# "Silent Spring" FREE online download!



## Guest (Mar 9, 2007)

I just stumbled across this. It's a HUGE PDF document, so takes a while to download if you're on dialup.

It's the book Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson. This is the book credited with alerting people to the dangers of pesticides, particularly DDT, back in the 60's, I believe it was. It probably was responsible for at least some of the impetus for the organic movement (just a guess on my part. But I'm sure this book had a powerful effect on the way we now think of our food and the environment).

It's a must read!

http://ebooks.du.ac.in/edu-resources/Resources/books/ss.pdf


----------



## donsgal (May 2, 2005)

ladycat said:


> I just stumbled across this. It's a HUGE PDF document, so takes a while to download if you're on dialup.
> 
> It's the book Silent Spring, by Rachel Carson. This is the book credited with alerting people to the dangers of pesticides, particularly DDT, back in the 60's, I believe it was. It probably was responsible for at least some of the impetus for the organic movement (just a guess on my part. But I'm sure this book had a powerful effect on the way we now think of our food and the environment).
> 
> ...


I read in a news article about six months ago that the government is considering allowing the limited use of DDT again due to the presence of Malaria in some sub-tropical parts of the US. It made the statement that if DDT had NOT been banned and had been utilized world-wide that it would have saved more than 20,000,000 (that's MILLION) people from a very painful death. I would sacrifice a whole bunch of California Condors for 20 million people, wouldn't you?

donsgal


----------



## jessepona (Sep 7, 2005)

Wow, that's really cool! I have a hard copy myself but its good to know it is out there!


----------



## FoxfireWoman (Oct 26, 2005)

We have a signed first edition of Silent Spring, along with a well read paperback copy. It is good to know that it's online tho - may have to download it and give a copy to each of the kids.

Thanks for the heads-up.

Kat


----------



## hillsidedigger (Sep 19, 2006)

Ironically, Silent Spring made this list, as did the Population Bomb:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=19669

but, then consider who the judges on this list are.

DDT used in spot applications (at maybe 1/50,000th. the levels previously commonly used) wouldn't hurt anything and ,no, its not a question of condors or people. No amount of insecticide will make it safe for crowds of people to live in 'malariaville'. How did people survive in those areas before the discovery of insecticides? Few did but they had an 'ancient knowledge' of how to survive there. Thats the trouble with the modern world. Time tested technigues are lost with the advent of quick, cheap chemical fixes.


----------



## indypartridge (Oct 26, 2004)

Silent Spring" has been identified as some of the worst "junk science" ever. I'm all for being organic and pesticide-free, but I also recognize scientific fraud. Do a google on "Silent Sprint" and "junk science" and you'll get over a thousand hits. 

In the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons (Vol 9, No 3, 2004), Prof J. Gordon Edwards dismisses the much-acclaimed Silent Spring by Rachel Carson as a scientific fraud. It is on the strength of this book alone that DDT was banned by order of one man â the head of the US Environmental Protection Agency. In his paper, âDDT: A case study in scientific fraudâ Edward observes that fraud in science is a major problem. He came to this conclusion after reading a 2002 report published by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. 
http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/459/515422

Regarding DDT:
http://www.junkscience.com/ddtfaq.html

So 40 years after the publication of Silent Spring, the legacy of Rachel Carson is more troubling than her admirers will acknowledge.
http://www.reason.com/news/show/34823.html

Isn't it time to acknowledge that the argument of Rachel Carson's Silent Spring was a complete fallacy? 
http://www.brothersjudd.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/reviews.detail/book_id/421/Silent Sprin.htm


----------



## hillsidedigger (Sep 19, 2006)

No, Silent Spring was not a complete fallacy

but raised many valid questions which had never occurred to most people

and prompted thinking people worldwide to consider just what sort of future we were constructing.

And, Indypartridge, those links you have listed are absolutely full of mis-information. Do you really think 'dioxins' are OK?


----------



## heather (May 13, 2002)

I'm of the opinion that Rachel Carson was a good scientist in some respects & not others
She was passionate but did not use statistics & scientific information correctly from what I've read
Obviously, I'm no expert, so I just go with what I've read
Also my husband is a biologist - has worked for both governmental & private scientific orgs & I don't think anyone we've ever discussed this with has been impressed with her science

another link
http://www.reason.com/news/show/34823.html


----------



## Cabin Fever (May 10, 2002)

The "book" is not worth wasting your paper and printer ink on.


----------



## Guest (Mar 9, 2007)

Wind in Her Hair said:


> (and in my humble opinion, Rachel Carson may not have had it _all_ right, but her book certainly drew attention and awareness to environmental issues that were being overlooked or ignored until that time...kinda like algore...
> 
> maybe the reaction to her book drew knee-jerk, irrational, illogical, politically motivated and costly(in terms of human lives) measures - but it certainly was the catalyst for an environmental movement (albeit somewhat misdirected) that continues to strive to minimize mankind's destructive impact on the world we live in...for what its worth.


 You've hit the nail on the head!


----------



## jerzeygurl (Jan 21, 2005)

the book is a complete sham....

millions of people have died because of this fictional book


----------



## orangehen (Dec 7, 2005)

I loved the book.


----------



## KayJay (Oct 3, 2006)

I'll probably get flamed for this :shrug: but when are people going to realize that if "millions of people" *don't* die, we are going to continue to grow in numbers at astronomical rates and eat the planet up in relatively no time at all? Dying is part of living, of course no one wants to be the one to die, but c'mon, if we keep worrying about "millions of people" dying so much that we'll sacrifice every other part of the world to save some humans we're all gonna end up dead.
Sorry for the drift.


----------



## heather (May 13, 2002)

Wind in Her Hair said:


> ...kinda like algore...


HEE HEE :dance: 

That's one of my favorite comparisons I've heard in a while

Rachel Carson.....Al Gore  

HEE HEE


----------



## Guest (Mar 9, 2007)

KayJay said:


> I'll probably get flamed for this :shrug: but when are people going to realize that if "millions of people" *don't* die, we are going to continue to grow in numbers at astronomical rates and eat the planet up in relatively no time at all? Dying is part of living, of course no one wants to be the one to die, but c'mon, if we keep worrying about "millions of people" dying so much that we'll sacrifice every other part of the world to save some humans we're all gonna end up dead.
> Sorry for the drift.


 And I keep wondering where would we be now if she hadn't written the book? _What if_ we had continued to use pesticides indiscriminately and unabated for an additional 20 or 30 years? How many more species might have become extinct, what impact on the environment, what impact on human health?

What would have happened when malaria-carrying mosquitoes became immune to DDT? Then what??


----------



## hillsidedigger (Sep 19, 2006)

Very little of the DDT was used for mosquito control, most was used to try to control agricultural pests.

Its the same with 'Roundup' sprayed by the tanker full onto croplands. Many say its safe, I say its not when considered with repeated use year after year for decades and maybe centuries the volumes of it to be used will be huge with no telling what long-term bad effects.

The maximum food for the most people for the longest time will be had by incorporating natural systems not by attempting to circumvent natural systems with quick chemical fixes. There's much more future promise in 'heirloom' seeds than in GM seeds, same with organic methods versus synthesized fertilizer and pesticides. 

Like KayJay said, there are dieoffs coming and there is no way on Earth for humanity to prevent them although the dieoffs might be somewhat minimized if enough people worldwide get the message and voluntarily adapt to a 'green' lifestyle.


----------

