On Apr 6, 2005, at 4:48 PM, Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Warren Ockrassa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Because DDT thins birds' egg shells. The biggest reason bald eagles are endangered is DDT -- it thinned the birds' shells so drastically that many embryos never survived to full development.
Is that a sufficient reason?
Well, first, no, it's not a sufficient reason. Not at all. But, second, it's _not even true_. Bald eagles _aren't_ endangered.
<http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/TESSSpeciesReport>
<http://www.epa.gov/espp/coloring/>
Seems it still is endangered.
They're actually a _pest_ in parts of Alaska, there are so many of them.
There's a lot more habitat in North America than Alaska.
DDT used for malarial prevention - indoor spraying, daubing on the walls of homes, and DDT -implanted mosquito nets - doesn't even get out into the environment, much less pose a threat.
And it's not relevant outside the US to bald eagles. As I mentioned to Dan I wasn't aware we were discussing *worldwide* DDT bans; I thought the discussion was about the US only.
Finally, Warren, as usual you rant about Iraq.
Two sentences doth not a rant make.
Have you been paying attention to what's happening over there? You know, the successful election, the formation of a government with a Kurdish President, things like that.
That's nice. Does it balance the thousands of dead civilians or the continuing insurgency?
If Iraq does end up as a stable democracy - and the odds of that are higher than they have ever been in all of Iraqi history - are you going to come back and admit that those evil neoconservatives destroyed one of the vilest governments on earth and replaced it with something pretty good _while you did everything you could to stop it from happening_?
You mean, if I was wrong for the right reasons while they were right for the wrong reasons? Interesting question.
Who, in that equation, will have been looking out for poor, brown people who are far away?
Interesting you bring up, elsewhere, that you're not rich white or liberal. Do remember that it was partly the efforts of rich white liberals (as well as activist judges) that put an end to slavery here, and that got the civil rights movement further along. It could be argued that the education you're getting now wouldn't have been possible but for the efforts of various rich white liberals who were interested in opening the halls of learning to *every* extraordinarily worthy student. Or are you going to contend that *their* efforts were also little more than preening?
It seems the "rich white liberal" bludgeon can beat both directions.
-- Warren Ockrassa, Publisher/Editor, nightwares Books http://books.nightwares.com/ Current work in progress "The Seven-Year Mirror" http://www.nightwares.com/books/ockrassa/Flat_Out.pdf
_______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
