mothertrucker

What Earth Day Is Really All About

Well, before we begin, let's all say "Happy Birthday" to Vladimir Lenin! What? You didn't know Earth Day was his birthday? Well, let's get some background on this guy! He, apparently, was a Russian revolutionary and communist politician who led the October Revolution of 1917 (aka "Great October Socialist Revolution" or "Red October"). He also headed the Soviet state during its initial years (1917–1924), as it fought to establish control of Russia in the Russian Civil War, worked to create a socialist economic system, was a persuasive orator, and, as a political scientist, his extensive theoretic and philosophical developments of Marxism produced Marxism–Leninism, the pragmatic Russian application of Marxism. (1)

Now that we know a bit about our good friend Lenin, let's talk about the beginnings of Earth Day.

Earth Day was started by founded by U.S. Senator Gaylord Nelson, a Democratic politician from Wisconsin. The first observation of Earth Day was held in 1970. Approximately 20 million Americans participated. Thousands of colleges and universities organized protests against the deterioration of the environment. Groups that had been fighting against oil spills, polluting factories and power plants, raw sewage, toxic dumps, pesticides, Freeway and expressway revolts, the loss of wilderness, and the extinction of wildlife suddenly realized they shared common values. (2)

Everything seems like rainbows and unicorns...until the famous "Unicorn Killer" is mentioned.

You won't find this man's name on any Earth Day promotional literature, and for good reason. Ira Einhorn, who, allegedly, played an instrumental role in founding Earth Day, is a former American environmentalist activist of the 1960s and 1970s who was the "Master of Ceremonies" during the first Earth Day in 1970. (3) However, the reason activists distance themselves from his is because he is now serving a life sentence, without parole, for his 1977 murder of his girlfriend, Holly Maddux. (4)

Now, isn't it funny how the Left loves to bash the Tea Party Movement by calling it "hateful" and "violent", yet, Earth Day, so far, we've seen two fundamental aspects of Earth Day as clearly negative things: a link to Socialism (because there is no way that it was simply coincidence that this day be on that man's birthday) and a fundamental leader, or member, at least, of the movement is a murderer whom they try to sweep under the rug.

However, we're not done yet! There's one more thing that must be brought to the table, and that thing is a little chemical with a long name and many uses (which really seems to anger environmentalists):

Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) (5)

Discovered in the 1940s, this chemical was discovered to have could stop epidemics of insect-borne diseases such as typhus. Its lifesaving potential was considered such a boon to mankind that the scientist who discovered it, Paul Mueller, won the Nobel Prize. The chemical would soon surpass all expectations in controlling malaria around the world and go on to save millions of lives. Because of this wonderful gift from the beauty known as science, the disease was almost entirely wiped out in Africa, Europe and places like Taiwan.

So, what's the problem? Well, this is:

For some bizarre reason, the left didn't like the idea of a miracle cure, so Rachel Carson, who helped launch the modern environmental movement and was among many environmentalists who was anti-pesticide, wrote a book called "Silent Spring" in 1964, which stated that DDT would spread far and wide and harm robins' ability to reproduce, as well as some other baseless, unproven statements. The truth is that, not only does DDT not do that, but no studies have ever been able to show that environmental exposure to DDT, even in large quantities, harms human health. It is less dangerous to humans than any number of natural chemicals, including some vitamins and medicines that we consume without a second thought. And when used in small quantities in malaria control, DDT protects people from deadly mosquitoes.

In other words, those against DDT don't have a leg to stand on and might as well just say that they are pro-disease. The benefits of this miracle chemical far exceed any of these ridiculous and unproven risks.

Because of people like Rachel Carson, DDT is gone due to a ban by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and is even banned in Europe. And the result? Malaria is making a comeback in third world countries. As a result, developing countries fear exporting agricultural goods because of the possibility DDT residue on their produce. If residue were discovered, then the offending country would be banned form trading with Europe.

Meanwhile, malaria continues its deadly scourge, with no realistic alternative to fighting it on the scale that DDT can achieve.

As Richard Tren said in USAToday, "The lesson is that we wouldn't have the crisis we do today if we hadn't put feel-good politics ahead of solid science decades ago...This year, let's commit to putting science first. The consequences of not doing so last a very long time."

Earth Day - a day to celebrate socialism, murder, lies and a big smack in the faces of the people who inhabit the planet. Good intention should not come before true science.

Wally Wally:
(from amren: “james-watson-wont-stop-talking-about-race” story)

The trouble is that about 65% of whites and about 99% of blacks will hear what Mary-Claire King said and think that it's a good argument against what Watson said even thought it has absolutely nothing to do with what Watson said. And another thing, why would any logical white person, who wants the white race to survive, want the average black IQ to be equal to the average white I

Fact: average American black IQ is 15 pts lower than average American white IQ. However, individually, there are many blacks who are a lot smarter than whites and vice versa. Furthermore, most blacks in America have sufficient intelligence to live productive lives, no different than a broad segment of whites who have ordinary IQ levels.

Perhaps you could explain, why disparate average IQ levels between American blacks and whites is SO important to you and your race realist brethren?

george00:
What a fantastic question but do you really need to ask? I give you exhibit A: Planet Earth. Look around it. The darker the skin of the people who predominate in any country the more poverty and crime. Don't bother with the world just limit it to the United States. The darker the skin of the people who predominate in any city and the more poverty and crime. I could go on breaking things down for you but hopefully to can see the pattern.
And yes the average black has enough intelligence to live a semi-productive life but only because he is surrounded by white people and an infrastructure invented and sustained by whites. How would this average black guy be doing in Africa? Not so well. Right?
I could answer you in another way. WLP gave an excellent talk on this subject but almost all advancements have been made by whites in the genius IQ range. If whites on a large scale interbred with nonwhites this would pull the number of whites in the genius IQ range down and grind all advancements to a halt. It's complicated.

Wally Wally:

A prevalent belief amongst race realists is: “black people aren’t smart enough to exist in 1st world societies” and “have a propensity for committing crime”. Based on this belief, they feel a segregated America should be revived. A very large number of productive blacks in America unequivocally destroys that belief. Reasonable, unbiased people of all races see blacks daily participating in the American dream.

The darker the skin of the people who predominate in any city and the more poverty and crime.

I’m a black baby boomer who grew up in Washington DC on the tail end of segregation. As was true with most cities with black populations, with the advent of integration, blacks who could afford better moved out of the cities, leaving a concentration of poor blacks. Many of the blacks that moved out now live in middle class suburban black neighborhoods. Contrary to popular (race realism)belief, cities like Washington DC have many areas that are populated with middle to upper class blacks, with poor blacks living in pockets.

And black crime: the second weapon of attack used to justify a return to segregation. “Blacks have a propensity for committing crime”, like black intelligence “facts”, it’s a “fact” unsupported by scientific research.

The bulk of crime being committed by blacks is being committed by young black males involved in drug gang violence. Young black gangsters are protecting the very lucrative profits generated by the black market enterprise: DRUGS. The same phenomena existed during prohibition when young white men were committing crime and violence against each other at exorbitant rates, protecting the very lucrative profits of that other black market enterprise: ALCOHOL. Black market enterprises that generate large sums of cash tend to attract large scale violence. Lucrative cash, not genetics, is responsible for much of the crime and violence in black communities.

And yes the average black has enough intelligence to live a semi-productive life but only because he is surrounded by white people and an infrastructure invented and sustained by whites.

Semi-productive? The average black has enough intelligence to live a productive life, no different than the average white. Race realists like to push the myth of – most whites being intelligent enough to invent the marvelous technologies we enjoy – but the truth of the matter is, most whites are quite ordinary when it comes to IQ, as capable of sustaining a society as most blacks and would be lost too if forced to sustain their surroundings. You race realists live vicariously through the achievements of your more talented brethren(whose numbers are relatively small in number).

SINCERITY.net:
First I repeat, I would rather see the discussion on the top where I opened the same topic. This discussion here is buried very low, nobody will find it.
WallyWally, do you understand the scientific method? Most anti-racists keep making unproven statement and guesses. If you say what is PC you can make unproven statements or prove them with pseudoscience. Have you read Richard Lynn's books like "IQ and the wealth of Nations" who has clearly proven the statement that the darker the skin the lower the average income and gross national product of countries and regions
A few middle class blacks, who run away from their lower IQ high crime brothers to hide in white/Asian neighborhoods or the rare black middlle class region don't fix black AVERAGES of crime, school dysfuncion, and welfare.
Als WallyWally, be honest. Like Obama, and Sottomayor, you probably benefitted from a life of constant affirmative action. Even the vote for Obama was mostly BECAUSE of his skin color.
Again, I suggest we continue the conversation above on the new post that I started
By the way, read Sincerity.net

Wally Wally:
Middle class blacks are no different than middle class whites when they choose to purchase homes in middle class neighborhoods, black or white. Middle class whites don’t purchase homes in poor white Appalachian neighborhoods, they purchase homes in middle class neighborhoods. Why should our(black) purchasing strategy be different than yours(white)?

The bulk of crime in inner city neighborhoods is mainly driven by black market forces: DRUGS in particular, the same black market forces that drove white prohibition era crime. The high crime rates are certainly not a result of a 15 point difference in average IQ between blacks and whites.

Your(race realist) claim: “lower IQ is responsible for the education gap between blacks and whites”, is unproven and nonsensical given there are more plausible explanations for the gap. How much IQ horsepower is needed to sufficiently master the K – 12 education curriculum? Unless you know the answer to that question, you can’t begin to make your claim regarding IQ and the education gap. Poor parenting(single, barely of age, mothers), violence infested neighborhoods, the misguided distructive belief: “studying is ‘acting white’, are much more plausible explanations for the educational failures in inner city neighborhoods.

george00: An ordinary IQ for whites is 100. An ordinary IQ for blacks is 85. Whites are much more capable of sustaining a society than blacks. Most whites plan their lives around avoiding blacks. That's why there's white flight. The reason for white flight is pretty much illustrated by the type of conversation we are having right now. I'll say something and then you completely don't grasp the implications of what I just said. There's a reason why blacks create s---hole countries and cities and neighborhoods and schools. There's a reason why nonwhites are risking everything and doing everything to get into white countries on a massive scale. White geniuses make advances that are sustained by average whites. Blacks have demonstrated that they are incapable of sustaining even basic white standards. Look at what happens to the white colonies of Africa after the whites leave. You have nothing to base your arguments on except there are a lot of blacks who are being productive at jobs they got from whites after they rioted and burned the cities down in a massive symbolic strong armed robbery maneuver. That's your argument and it sucks.

Wally Wally: . I'll say something and then you completely don't grasp the implications of what I just said.

You make claims (e.g. – “Blacks have demonstrated that they are incapable of sustaining even basic white standards”.) for which there are glaring counter examples for refutation. It’s hard to take race realism seriously when you engage in constant hyperbolic propaganda.

george00: You keep wanting to take what blacks do when the blacks are sustained by whites. White people are employing blacks. It's a matter of frequency. The frequency of examples supporting your claims are much lower than the frequency of the examples supporting my claims. Blacks are parasites on whites. Whites would be much better off without blacks and blacks would be much worse off without whites.