through now and should
have their say before anything is committed to.  What is a wait of five
years in a project which is going to take decades?  If we keep the
funding level low and constant, we would be OK in the long run.  I
personally see no reason to increase it.
But a certain momentum has developed, having little to do with science.
Among things that drive it are the interest of the administration (more
resources to process --> more importance) and in many not-so-negligible
cases the personal motivation to do it _now_ such that a bit of breast
patting can be indulged (I do hate careerism, but you will find it in
any endeavour involving social primates).  Another problem is that the
people who actually lead the departments who manage these projects (eg,
DOE) are not scientists and do not in my opinion seem to realise that
fusion is still a physics project, not an engineering one you can throw
money at.
I have always thought ITER was premature and still do.  You can see an
eloquent statement of this position by Tom Stix and Andrew Sessler in
the June 1996 Physics Today, if you want to.  No, nobody suppressed it.
    "We are fully aware of the special interests of each partner in
    ITER and in no way do we wish to dictate international strategy.
    But we would be less than honest if we failed to reiterate our
    opinion, that the ITER step is too large and that the time to
    "first plasma" is too long: 12-14 years from now, not including a
    decision-making delay of uncertain length after mid-1998.
    Conservatism, both fiscal and scientific, demands that the fusion
    community move ahead prudently while keeping open its options for
    significant breakthroughs.  Accordingly, we advocate a
    collaborative multinational fusion strategy that we believe will
    answer the most important magnetic fusion reactor questions more
    reliably, quickly, flexibly and cost-effectively than the
    currently proposed single ITER machine."
    -- Stix and Sessler, _Physics Today_ June 1996, 
       answering M Rosenbluth, p 25
I can sign onto that, with the proviso that the "international strategy"
should not be very binding -- that each center should maintain a
scientifically sound measure of independence (as is now _de facto_ the
case).  I think the above is sufficient to demolish any effort to
characterise the whole community as arrogant megalomaniacs, although in
certain cases this would indeed hit the target.
--
Mach's gut!
Bruce Scott, Max-Planck-Institut fuer Plasmaphysik, bds@ipp-garching.mpg.de
Remember John Hron:       http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/h/hron-john/
Return to Top
Subject: Re: Environmentalists responsibility for human deaths (was Re: Major problem with climate predictions )
From: "D. Braun"
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 1996 11:44:27 -0800
On 7 Nov 1996, Mike Asher wrote:
> gdy52150@prairie.lakes.com wrote:
> > 
> > some facts that you have deliberitly chose not to use.At the time of
> > the ban in the US DDT was a known carcinogentic, tumorigentic,and
> > teragentic. In addtion today it is also a known endocrine blocker,
> > these toxins will be the next large battle and in all likelyhood be as
> > large a problem as ozone depletion or global warming.
> 
> Sorry to disturb your rhetoric with some facts, but below is a fairly
> comprehensive list of study results on the human effects of DDT.  
> 
> A summary of the 19 research studies below is:
> 
>  - Humans exposed to large, longterm doses have had little
>    or no symptoms.
>  - DDT has not been shown to be a human carcinogen.
>  - DDT does not cause chromosomal damage
>  - DDT does not cause liver damage
>  - Dermal irritation from DDT is minor and presents no health risks
> 
> One study noted a possible increase in one lung cancer, but made no
> determination as the study group was exposed to other contributory factors.
> Note that the OSHA guidelines list DDT as class B2, a probable human 
> carcinogen.   This is given to any substance that has been shown to have
> a positive carcinogenic profile in any other animal species.  
I applaud your effort at posting sources with abstracts.
I do have a question: Did you do a broad literature search (I assume on
your computer) to find these, or are these references pulled from a book
or paper which sought to disprove human health risks associated with DDT?
BTW, there were several more studies which you cited below which did link
increased incidence of cancer with DDT exposure, in addition to the "one" 
you cite. 
The issue concerning DDT and other persistant, chloronated hydrocarbon
pesticides is larger than the direct affects on humans--- it also includes
the fact that these pesticides bioaccumulate in the food chain, have
caused reproductive failures in several bird species, and because they are
broad spectrum, kill most invertebrates they come in contact with.  
You don't have to be a forest entomologist, which I am, to realize that
killing off thousands of species of non-target invertebrates, to very low
levels, where these pesticides are applied is a bad idea. Any high school
biology course mentions that invertebrates are critical cogs in the
decomposition cycle, by which nutrients are made available to plants, are
plant pollinators, are beneficials, in that they eat or parasitize pest
species, producing biological control, and that invertebrates are the
basis for many vertebrate food chains. Oh, and many pest species also
quickly become tolerant -- e.g., mosquitos and fleas. Haven't you heard?
Integrated Pest Management (IPM) has come on the scene due to the
drawbacks of the old "pray and spray" attitude which reigned whem DDT was
widely used on our fields and forests.  Pesticides now are used which are
narrowly focused on target organisms, are short lived, and are of the
lowest toxicity required.  Biologicals are prefered, and not spraying at
all, based on knowledge of potential pest population trends, is the norm.
Do you believe that these considerations are based on groundless opinions 
of the uninformed? 
		Dave Braun 
> 
> ===== BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE =====
> DERMAL EXPOSURE ... HAS BEEN ASSOCIATED WITH NO ILLNESS & USUALLY NO
> IRRITATION. ... EVEN SUBCUTANEOUS INJECTION OF COLLOIDAL SUSPENSIONS OF
> DDT IN SALINE SOLUTION UP TO 30 PPM CAUSED NO IRRITATION. ... ONE STUDY
> REPORTED THAT DDT-IMPREGNATED CLOTHING CAUSED A SLIGHT, TRANSIENT
> DERMATITIS, BUT THE METHOD OF IMPREGNATION WAS NOT STATED & THE ABSENCE
> OF SOLVENT WAS NOT GUARANTEED. OTHER MORE THOROUGH STUDIES OF
> DDT-IMPREGNATED CLOTHING HAVE FOUND IT NONIRRITATING. (HAYES, WAYLAND J.,
> JR. PESTICIDES STUDIED IN MAN. BALTIMORE/LONDON: WILLIAMS AND WILKINS,
> 1982. 198)
> 
> Virtually all fatalities reported in the literature have resulted from ...
> intentional ingestion of DDT in various toxic solvents. The toxicity of
> these solutions is greater than that of either DDT or the solvent alone. 
> (DREISBACH, R.H. HANDBOOK OF POISONING. 12TH ED. NORWALK, CT: APPLETON
> AND LANGE, 1987. 99)
> 
> ... THERE IS NO DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE THAT DIETARY ABSORPTION OF DDT, ALONE
> OR IN COMBINATION WITH INSECTICIDES OF ALDRIN-TOXAPHENE GROUP, HAS CAUSED
> CANCER IN GENERAL POPULATION. NO EVIDENCE ... PRESENTED THAT DDT HAS
> CAUSED CANCER AMONG MILLIONS OF INDIVIDUALS (ALMOST ENTIRELY MEN) WHO
> HAVE BEEN OCCUPATIONALLY ENGAGED FOR AS LONG AS 35 YEARS IN MFR &
> HANDLING OR SPRAYING ... DDT (AS DUST, SOLN & SUSPENSION) IN ALL PARTS
> OF WORLD & UNDER ALL POSSIBLE CLIMATIC CONDITIONS. (CLAYTON, G. D. AND F.
> E. CLAYTON (EDS.). PATTY'S INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE AND TOXICOLOGY: VOLUME 2A,
> 2B, 2C: TOXICOLOGY. 3RD ED. NEW YORK: JOHN WILEY SONS, 1981-1982. 3697)
> 
> The peripheral lymphocytes of workers occupationally exposed to DDT were
> examined and no increase in chromosomal aberrations was observed when
> compared to an unexposed cohort. In one small group of severely exposed
> workers, a small increase in chromatid aberrations was found. In general,
> a positive correlation was observed between DDT levels in the plasma and
> time of exposure. However, there was no relationship between the plasma
> level of DDT and the frequency of chromosomal aberrations. (RABELLO MN ET
> AL; MUTAT RES 28: 449-54 (1979))
> 
> HYPERSENSITIVITIES, SUCH AS DERMATITIS, ANAPHYLAXIS, & FATAL
> PERIARTERITIS NODOSA & APLASTIC ANEMIA, HAVE BEEN REPORTED, BUT THEY ARE
> RARE. WHETHER DDT OR OTHER INGREDIENTS IN COMMERCIAL MIXT HAVE BEEN
> RESPONSIBLE HAS NEVER BEEN DETERMINED. (GOODMAN, L.S., AND A. GILMAN. 
> (EDS.) THE PHARMACOLOGICAL BASIS OF THERAPEUTICS. 5TH ED. NEW YORK:
> MACMILLAN PUBLISHING CO., INC., 1975. 1014)
> 
> No increase in chromosomal aberrations were observed in human ...
> lymphocyte cultures exposed to 1, 10, or 100 ug/ml DDT based on the
> analysis of 25 metaphases per culture. (HART HM ET AL; XENOBIOTICA 2: 567
> (1972))
> 
> There was no evidence of liver disease or abnormalities in liver function
> tests in 31 chemical workers who in the course of their work had ingested
> the equivalent of 3.6 to 18 mg of DDT daily for 16 to 25 years. Serum
> concn of DDT & its metabolites in 10 patients were 20 times greater than
> in the normal population. (REYNOLDS, J.E.F., PRASAD, A.B. (EDS.)
> MARTINDALE-THE EXTRA PHARMACOPOEIA. 28TH ED. LONDON: THE PHARMACEUTICAL
> PRESS, 1982. 835)
> 
> Observation of tumors (generally of the liver) in seven studies in
> various mouse strains and three studies in rats. DDT is structurally
> similar to other probable carcinogens, such as DDD and DDE. HUMAN
> CARCINOGENICITY DATA: Inadequate. ANIMAL CARCINOGENICITY DATA:
> Sufficient. **QC REVIEWED**(U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S
> INTEGRATED RISK INFORMATION SYSTEM (IRIS) ON
> P,P'-DICHLORODIPHENYLTRICHLOROETHANE (DDT) (50-29-3) FROM THE NATIONAL
> LIBRARY OF MEDICINE'S TOXNET SYSTEM, AUGUST 29, 1994)
> 
> 
> In humans, ingestion of 20 gr. of DDT in the form of a 10 % dry mix with
> flour has induced symptoms that persisted for more than 5 weeks,
> (DREISBACH, R. HANDBOOK OF POISONING. 12TH ED. NORWALK, CT: APPLETON AND
> LANGE, 1987 99)
> 
> 
> Severe scrotal pain followed the local use of dicophane application for
> pubic lice in two patients. Long term effects .. were not noted.
> (REYNOLDS, J.E., PRASAD, A.B. (EDS. MARTINDALE-THE EXTRA PHARMACOPOEIA.
> 28TH ED. LONDON:
> THE PHARMACEUTICAL PRESS, 1982 835)
> 
> DDT/DDE HAS NOT ... DEMONSTRATED A SELECTIVE TOXIC EFFECT ON EYES. PURE
> DDT DISSOLVED IN PURIFIED KEROSENE WAS TESTED ... AT 0.01% ON HUMAN EYE &
> CAUSED NO DISCOMFORT OR IRRITATION ... RARE INSTANCES HAVE BEEN REPORTED
> OF OCULAR IRRITATION FOLLOWING CONTAMINATION OF THE EYE BY POWDERS
> CONTAINING DDT, & IN ONE INSTANCE CHRONIC SUPERFICIAL PUNCTATE KERATITIS
> WAS ASSOC WITH FATAL POISONING FROM LONG EXPOSURE TO THE DUST, BUT IT IS
> PROBABLE THAT CONSTITUENTS OTHER THAN DDT WERE RESPONSIBLE, OR THAT THERE
> WAS HYPERSENSITIVITY. ... IN EXPERIMENTAL EXPOSURE OF TWO MEN TO SKIN
> CONTACT WITH DDT ONE DEVELOPED MANY COMPLAINTS INCL "YELLOW VISION" FOR
> LESS THAN AN HR ON 2 OCCASIONS. (GRANT, W.M. TOXICOLOGY OF THE EYE. 3RD
> ED. SPRINGFIELD, IL: CHARLES C. THOMAS PUBLISHER, 1986. 305)
> 
> EVIDENCE ... THAT SIGNIFICANT POISONING OR DISTURBANCE OF EYES OR VISION
> IS UNLIKELY FROM PROLONGED OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE HAS BEEN PROVIDED BY
> STUDY OF 35 MEN EXPOSED FOR 11-19 YR TO LARGE AMT OF DDT IN ITS MFR, WITH
> BODY FAT CONCN OF DDT & ITS ISOMERS & METABOLITES RANGING FROM 38-647
> PPM, CONTRASTING WITH AVG OF 8 PPM FOR GENERAL POPULATION. AMONG THESE
> MEN & IN OTHER EMPLOYEES OF MFR PLANT, NO INSTANCES OF CLINICAL POISONING
> WERE RECOGNIZED. ... NONE OF 35 PATIENTS IN ... STUDY HAD EYE COMPLAINTS.
> (GRANT, W.M. TOXICOLOGY OF THE EYE. 3RD ED. SPRINGFIELD, IL: CHARLES C.
> THOMAS PUBLISHER, 1986. 306)
> 
> ... ALMOST CONTINUOUS DAILY EXPOSURE TO AEROSOLS SUFFICIENT TO LEAVE
> WHITE DEPOSIT OF DDT ON NASAL VIBRISSAE OF VOLUNTEERS PRODUCED MODERATE
> IRRITATION OF NOSE, THROAT, & EYES. EXCEPT FOR THIS IRRITATION DURING
> EXPOSURE, THERE WERE NO SYMPTOMS ... TESTS /ARE REPORTED/ IN WHICH
> VOLUNTEERS WERE EXPOSED TO DDT DISPERSED INTO AIR ... BY VOLATILIZING
> UNITS OR BY CONTINUOUSLY OR INTERMITTENTLY OPERATED AEROSOL DISPENSORS.
> IN SOME INSTANCES, SLIGHT ODOR & SOME DRYNESS OF THROAT WERE NOTICED ...
> . (HAYES, WAYLAND J., JR. PESTICIDES STUDIED IN MAN. BALTIMORE/LONDON:
> WILLIAMS AND WILKINS, 1982. 198)
> 
> ... STUDIES OF DDT IN VOLUNTEERS HAVE BEEN DESIGNED ... TO SEARCH FOR
> POSSIBLE EFFECTS OF DOSES CONSIDERED TO BE SAFE. IN 1ST OF THESE STUDIES,
> MEN WERE GIVEN 0, 3.5, & 35 MG/MAN/DAY. THESE ADMIN DOSAGES, PLUS DDT
> MEASURED IN MEN'S FOOD, RESULTED IN DOSAGE LEVELS OF 0.0021 TO 0.0034,
> 0.038 TO 0.063, & 0.36 TO 0.61 MG/KG/DAY, RESPECTIVELY, EXACT VALUE
> DEPENDING ON WT OF EACH INDIVIDUAL. SIX VOLUNTEERS RECEIVED HIGHEST
> DOSAGE OF TECHNICAL DDT FOR 12 MO, & 3 RECEIVED IT FOR 18 MO. A SMALLER
> NUMBER OF MEN INGESTED LOWER DOSAGE OF TECHNICAL DDT OR 1 OF DOSAGES OF
> p,p'-DDT FOR 12 TO 18 MO. NO VOLUNTEER COMPLAINED OF ANY SYMPTOM ... SAME
> RESULT WAS OBTAINED IN 2ND STUDY IN WHICH SAME DOSAGES WERE GIVEN FOR 21
> MO & VOLUNTEERS WERE OBSERVED FOR MINIMUM OF 27 ADDNL MO. (HAYES, WAYLAND
> J., JR. PESTICIDES STUDIED IN MAN. BALTIMORE/LONDON: WILLIAMS AND
> WILKINS, 1982. 195)
> 
> Alveolar-cell carcinoma of the lung has been reported in 5 patients with
> granulomatous disease of the lungs associated with the inhalation of DDT
> powder. In 4 studies, tissue levels of DDT were reported to be higher in
> cancer patients than in subjects who died from other causes; no
> significant difference was found in 4 other studies, 1 of which was
> confined to cancer of the breast & incl some living patients. Serum DDT
> levels appeared to be elevated in another study of 9 cancer patients, but
> the study is difficult to interpret. In 2 case-control studies of
> soft-tissue sarcoma, & in 3 of malignant lymphoma, relative risks for the
> assoc of these diseases with exposure to DDT were 1.2, 1.3, 1.6, & 1.8,
> respectively. Some of the men in these studies had also been exposed to
> chlorophenoxy herbicides & chlorophenols, for which there were higher
> relative risks. (IARC. MONOGRAPHS ON THE EVALUATION OF THE CARCINOGENIC
> RISK OF CHEMICALS TO MAN. GENEVA: WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION,
> INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER,1972-PRESENT. (MULTIVOLUME
> WORK).,P. S7 186 (1987))
> 
> Excess of leukemia (particularly chronic lymphocytic leukemia) were noted
> in 2 studies. A case-control study of colon cancer showed no increased
> relative risk for exposure to DDT. A small excess of deaths from cancer 
> (3 observed, 1.0 expected) was found in forestry foremen exposed to DDT,
> 2,4-D & 2,4,5-T. In two other studies of men involved in production /
> manufacture of DDT, there was no incr in mortality from cancer overall 
> (standardized mortality ratio (SMR), 68 & 95, respectively), although in
> 1, mortality from resp cancer was increased slightly (SMR, 156; 95%
> confidence interval, 74-286). Possible incr. in lung cancer mortality was
> also observed in agricultural workers who had used DDT & a variety of
> other pesticides & herbicides, but a small case-control study of lung
> cancer deaths in orchardists showed no excess. Studies of pesticide
> applicators, who used DDT as well as a number of other pesticides, showed
> excesses of lung cancer. In 1 of these studies, the risk for lung cancer
> increased with duration of holding a licence to nearly 3-fold among those
> licenced for 20 or more years. Exposure to multiple pesticides in these
> studies prevents a clear evaluation of the cancer risk assoc with DDT
> alone. (IARC. MONOGRAPHS ON THE EVALUATION OF THE CARCINOGENIC RISK OF
> CHEMICALS TO MAN. GENEVA: WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION, INTERNATIONAL AGENCY
> FOR RESEARCH ON CANCER,1972-PRESENT. (MULTIVOLUME WORK).,P. S7 186 
> (1987))
> 
> Three case studies ... of alveolar-cell carcinoma were performed among
> men occupationally engaged in 2,4-D handling/manufacture ... mortality
> rates were within control limits.   (HAYES, WAYLAND, PESTICIDES 
> STUDIED IN MAN. BALTIMORE/LONDON: WILLIAMS AND WILKINS, 1982) 
> 
> No effect on unscheduled DNA synthesis was observed in SV-40 transformed
> human cells with concentrations up to 1,000 uM DDT either with, or
> without S-9 microsomal activation. (AHMED FE ET AL; MUTAT RES 42: 161 
> (1977))
> 
> 
> 
> 
Return to Top

Downloaded by WWW Programs
Byron Palmer