Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Rational Readings on Environmental Concerns

Rate this topic


softwareNerd

Recommended Posts

Here's a book recommendation:

Rational Readings on Environmental Concerns - Edited by Jay H. Lehr (ISBN: 0-442-01146-6)

Available via addAll for under $10, including shipping.

This book is a collection of essays by different people, mostly scientists. Most of the essays are short, but very well footnoted. Topics covered include "acid rain", DDT, carcinogens, absetos, ozone, radon, recycling, and even global warming.

If you get hold of the book, flip to the essay on DDT by J.Gordon Edwards, Ph.d,. Twelve pages later you'll have a different perspective of environmentalists. Most of the other essays will add to the inductions.

(Check out more reviews on Amazon.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you comment on the two negative reviews on Amazon. Specifically, the following quotes:

The problem with this book is that it persuades the reader to reject everything on the grounds that it might not be true because the media are not independently objective... This curse-the-darkness attitude leads to deliberate denial that there are any problems serious enough that I might change my lifestyle, or even be moved to try to do something about them.

outrageously hilarious statements: for example, the authors claim that acid rain is beneficial because it removes "unwanted" organisms from lakes and streams, and thus creates a "pristine environment" for swimmers and bathers. Of course, this ignores the effects of acid rain on ecosystem functioning in terms of multi-trophic interactions and ultimately, stability.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you comment on the two negative reviews on Amazon. Specifically, the following quotes:

"...persuades the reader to reject everything..."

The book is a collection of essays that reject the environmentalist claims in each of the areas covered. For instance, to take Global Warming, one of the essays is by Singer. So, by it's nature it rejects "everything". However, I don't think it follows that a thoughtful reader should take all it says as true, ignoring the environmentalists' side. Like most books, I think each reader will take something different from it.

"...the authors claim that acid rain is beneficial because..."

I don't remember that, because it's been some years since I read it. (I picked it up again yesterday to read about DDT; and, hence my post.) However, it would not surprise me if the author of the acid-rain chapter pointed out the positives of acid rain. As for "ignoring" the ill-effects, most of the essays are written to provide an alternative view-point. They are best read in conjunction with some material presenting the environmentalists' view on the same topic.They are not "balanced" on their own; more like the other side in a debate.

Since I just re-read the essay on DDT, I can give an analogous example of "benefit". The first of two essays on DDT does not dwell on the benefits to humans. However, it does point to some benefits to certain birds. The use of DDT decreases various parasitic insects that suck the blood of certain; it protected them from avian malaria; it triggers the induction of an enzyme that detoxifies certain carcinogens in birds. It points to years when DDT was being used, and points to various statistics showing increases in bird populations. It points to studies where birds were fed a diet containing DDT, with no change in egg-shell thinning. It points to studies that did show such thinning, and claims that the study used a diet that had less than normal calcium; and, when repeated by the same researchers after criticism, using a higher-calcium diet, the DDT did not have an impact.

A layman would find it impossible to fully verify the various facts presented. However, I think that a layman can make some type of further literature survey, based on the many foot-notes, and based on other facts, like "who did that study"?

Some essays address non-scientific issues, like politics. For instance, one can look at the final stages where the EPA was deciding whether to ban DDT. The EPA held hearings for seven months. As a layman you might think that the hearings concluded that DDT should be banned. The essay claims this was not so, quoting Judge Edmund Sweeny as saying: "DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man... DDT is not a mutagenic or teratogenic hazard to man...The use of DDT under the regulations involved here do not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife... The evidence in this proceeding supports the conclusion that there is a present need to the essential uses of DDT."

The essay claims that the "Environment Defense Fund" appealed, and EPA administrator (William Ruckelhaus) overruled his hearing examiner and decided to ban DDT. The essay claims that Ruckelhaus never attended a single hearing, and that he admitted not to have read the hearing transcripts. It quotes a letter that he wrote, saying this: "Decisions by the government involving the use of toxic substances are political with a small 'p'. Science has role to play, but the ultimate judgment remains political...". The essay also points out that Mr. Ruckelhaus was a member of the "Environmental Defense Fund" and has solicited donations for it, using his letterhead.

Hopefully, that is enough to whet one's appetite....

But the summary answer is: expect "the other side", rather than a middle-ground view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2nd the recommendation for the book. It's excellent.

The cited reviews are "outrageously hilarious" in an of themselves. The opposite of the "Curse the Darkeness" mentality is of course, the "Accept the Arbitrary"...

Edited by KendallJ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like most books, I think each reader will take something different from it.

That sounds like you're almost backing up what the first reviewer said, that if no specific conclusions are to be made, it "leads to deliberate denial that there are any problems serious enough that I might change my lifestyle, or even be moved to try to do something about them.

But the summary answer is: expect "the other side", rather than a middle-ground view.

It does sound interesting, and I'll put it on my wish list. Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That sounds like you're almost backing up what the first reviewer said, that if no specific conclusions are to be made, it "leads to deliberate denial that there are any problems serious enough that I might change my lifestyle, or even be moved to try to do something about them.
Actually, I don't know if I'm saying the same thing. I'm saying that is also possible that someone can read this book and come out of it more, not less, convinced of the environmentalist arguments. Of course, if a reader takes everything in this book at face value he would conclude that environmentalists are wrong. However, if one also has access to the other side (relatively easy to get), and if one follows through on some key points, looking for flaws in the essays, one might conclude differently. Perhaps, on some issue one might even end up thinking the essayist is a variety of conspiracy-theorist.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Depending on what area of environmentalism you are interested in catching up on, you might also check out 'the heated debate' by Robert C. Balling which focuses exclusively on global warming. Very detailed. Not sure if the layman will be able to verify everything, but it does address numerous claims made by the popular vision of global warming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...