Quote:
Originally posted by samtheman
But remember, if the group is an Environmentalist one or claims to be, the data must be accurate.
Quit trying to attack the messenger, and respond with facts that disput the allagations.
|
The DDT argument should be dropped, as most of us don't really care and there is some evidence that it isn't as bad as they once thought. DDT's use to fight malaria is valid if it's found to be relatively safe, and Central and South America is starting to use it again anyway, but I see no need to use it here because there isn't any threat of mosquito borne disease. Like I said, let's drop it.
Regardless, you're right, environmental groups need to be taken with a grain of salt as well, BUT they often have legit research to back up claims, whereas that site you linked to doesn't as far as I can tell. Read the mission statement for websites, it's the first thing I do.
For example: 21st Century Science & Technology magazine challenges the assumptions of modern scientific dogma.
That first sentence alone tells me that this site is way out of the mainstream and needs very solid evidence to support the claims they are making. Evidence that they don't seem to have for many issues.
Also, please stop pasting entire articles, it muddies up the thread and we have no way of knowing where you got it from most of the time (which I'm sure is intentional on your part, as the stuff you post is not usually of very high standards, and you know it).