{"id":339556,"date":"2024-08-14T09:25:54","date_gmt":"2024-08-14T07:25:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=339556"},"modified":"2024-08-14T09:25:57","modified_gmt":"2024-08-14T07:25:57","slug":"environmentalism-or-individualism-part-3-inhuman-rights","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=339556","title":{"rendered":"Environmentalism or Individualism? (Part 3: Inhuman Rights)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n

From Master Resource<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

By Robert Bidinotto<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ed. Note<\/strong>: This is Part 3 of a six-part series on the ideology of environmentalism and its incompatibility with the foundational individualist philosophy of the United States. Parts 1 is here<\/a>. Part 2 is here<\/a>.<\/em> Subsequent posts: Part 4, Part 5, Part 6)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

\u201cWhy is it that any touch of Man upon nature is to be regarded as a violation and desecration? What is the distinctive aspect of human nature that so offends the environmentalists?\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Today, the most consistent expression of environmentalism\u2019s misanthropic view can be found in the so-called \u201canimal rights movement,\u201d which emerged with the publication in 1975 of philosopher Peter Singer\u2019s book, Animal Liberation<\/em>. \u201cThis book,\u201d Singer wrote, \u201cis about the tyranny of human over non-human animals.\u201d That tyranny amounts to \u201cspeciesism,\u201d akin to \u201cracism.\u201d A speciesist, Singer said, \u201callows the interest of his species to override the greater interest of members of other species.\u201d1<\/a><\/sup> Note the word \u201cgreater.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As fellow philosopher Tom Regan, author of The Case for Animal Rights<\/em><\/a>, put it, \u201cthe fundamental wrong is the system that allows us to view animals as our resources, here for us.\u201d2<\/a><\/sup> Instead, both Singer and Regan hold that all beings with a capacity to feel pleasure and pain have an \u201cinherent value of their own.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This means, say three animal-rights philosophers at Oxford, that \u201cThere can be no rational excuse left for killing animals, be they killed for food, science or sheer personal indulgence.\u201d3<\/a><\/sup> It means: no animal testing of medicines or surgical techniques; no hunting, circuses, or rodeos; no birdcages or dog pens; no leather, no meat, no milk, no eggs\u2014no use of animals, period.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Strict observance of animal rights forbids even direct protection of people and their values from nature\u2019s many predators. For example, in his book Returning to Eden<\/em>, Michael W. Fox\u2014then a vice-president of the Humane Society\u2014denounced the use of bug sprays and electric \u201cbug roasters\u201d to zap mosquitoes; after all, he said reassuringly, \u201conly a few of the millions you kill would have bitten you.\u201d4<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Likewise, in a 1990 fundraising letter to Humane Society members, opposing the federal Animal Damage Control program, Society president John Hoyt denounced \u201cthe killing of millions of animals\u2014to protect American agriculture and other resources from damage caused by wildlife. This goal must be changed to one that seeks to limit<\/em> losses to acceptable levels without<\/em> killing or injuring wildlife.\u201d [Emphasis in original.]<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Losses to people, you see, are \u201cacceptable\u201d; losses to animals are not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Radical preservationism is now enshrined in major environmental laws\u2014such as the Endangered Species Act, which places minnows and owls above our needs for hydroelectric power and lumber; and wetlands regulations, which set aside mosquito-breeding swamps as inviolate sanctuaries for salamanders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The federal government\u2019s 1964 Wilderness Act defines a wilderness \u201cas an area where the earth and its community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain.\u201d5<\/a><\/sup> No roads, cabins, camping facilities, campfires, mechanized vehicles of any kind are permitted to sully these virginal expanses. This federal law, environmentalist historian Shabecoff states proudly, \u201cthrew the authority of the United States government behind the radical idea that the land and its riches have value even when left undisturbed.\u201d6<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

But why<\/em>?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why is it that any touch of Man upon nature is to be regarded as a violation and desecration? What is the distinctive aspect of human nature that so offends the environmentalists?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As they make clear in virtually every utterance, it is Man\u2019s power to reason, and everything that flows from it: abstract knowledge, science, technology, material wealth, industrial society, the capitalist system.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Why? Because reason is the tool by which Man transforms his environment for his own benefit<\/em>. Therefore, to environmentalists, rationality is the mark of Cain. In the \u201cnatural order\u201d they espouse, we humans are the second-class citizens of the universe\u2014condemned, by our very nature as rational, creative developers, to sit at the back of the bus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Great Apple Scare<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

To define environmentalism is to damn it, which is why many movement spokesmen go to considerable public lengths to cover the naked implications of their core premises with fig leaves of respectability and moderation. One way they do it is to clothe their endless scare campaigns in the ill-fitting garb of science.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Their tactics always follow a familiar pattern. First come declarations of some new ecological \u201ccrisis,\u201d based upon the flimsiest of evidence and perversions of the scientific method. Next are mathematical projections of catastrophic consequences stemming from the new danger, extrapolated from ludicrous worst-case scenarios. Finally, the claim is made that \u201cwe must do something immediately,\u201d because the predicted consequences\u2014though not provable\u2014are just too horrible to contemplate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Let me give you just one notorious example that I investigated personally for Reader\u2019s Digest<\/em>.7<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In 1989, one of the nation\u2019s most influential environmentalist groups, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), panicked America about Alar, a chemical growth agent then used on apples. On CBS-TV\u2019s 60 Minutes<\/em> program and later on Donahue<\/em>, the NRDC\u2014with the help of its eminent toxicological consultant, actress Meryl Streep\u2014reported that apples treated with Alar eventually could cause thousands of lifetime cancer cases among today\u2019s preschoolers. This carefully engineered publicity stunt terrified mothers, cost Alar\u2019s manufacturer, Uniroyal, millions, caused over $100 million in losses to apple growers, some of whom were bankrupted\u2014while making a fortune for the NRDC.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Alar scare was in keeping with the NRDC\u2019s uncompromising position that the presence of pesticide residues on food in any amount\u2014no matter how trivial\u2014constitutes an \u201cintolerable risk\u201d to human health. For example, NRDC\u2019s Lawrie Mott wrote in 1984 that \u201cit may be impossible to define a safe level of pesticide residues in food.\u201d8<\/a><\/sup> Mott told me that the NRDC would ban all such chemicals \u201cno matter how great their benefits are.\u201d9<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

During the 1970s, initial tests on rodents using Alar and its chemical by-product, UDMH, suggested a cancer risk. But the dose levels in those tests were so absurdly high that the animals were dying of simple poisoning. Nonetheless, the EPA used these poorly designed and monitored tests to try to ban Alar.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But in 1985, the EPA\u2019s own independent Scientific Advisory Panel dismissed the Agency\u2019s findings, throwing out the rodent experiments as scientifically worthless. Stung by the panel\u2019s rejection of its evidence, the EPA retaliated by ordering Uniroyal to start another round of tests. Yet for two years, every test on Alar came back clean. And even at dose levels 35,000 times higher than the highest amount that children might ingest daily, UDMH caused no tumors in rats.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, in desperation, the EPA decided to stack the deck: for a final mouse test, it ordered the laboratory to increase the UDMH dose levels four to eight times higher than independent consultants had already computed was the maximum amount the animals could tolerate. Sure enough, these grossly excessive doses at last generated the tumors that the agency had been looking for\u2014even though 80 percent of the mice were poisoned to death. The EPA then used these deliberately manipulated results to estimate that 45 people in a million \u201cmight\u201d get cancer from Alar. It therefore ordered all use of the product to cease.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But while Uniroyal and apple growers suffered, the NRDC prospered.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

After its 60 Minutes<\/em> appearance, the group dashed off a new paperback book on pesticides, titled For Our Kids\u2019 Sake<\/em>, priced at $6.95 per copy. Then they set up a 900 phone number, priced at $3.00 per call, through which to order the book. At the outset of the scare, the phone number was dutifully published on the front page of USA Today<\/em> and aired on national TV commercials featuring Streep. When promoted on the Donahue<\/em> show, over 90,000 copies were sold. The NRDC\u2019s Janet Hathaway proudly told me that during the scare, NRDC phones were ringing off the hook with new members and contributors.10<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n\n\n\n

This is only one of countless phony environmental scares that could be cited. Similar pseudo-scientific nonsense is also peddled over radon in homes, global warming, ozone depletion, electromagnetic fields, and much more.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

____________________________<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    \n
  1. Peter Singer,\u00a0Animal Liberation<\/em><\/a>: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals<\/em>\u00a0(New York: Avon Books, 1975), pp. ix, 9.\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  2. Tom Regan,\u00a0\u201cThe Case for Animal Rights,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0in\u00a0In Defense of Animals<\/em>, ed. Peter Singer (New York: Basil Blackwell, 1985).\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  3. Stanley Godlovitch, Roslind Godlovitch, and John Harris, eds.\u00a0Animals, Men, and Morals<\/a>: An Inquiry into the Maltreatment of Non-Humans (New York: Grove Press, 1971), p. 7.\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  4. Michael W. Fox,\u00a0Returning to Eden<\/em><\/a>: Animal Rights and Human Responsibilities<\/em>\u00a0(New York: Viking Press, 1980), p. 232.\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  5. Pub. L. 85-577, 78 Stat. 890, at 891.<\/a>\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  6. Philip Shabecoff,\u00a0A Fierce Green Fire<\/em><\/a>: The American Environmental Movement<\/em>\u00a0(New York: Hill and Wang, 1993), p. 153.\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  7. Robert James Bidinotto, \u201cThe Great Apple Scare,\u201d\u00a0Reader\u2019s Digest,<\/em>\u00a0October 1990, pp. 53\u201358. Reprinted online\u00a0here<\/a>.\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  8. Lawrie Mott, \u201cBad Apples: Pesticides in Food,\u201d\u00a0The Amicus Journal,<\/em>\u00a0Summer 1984, 37.\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  9. Lawrie Mott, phone interview with author, June 12, 1990.\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n\n\n\n
  10. Janet Hathaway, phone interview with author, June 19, 1990.\u00a0\u21a9\ufe0e<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n\n\n\n
    \n\n\n\n

    About the Author<\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Robert Bidinotto is an award-winning journalist, editor, lecturer, and novelist who reports on cultural and political issues from the perspective of principled individualism. Over three decades he has established a reputation as a leading critic of environmentalism.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    As a former Staff Writer for Reader\u2019s Digest<\/em>, Bidinotto authored high-profile investigative reports on environmental issues, crime, and other public controversies\u2014including articles on global warming and the 1989 Alar scare. His Alar article was singled out for editorial praise by Barron\u2019s<\/em> and by Priorities<\/em>, the journal of the American Council on Science and Health. He authored a monograph, The Green Machine<\/em>,and for several years ran a website (\u201cecoNOT\u201d), both critically examining the environmentalist philosophy and movement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Bidinotto\u2019s many articles, columns, and reviews also appeared in Success<\/em>, Writer\u2019s Digest, The Boston Herald<\/em>, The American Spectator<\/em>, City Journal<\/em>, The Freeman<\/em>, and Reason<\/em>. He served as the award-winning editor of The New Individualist<\/em>, a political and cultural magazine, and as editor of publications for the Capital Research Center, a nonprofit watchdog group.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    In 2011, Bidinotto began writing political thrillers. HUNTER<\/em>\u2014the debut novel in his Dylan Hunter series\u2014soared to the top of the Amazon and Wall St. Journal <\/em>bestseller lists. BAD DEEDS<\/em>, the first sequel, dramatizes the evils and dangers of environmentalism. A number-one best-selling Audible political thriller, BAD DEEDS <\/em>was named \u201cBook of the Year\u201d by the Conservative-Libertarian Fiction Alliance. Bidinotto\u2019s thrillers are available on Amazon<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Learn more about Robert Bidinotto at his fiction website, \u201cThe Vigilante Author\u201d<\/a> and at his nonfiction blog<\/a>.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

    <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Ed. Note: This is Part 3 of a six-part series on the ideology of environmentalism and its incompatibility with the foundational individualist philosophy of the United States. Parts 1 is here. Part 2 is here. Subsequent posts: Part 4, Part 5, Part 6)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121246920,"featured_media":339559,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_coblocks_attr":"","_coblocks_dimensions":"","_coblocks_responsive_height":"","_coblocks_accordion_ie_support":"","_crdt_document":"","advanced_seo_description":"","jetpack_seo_html_title":"","jetpack_seo_noindex":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[1],"tags":[691830146,691830145,691825754,691830147,691830143,691830144],"class_list":{"0":"post-339556","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","6":"hentry","7":"category-uncategorized","8":"tag-animal-damage-control-program","9":"tag-animal-liberation","10":"tag-environmentalism","11":"tag-great-apple-scare","12":"tag-inhuman-rights","13":"tag-peter-singer","15":"fallback-thumbnail"},"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Animal-Liberation-Now.jpg?fit=1050%2C664&ssl=1","jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/paxLW1-1qkI","jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":339692,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=339692","url_meta":{"origin":339556,"position":0},"title":"Environmentalism or Individualism? (Part 4: Philosophic Conflict)","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"15\/08\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"This is Part 4 of a six-part series on the ideology of environmentalism and its incompatibility with the foundational individualist philosophy of the United States. \u201cThe fundamental concern of environmentalists is about the logical incompatibility of the values underlying a modern, technological, capitalist society, and the values embodied in the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"environmental problems\"","block_context":{"text":"environmental problems","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=environmental-problems"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0GettyImages-693507696-ed03cdf603644d8aa71584efa64194a1.jpg?fit=1200%2C927&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0GettyImages-693507696-ed03cdf603644d8aa71584efa64194a1.jpg?fit=1200%2C927&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0GettyImages-693507696-ed03cdf603644d8aa71584efa64194a1.jpg?fit=1200%2C927&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0GettyImages-693507696-ed03cdf603644d8aa71584efa64194a1.jpg?fit=1200%2C927&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0GettyImages-693507696-ed03cdf603644d8aa71584efa64194a1.jpg?fit=1200%2C927&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":339862,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=339862","url_meta":{"origin":339556,"position":1},"title":"Environmentalism or Individualism? (Part 6: The \u201cIdeal\u201d of Primitivism)","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"17\/08\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cEnvironmentalism reflects an antipathy for a complex, technological, and free society where survival is bought at the cost of ambition, learning, thinking, taking risks, and working hard, within a free, competitive marketplace.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In \"Al Gore\"","block_context":{"text":"Al Gore","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=al-gore"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0What-is-Primitivism-Featured.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0What-is-Primitivism-Featured.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0What-is-Primitivism-Featured.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0What-is-Primitivism-Featured.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0What-is-Primitivism-Featured.jpg?fit=1200%2C675&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":339139,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=339139","url_meta":{"origin":339556,"position":2},"title":"Environmentalism or Individualism? (Part 1: America\u2019s Enlightenment Heritage)","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"10\/08\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Today, Master Resource begins a six-part series analyzing the philosophic basis of environmentalism, its enmity to the technologies of instrumental reason (especially energy technology), as well as its incompatibility with the foundational individualist philosophy of the United States. Written some years ago by the award-winning essayist\u00a0Robert Bidinotto, this manifesto seemed\u2026","rel":"","context":"In \"Climate change\"","block_context":{"text":"Climate change","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=climate-change"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/02e3e2d36f1e4f0b0b7c104b8f6a2a6d0.jpg?fit=1200%2C873&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/02e3e2d36f1e4f0b0b7c104b8f6a2a6d0.jpg?fit=1200%2C873&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/02e3e2d36f1e4f0b0b7c104b8f6a2a6d0.jpg?fit=1200%2C873&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/02e3e2d36f1e4f0b0b7c104b8f6a2a6d0.jpg?fit=1200%2C873&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/02e3e2d36f1e4f0b0b7c104b8f6a2a6d0.jpg?fit=1200%2C873&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":339780,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=339780","url_meta":{"origin":339556,"position":3},"title":"Environmentalism or Individualism? (Part 5: The Value of Nature)","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"16\/08\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cYes, we too are part of nature; but our nature is that of a developer\u2026. It\u2019s morally appropriate for us to regard the rest of nature as our environment\u2014as a bountiful palette and endless canvass for our creative works.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In \"double standard\"","block_context":{"text":"double standard","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=double-standard"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screen-Shot-2018-06-30-at-07.53.29.png?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screen-Shot-2018-06-30-at-07.53.29.png?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screen-Shot-2018-06-30-at-07.53.29.png?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screen-Shot-2018-06-30-at-07.53.29.png?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0Screen-Shot-2018-06-30-at-07.53.29.png?fit=1200%2C599&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":339430,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=339430","url_meta":{"origin":339556,"position":4},"title":"Environmentalism or Individualism? (Part 2: Conservation vs. Preservation)","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"13\/08\/2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe ultimate goal of the mainstream environmentalist movement, therefore, is not conservation of natural resources for human use. It is preservation of nature as an end in itself.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In \"capitalism\"","block_context":{"text":"capitalism","link":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?tag=capitalism"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0641215872b8467b09ee5453c_630dcbbb3fef5aee2bc9e227_conservation-vs-preservation.jpeg?fit=1200%2C628&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0641215872b8467b09ee5453c_630dcbbb3fef5aee2bc9e227_conservation-vs-preservation.jpeg?fit=1200%2C628&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0641215872b8467b09ee5453c_630dcbbb3fef5aee2bc9e227_conservation-vs-preservation.jpeg?fit=1200%2C628&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0641215872b8467b09ee5453c_630dcbbb3fef5aee2bc9e227_conservation-vs-preservation.jpeg?fit=1200%2C628&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/08\/0641215872b8467b09ee5453c_630dcbbb3fef5aee2bc9e227_conservation-vs-preservation.jpeg?fit=1200%2C628&ssl=1&resize=1050%2C600 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":201012,"url":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/?p=201012","url_meta":{"origin":339556,"position":5},"title":"The National Association of Scholars (NAS) recognition of a scientific duplication crisis \u2014 Part 3","author":"uwe.roland.gross","date":"23\/05\/2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Scientific Method Science Experiment Theory Puzzle 3d Illustration EPA regulations rely on environmental epidemiological literature, without applying rigorous tests for reproducibility, and without considering the environmental epidemiology discipline\u2019s general refusal to take account of the need for Multiple Testing and Multiple Modeling. Such rigorous tests are needed not least because\u2026","rel":"","context":"Similar post","block_context":{"text":"Similar post","link":""},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/0Scientific-method-jig-saw-1.jpg?fit=848%2C565&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/0Scientific-method-jig-saw-1.jpg?fit=848%2C565&ssl=1&resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/0Scientific-method-jig-saw-1.jpg?fit=848%2C565&ssl=1&resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/climatescience.press\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/0Scientific-method-jig-saw-1.jpg?fit=848%2C565&ssl=1&resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339556","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/121246920"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=339556"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339556\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":339561,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/339556\/revisions\/339561"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/339559"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=339556"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=339556"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/climatescience.press\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=339556"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}