While this message was definately an amusing antidote about the ease in
which you can manipulate the American public, I think its important to note
that *both* sides use such tactics. Heck, when it works, why not? I've
found it very hard recently to determine the real facts of several issues
recently (i.e., for the Timber Salvage Rider in the United States) because
each group tends to emphasize those numbers which support their cause. I'm
sure many people other than me realized how easy it is to manipulate numbers
when they took a statistics class.
As I write this, though, I realize I don't have a ready solution (and
therefore, am venting more than anything). I guess I want to emphasize (and
here I am probably preaching to the choir), that for all issues, especially
environmental ones, it is important to try and determine the source of the
'facts' with which you are presented in order to get the whole story.
Because *everyone* telling a story has a purpose behind it.
Kristen Manies
Dept. of Forestry
University of Wisconsin, Madison
1630 Linden Drive
Madison, WI 53706
manies@calshp.cals.wisc.edu
>From: <WillyJo1@aol.com>
>To: MDCMAIN.SMTP("ar-debate@cygnus.com")
>Date: Monday, April 15, 1996 7:11 pm
>Subject: Re: good stuff
>
>I came across this recently and cold not help but share it.
>
>As we have often heard, when polled Americans continue to say
>they care deeply about the environment. But, what is that belief
>built upon? On sound science and careful environmental analysis?
>Or, is it the results of flimsy or non-existent evidence coupled
>with carefully crafted rhetoric and scare tactics?
>
>Peter Sparber, a Washington D.C. business lobbyist, conducted a
>simple experiment to find the answers to those questions. The
>results from Mr. Sparber's efforts were reported in the October
>10, 1995 issue of the "Journal of Commerce" in an article written
>by Peter M. Tischwell.
>
>Mr. Sparber has a simple theory, which is this: Many Americans
>can be tricked into believing an environmental crisis exists
>without any facts whatsoever. To test this theory, Mr. Sparber
>put together a mailing list of people who support banning
>pesticides and sent them a letter from a fictitious group he
>called "Stop the Silent Killer Foundation". Here is the
>entire text of the letter:
>
>Dear Mr. Smith,
>
>You have been identified as a person who cares deeply about the
>future of our fragile planet, the health of our children and the
>quality of our nation's leadership. If we are right, we need
>your help, and we need it immediately.
>
>As you have undoubtedly read, DIHYDROGEN OXIDE has been found to
>be a major threat to the environment and to humans and animal
>health. Here are the facts:
>
>In 1991, the most recent year for which statistics are available,
>4,100 Americans, many of them under the age of 10, died from
>excessive dosages of dihydrogen oxide commonly found in many
>homes and recreation areas.
>
>Our polluted lakes, rivers, and oceans are known to contain vast
>quantities of dihydrogen oxide. On this, there is no controversy!
>Contaminated ground water? Same tragic situation.
>
>In California, Missouri and Georgia, families have lost their
>homes due to dihydrogen oxide contamination.
>
>In some applications, dihydrogen oxide is a major contributor to
>injuries from falls. In other applications, dihydrogen oxide is
>a major cause of burns.
>
>Why does America endure this wasteful destruction of our planet,
>our children and ourselves? Greed. Simple greed and stupidity.
>
>We need your help now. In the next 24 hours, we need you to
>demand an end to the production and use of dihydrogen oxide.
>Please write: The Dihydrogen Oxide Institute, P.O. Box 7178,
>Washington DC 20044-7178.
>
>On behalf of future generations, I thank you.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>John Alan Waterman
>
>Waterman, eh?
>
>And, what is this heinous product, Dihydrogen Oxide? Does H20 or
>water ring a bell?
>
>Well, as you might guess, responses to Mr. Waterman's letter
>immediately came pouring in to Mr. Sparber's fictitious
>Dihydrogen Oxide Institute. For instance, a couple from
>Portland, Maine wrote:
>
>We're writing to state a demand to end production and use of
>dihydrogen oxide. This is a major threat to the environment and
>to humans and animal health. Do the right thing and don't let $$
>always speak.
>
>A woman from Lyndon, Washington, sent in this response:
>
>What is going on here? You people must really believe the world
>will come to an end in the year 2000. Why else would you be
>poisoning the planet and its inhabitants with dihydrogen oxide.
>
>I know producing this poison is how you make your living. You
>must also realize that this same poison is what causes some
>people's deaths. How in God's name can you live with yourselves?
>Stop production and get a job you can be proud of - one that
>won't ruin your karma.
>
>>From New York, New York:
>
>For the sake of other's lives, please stop the production of
>dihydrogen oxide! More than 4,100 Americans died from excessive
>dosages. Since 1991, there are no more statistics, but I surmise
>the total deaths must be about 13,000 more!
>
>You are polluting our water. Stop your greed. Stop production.
>
>Mr. Waterman Sparber received many other responses all asking for
>an immediate end to dihydrogen oxide production. Didn't know
>water could be so dangerous. But every year thousands of
>American slip and fall on ice. More are burned by scalding
>water; and in 1991, 4,100 American drowned. Water can be a truly
>dangerous substance.
>
>The lesson in all this should be disturbing for a farmer seeking
>sound environmental policy. Farm Bureau members nationwide want
>reform of the Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, the
>Delaney Clause but are fighting an uphill battle against
>environmental groups who use skewed, distorted or non-existent
>evidence promising imminent environmental disaster if Farm
>Bureau supported reforms are enacted.
>
>It's easy to create fear. It's difficult to allay those fears
>and disprove negative statement. The reason they continue is
>because they are effective, and there is no penalty whatsoever
>for publishing false, misleading statements on the environment.
>
>AFBF President Dean Kleckner, in his annual meeting address,
>challenged Farm Bureau members nationwide to challenge every
>shoddy piece of "environmental science". If we don't, farm
>practices will be governed by people easily fooled by the
>environmental scare of the week rather than by science and what
>makes sense down on the farm. Utah Farm Bureau News.
>
>----------End of Original Message----------
>
>-------------------------------------
>Name: Pacific Lumber Co.
>E-mail: scopac@northcoast.com
>Date: 06/07/96
>Time: 15:20:20
>
>This message was sent by Chameleon
>-------------------------------------
>
>
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0