War on Rachel Carson enters 47th year

Ed Darrell comments on the latest attack on Rachel Carson in a war that has being going on since 1962:

“Not Evil, Just Wrong” is slated for release sometime on October 18. This is the film that tried to intrude on the Rachel Carson film earlier this year, but managed to to get booked only at an elementary school in Seattle, Washington — Rachel Carson Elementary, a green school where the kids showed more sense than the film makers by voting to name the school after the famous scientist-author.

The film is both evil and wrong. …

That’s a whopper about every 15 seconds in the trailer — the film itself may make heads spin if it comes close to that pace of error.

The movie’s producers get so many basic things so very wrong that it seems that they do not know the difference between truth and falsehood or don’t care.

Comments

  1. #1 Lars Karlsson
    August 19, 2009

    From the movie trailer: “They want to go back to the Dark Ages and the Black Plague.”

    Not evil just incredibly stupid.

  2. #2 bi -- IJI
    August 19, 2009

    From comments at Darrell’s blog:

    > You’ll be glad to know that we’d be happy to debate you after the movie premiere on Oct 18, 2009.

    I now get the feeling that they’ll be willing to debate anyone except George Monbiot.

  3. #3 Marion Delgado
    August 19, 2009

    I dunno Frank – if Ed Darrell asks them to answer questions online ahead of time, they’ll chicken out. That’s more the M.O. Plimer challenged Monbiot to a debate, after all.

  4. #4 Michael
    August 19, 2009

    Lars, ‘not evil just wrong’, is certainly not the case with this lot.

  5. #5 Nils Ross
    August 19, 2009

    I love the “hotter is better,” and “more CO2 is better,” arguments. By watching who buys them and who doesn’t, you get an automatic separation of credulous idiots and critical thinkers.

  6. #6 Lars Karlsson
    August 20, 2009

    Michael,
    Well, it is hard to tell whether these people actually are so braindead that they actually believe in what they say, or they simply have a bottomless contempt for their intended audience.

  7. #7 Donald Oats
    August 20, 2009

    The technical philosophy term for their mouthy emanations is “bullshit”; see “Bullshit and Philosophy”, Eds Gary L. Hardcastle and George A. Reisch, Open Court Publishing, 2006. This term is used where truth or falsehood are of no concern to the utterer of verbal steaming piles of manure – they usually don’t know or care whether their malodorous oratory is true or false.

    Someone who knows that they are claiming false statements as true, on the other hand, is known as a “liar”.

    These idiots are probably largely of the former category.

  8. #8 Mark
    August 20, 2009

    > Not evil just incredibly stupid.

    > Posted by: Lars Karlsson

    The difference in what happens being *what* exactly?

    You’re just as dead from a nutter killing you because the crows told him, someone not looking what they were doing and someone who loathes your very existence.

    Still just as dead.

  9. #9 Dave Andrews
    August 20, 2009

    Ok, I admit the trailer can give some hints about the film. But then it is ‘advertising’ intended to pull in the punters.

    None of you have actually seen the final result so, like good scientists, why don’t you withold you fire until you have?

  10. #10 Mark
    August 21, 2009

    > None of you have actually seen the final result so, like good scientists, why don’t you withold you fire until you have?

    > Posted by: Dave Andrews

    From your assertions about AGW theory you haven’t read the IPCC report and any of the papers that went into it.

    Yet you still insist that it’s wrong.

    How about you read up on AGW theory before you decide whether it’s right or wrong?

  11. #11 Dave Andrews
    August 21, 2009

    Mark,

    I have read the IPCC and lots of other papers and books on climate science. Could it be that you can’t accept that someone who has done that can come to a different conclusion than you?

    Even worse, could it be that you categorically believe the science is ‘settled’ – a state that actually cannot exist?

  12. #12 bi -- IJI
    August 22, 2009

    Dave Andrews:

    > I have read the IPCC and lots of other papers and books on climate science.

    Once more, Dave Andrews shows that he’s not just a Leftist, but that he’s a Closet Secret Hidden Leftist, since he gives no indication whatsoever of having read the IPCC report except for a statement that “I have read the IPCC”.

    And no doubt, while the trailer of the film is totally insane, perhaps the film itself will show that the producers are in fact Closet Secret Hidden Even-Handed Moderates.

  13. #13 Mark
    August 25, 2009

    > I have read the IPCC and lots of other papers and books on climate science.

    Then why do you ask questions about what the IPCC considers when that answer is in the IPCC report?

  14. #14 emo
    April 19, 2010

    Rachel Carson is responsible for the deaths of millions of people in Africa/Asia and Latin America. Thank God DDT is in use once again so that poor people in the Third World wont die of mosquito borne illness. Rachel Carson is history’s most evil woman