1. Was Carson advocating for the banning of all the chemicals? What was she worried about?
2. Discuss why was Silent Spring so effective in arousing public concern? Carson was thought to be "hysterical" and "unqualified." Did people still believe her findings?
1. I don't think Carson was necessarily trying to ban all the chemicals used on crops but she wanted to let the public know that the pesticides and chemicals that were being used by farmers were severely damaging the environment. She want to get the point across that, "all of nature works as one and when you attack one part, you affect all, in frequently unanticipated ways". In other words, the pesticide was killing a large amount of sage trees, which was indirectly killing the animals that ate those sage trees (due to a lack of sage trees in their environment). And the death of those animals resulted in the death of the carnivorous animals that ate those animals, etc etc. The earth is ONE huge system and by attacking one park of it, the result is a domino effect- all the other parts of the system are affected as well. She was worried that the introduction of this new pesticide would create a domino effect and destroy earth's environment
ReplyDelete2. The people were unaware of the effects that the pesticides had on the environment, so when Carson wrote about the impact that the chemicals had on the environment, naturally, people were shocked. She researched the effects of the chemical well, and people had no choice but to believe her findings because they were well backed-up. The people who called her "hysterical" and "unqualified" were the people who were working in the chemical industry- they tried their best to deny her findings because if people started to believe her, then not only would they loose their jobs, but also they would be hated by the public for not mentioning the side affects of those pesticides. The people still believed Carson because in the end, the use of chemical pesticides were regulated and in some cases (DDT) banned.
1. Carson seemed to wish to raise awareness of the certain chemicals that were causing unexpected ramifications within the environment. She suggested that the use of these chemicals and pesticides were causing a negative effect but she did not say that each and every type was harmful. Her main concern was the effect the chemicals were having on the ecosystem as a whole. When the pesticides wiped out the sage it had an effect on the consumers which had an effect on the carnivores and so on. Carson was concerned on the effect the pesticide would have on the entirety of the system.
ReplyDelete2. In the time period in which this book was published, it was very odd for someone to possess this view. Environmental conservation and awareness was not even conceptualized yet, and for this reason people did not take to her idea very well. She was accused of being hysterical and unqualified within these accusations by the people who would be directly effected within her findings, the chemical industries. They tried to persuade the public that these were false accusations however some people still took her findings to heart and some progress was made. Regulatory processes have been implemented on some pesticides as well as extreme measures of banning those such as DDT.
1. Carson wanted to being awareness of the chemicals that were causing issues within the environment. She suggested that the uses of the chemicals and pesticides were the reasons that these negative effects were being created; Yet neglected to mention that each type of chemical had harmful effects. When pesticides wiped out sage, its had effects on consumers which had effects on each trophic level. The main concern was the effects it all was having on the entire of the ecosystem
ReplyDelete2. Due to the information contained in Carson's book and peoples ignorance of the effects that the pesticides had, people were naturally shocked, and opposed to this theory. Though she had done her research well, people in the chemical industry called her "hysterical" and "unqualified" within her theory. They then attempted to persuade the public to believe that her data was false in attempts to better them self; Also in attempts to keep their jobs and reputations in the public. This attempts were unsuccessful and Carson's findings lead to regulations and in some cases being banned all together such as DDT.
1. She did not want the completely ban these pesticides, but just wanted to raise public awareness so they were used in more controlled ways that had little effect on the environment.
ReplyDelete2. It was effective in raising public awareness because of the amount of research that was put into making the book. She researched the effect of pesticides on all of the aspects of the environment, including humans, animals and plant life. She also included sources to where she got her facts so people can look up the information for themselves if they didn't believe her book.
1. Carson did not want a complete ban on all of these pesticides, she simply wanted to inform the public that some of these pesticides were being used were having a negative effect on the enviroment. She was worried about the sage trees. She argued that by destroying the sage trees with pesticides, it then killed the animals that benefited from it (habitat, food, etc.) which in turn killed the animals that ate it. Because as one trophic level's population declines, the upper levels are then affected. So, ultimately she was concerned that the new pesticide would have another negative impact on the ecosystem.
ReplyDelete2. When Carson first came out with her findings (her book) on the effects that the pesticides have on us, people were surprised. They were surprised, because the workers in the chemical industry were keeping all of the side effects quiet so they could keep making money. So, when Carson came out with this research, she was of course called "hystarcial" and "unqualified", because theses industries wanted to keep the public in the dark. But with all of the research and facts to back up her findings, the public had no choice but to believe her.
1. Carson didnt want to ban all pesticides, only the ones that were harming the environment significantly. She actually believed that, with regulation, pesticides should be used as seen when she stated "the scalpel of biological controls first instead of the shotgun of chemical killers." She was worried that the overuse of pesticides would significantly harm the environment. She gave the example of beavers and trout, showing how by interfering with their environment, other economies would be harmed such as the fishing economy. Her overall goal in life was to achieve a society that maintains the use of pesticides.
ReplyDelete2. Silent Spring raised public concern this well because it had a monumental amount of research and work put into it that backed up the entire argument. Carson's work towards this book showed that it was an important matter which is why it got this much public support. Even though there were critics, Carson was one of the most qualified people to discuss this topic. Currently, a handful of the information that she put into her book are still true and people still believe them ans side with them.
1- I do not believe Carson was advocating for the banning of all the chemicals but only ones that could have huge impacts on the environment, as well as the Earth's future. Carson worried about the sage trees who had been wiped out, and therefore worried about the environment. Her main concern was mostly the effect all these different chemicals had on ecosystems.
ReplyDelete2- 'Silent Spring' was so effective in arousing public concern because of all the research and studies that had been made for the argument Carson advanced. Even though she was considered 'hysterical' and 'unqualified', Carson's studies and researches were still very advanced and innovating. People believed her findings, as she was very sure of what she was advancing.
1. Carson was not advocating for the banning of all chemicals, just more awareness and regulation on the different pesticides used. Carson was worried about a domino effect and she explains how chemicals affect the environment, humans, and animals, and how chemicals effect all part of nature, when you attack just one part.
ReplyDelete2. Silent Spring was so effective in arousing public concern because during this time, very little people knew about the negatives of chemicals and pesticides. She put a lot of research in the book which came from her background in marine biology. People still believe in her findings because of her background, research, and the outcome, such as laws preventing certain chemicals to be used.
I believe that carson only advocated for a controlled use of pesticides and other chemical. Not the banning of them.
ReplyDeleteCarson was effective in doing tis with silent spring, because she was qualified, and with her conclusions put fear into the readers eyes.
Carson didn't advocate the banning of all chemicals or even of pest and weed controllers. She simply suggested that these chemicals should be used in small amounts, if safe, and with a good understanding of the possible consequences, so as to prevent huge detriments to te environment and human and animal life.
ReplyDeleteCarson was so effective in arousing public concern because her work and research had covered the effects of the studied chemicals on all aspects of the environment, including the effects on human population. Although Carson was dismissed as crazy by those who were on the receiving end of the accusations, a further investigation by the Kennedy Administration proved Carson's claims true, and many more bans were enforced.