"repeated studies have found no evidence that DDT exposure increases the risk of cancer"

Bad thinking. The only reason we don't have "proof" that DDT is a human carcinogen is because ever since the Nuremberg trials, doctors have been reluctant to feed large doses of probable poisons to human beings to see just how poisonous they are. The "repeated studies" mentioned are post hoc epidemiological surveys, i.e. looking at a few people who have been exposed to varying degrees and trying to quantify how different their medical history is from everybody else, how different their various other toxic exposures and other lifestyle factors and genetics are, just what their exposure to DDT was, and from all those estimates calculate just what portion of any difference in their medical history can therefore be attributed to their DDT exposure. As expected, this kind of study is quite a bit less sensitive than the gold standard randomly assigned clinical trial. But studies of that kind have implicated DDT in the development of tumors in mammals other than humans, and there's no particular reason why people would be immune to DDT when rats aren't, so the EPA lists DDT as a probable carcinogen.

The WHO didn't spray DDT in the areas affected by the tsunami, because:

"Endemic sporadic malaria close to the affected areas transm­itted by An.culicifacies, which has been considered DDT-resistant for­ many years"

http://mosquito.who.int/docs/Asia_tsunami_malaria_risk-v1-5Jan.pdf

But who you gonna believe, the people at WHO who actually make a career out of fighting malaria, or the Competitive Enterprise Institute?

Today in Salon, lovable crank Camille Paglia writes....

Hey, come on, you need some perspective here. Cheney would have just told her to F herself.

This country, like most things in life, requires balance between opposing tendencies; for instance, balance between the nice generous softies who make life better for everyone and want everybody to have fun (i.e. the Democrats) and the mean old skinflints who sit on the money so that you don't give it all away, and make sure somebody does some work around here(i.e., the Republicans).

Look what happens when the Republicans try to run somebody likable; Reagan, and George W. Bush. Ruins everything.

So no wonder they don't like their own candidates. If they were likable, they wouldn't be Republicans unless there was something wrong with them.

Yeah, if it weren't for Nader it would have at least been harder to Bush to steal the presidency; however, every half-assed posture-but-do-nothing "opposition" the Democrats put up against Bush erodes my conviction that Nader should not have run.

Should have jumped up and screamed "Gas attack! Terrorists!"

There's an easy way to get a more objective news feed; set your cable tv box to wake you up every morning with the BBC American news.

The folks who do that 'Intuitive, Feeling, Sensing' kind of personality analysis for a living will tell you that one of the widest gulfs is that between the 'gut feeling' guys and the 'data-driven' guys. There's a place for both types in the world, but it's very difficult for the two to understand, value, or trust each other, let alone cooperate. I think the last 6 years have witnessed the triumph of the 'gut feeling' folks over the 'reality-based community', and a demonstration that in fact we do need both factions to function.

Hell, I would settle for just getting rid of the "health care comes via your employer" model, and letting the debate regarding single payer continue. Both sides may not agree on which is the best model, but everybody can agree that we're sticking with the worst model.

Adoption. guys, 45 year old ladies, guys with 45 year old ladies, look into it.

Fuzzy math!!!!!

"But in a regional and perhaps even geopolitical sense, it may be more important that Iraq has the most extensive river system in the Middle East."

But, due to dams built by Turkey and Syria, the amount of water entering Iraq via the Euphrates dropped by 75% over the 1970s and 1980s. The water "Peace Pipeline" (as distinguished from the various proposed oil Peace Pipelines, such as the one from Mosul to Haifa), starting further upstream in Turkey, "would include the transfer of fresh water from the Seyhan, Ceyhan, and Euphrates basins by a series of dams and diversion tunnels to supply countries in the Arabian peninsula, including Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman."

-"Managing Water for Peace in the Middle East: Alternative Strategies", Masahiro Murakami, United Nations University Press, 1995.

proposed map: http://www.unu.edu/unupress/unupbooks/80858e/80858E0I.GIF

God makes the plans. For man to do so would be unforgivable hubris.

Plastic bags don't have to end up ghostly jellyfish in the lakes forever. There have been lots of demonstrations of degradable plastic bags that incorporate in the plastic some starch (same stuff as those "styrofoam" peanuts that are really just unflavored Cheetos and dissolve in water) so they degrade after a few weeks in the weather. Another use for the corn industry that is gobbling up America.

My local supermarket chain has a big bin in front of each door for bags for recycling.

Don't forget the bags newspapers are delivered in. I get more of those than grocery bags. My peeve use to be that my paperperson single-bags instead of double-bags the paper, and when he tosses it onto the driveway on a wet day, it rips the bag enough to soak the paper. I got less peeved when I found out that the newspapers make the delivery folks pay for the bags themselves!! Then the household hints column suggested that maybe every once in a while you send your collected newspaper bags back to the paperperson. As long as you have to tip him every Christmas anyway, might as well do the environment some good while getting on his good side.