The Straight Dope 12/13/2002

____________________________________________
The Straight Dope -- By Cecil Adams
http://www.straightdope.com

You are subscribed as: [[email protected]]

To unsubscribe CLICK on the URL below this line:
mailto:[email protected]
If you can't "click" above, then send a blank email to:
[email protected]
____________________________________________
THE STRAIGHT DOPE 12/13/2002

Dear Cecil:

Was Rachel Carson a fraud and is DDT actually safe for humans? According to 
Marjorie Mazel Hecht and [San Jose State University] professor J. Gordon 
Edwards at www.21stcenturysciencetech.com, DDT is safe and indeed saved and 
can save human lives, and Rachel Carson's Silent Spring is full of lies. 
According to them, the banning of DDT was politically motivated and went 
against the majority of scientific opinion. Yet I consistently hear how 
dangerous DDT is. What's the truth here? --Craig Sheldon

~~~~~~
Looking for the perfect gift for that wedding, birthday, or
bar mitzvah? Straight Dope books are the very thing! See
http://www.straightdope.com/store.html
~~~~~~

Cecil replies:

Claiming Silent Spring (1962)is full of lies is a bit harsh. Let's say it 
contains certain statements at variance with the facts as we now understand 
them. I'm willing to believe this was a natural result of the fledgling state 
of environmental science at the time, whereas right-wing conspiracy theorists 
(who apparently include the parties you mention--Hecht supports 
crank-for-all-seasons Lyndon LaRouche) see it as evidence of a campaign of 
deceit by the liberal cabal. We could spend pages debating the details, but 
the bottom line is this: Soaking the biota in DDT like it was bubble bath, 
standard practice at the time Silent Spring was written, was a bad thing and 
Carson was right to condemn it. But refusing to use DDT because of 
exaggerated fears of environmental damage is, in some circumstances, far 
worse.

For more, see:
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/021213.html


STAFF REPORT

Dear Straight Dope:

Here's a rumor (and by rumor I mean one of those E-mail-lore things): The 
name Wendy was made-up for the book Peter Pan. As I have a friend so named, 
is this true? --Craig Cormier

SDSTAFF Czarcasm replies:

One simple click here shows us that the name Wendy was invented in 1973 for 
the "Superfriends" cartoon on ABC, the name Marvin having been previously 
invented by Mel Blanc in the 50s for a series of Bugs Bunny cartoons. Next 
question?

For more, see: 
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mpeterpanwendy.html


STRAIGHT DOPE CLASSIC - 11/10/1976

Dear Cecil: 

A while back this item appeared in Playboy's "After Hours" column: "Better 
check the mirror before venturing out in Chicago, because, according to a 
city Ugliness Ordinance, "No person who is diseased, maimed, mutilated or in 
any way deformed so as to be an unsightly or disgusting object, or an 
improper person to be allowed in or on the public ways or other public places 
in this city, shall therein or thereon expose himself to public view, under a 
penalty of not less than one dollar nor more than $50 for each offense.' Is 
this for real, and what's it all about? --Josh B., Chicago

Cecil replies:

It's no joke. The ordinance (it's since been repealed) dates back to 1881. 
Originally certain extenuating circumstances were provided for: "On the 
conviction of any person for a violation of this section, if it shall seem 
proper and just, the fine provided for may be suspended, and such person 
detained at the police station, where he shall be well cared for, until he 
can be committed to the county poor house." The enlightenment of the 
twentieth century (which, according to some historians, reached Chicago circa 
1930) led to the deletion of this clause.  The alleged purpose of the statute 
was not, as you might think, to rid the public ways of unsavory characters, 
but to protect the pitiful creatures from being exploited for profit--in 
other words, not to punish the deformed, but to protect them. Perfectly 
clear? An earlier ordinance had given the City Council the power to 
"regulate, license, suppress, and prohibit...exhibitions of natural or 
artificial curiosities," but apparently that legislation was too much to the 
point to be useful. 

For more, see:
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_137a.html

____________________________________________
Here's how you can get your OWN FREE Subscription:
Send a blank mailto:[email protected]
____________________________________________
Copyright 1995 - 2002 Chicago Reader, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
You may forward this document by email ONLY if you
include the entire document INCLUDING the information
at the bottom of this publication
____________________________________________
Visit our good friends at Joke A Day http://www.jokeaday.com
They're kind enough to mail THE STRAIGHT DOPE for us.
Join the World's Largest Daily Humor List and receive daily
laughs in your email by sending mailto:[email protected]