To Cure Hyperventilation, Put A Bag Your Head

The cure for hyperventilation is to put a bag over your head, thus increasing your CO2 levels. In 1970, Stanford’s climate alarmist Paul Ehrlich said that by 1980 Lake Erie would be dead, and that we would run short of food and water in the US.

CgGsqJ4UAAEC4b4 (1)

6 Oct 1970, Page 3 – Redlands Daily Facts at

What actually happened is that US corn production doubled.


Early Thoughts on 2015 US Corn Yield – DTN Progressive Farmer

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to To Cure Hyperventilation, Put A Bag Your Head

  1. RAH says:

    Oceans are far from dead. Lake Erie water level has been getting better not worse. And the place in the US with a real water problem within the last few years has been the progressive and very environmentally reactionary state of California!
    And even the doomsday socialist progressives at the NYT will print a story about the global decline of major diseases. :

    Another leftist hero wacko has been proven to have been completely insane.

    • Louis Hooffstetter says:

      Paul Ehrlich been so consistently wrong about everything that Las Vegas bookies won’t give odds on his predictions anymore.
      He’s got a perfect batting average.

  2. AndyG55 says:

    Raising your internal CO2 level by altering your breathing can also help with asthma.

    CO2 is a natural bronchial dilator.

  3. gator69 says:

    As it turns out, the claims of our use of DDT being harmful to humans was just a false flag, like CAGW…

    The fact that DDT saves lives might account for part of the hostility toward it. Alexander King, founder of the Malthusian Club of Rome, wrote in a biographical essay in 1990:

    “My own doubts came when DDT was introduced. In Guyana, within two years, it had almost eliminated malaria. So my chief quarrel with DDT, in hindsight, is that it has greatly added to the population problem.”

    • RAH says:

      I agree gator69 but I also believe the claim that it was very harmful to some bird species and especially raptors. So I think that while it should be not be used for agricultural purposes it should be used in a targeted manner to control or eliminate the vectors of human diseases and pests.

      • Lance says:

        @RAH, Um, in a word, “No”.

        Fact and history say that DDT is NOT a threat to raptors and the deaths of millions lie at the feet of Rachel Carson and the EPA for absolutely Zero benefit.

        “The ban on DDT, founded on erroneous or fraudulent reports
        and imposed by one powerful bureaucrat, has caused millions of deaths, while sapping the strength and productivity of countless human beings in underdeveloped countries. It is time for an honest appraisal and for immediate deployment of the best currently available means to control insect-borne diseases. This means DDT.”

        Rachel Carson’s Deadly Fantasies

      • gator69 says:

        Lance is correct. If there was an actual egg problem, studies have concluded it was more likely due to hunters using lead shot.

        • RAH says:

          Well there was a big problem and it started getting better long before lead shot went out of use for fowl hunting in 1991. I was a hunter and I saw it as a kid. You had to look long and hard to find a red tailed hawk and several other species of raptors, including owls in Indiana when I was a kid. Now I they’re all over the place including a nesting pair of red tails in a tree in my front yard several years until this year. Something changed and the elimination of DDT was one of the things that changed and it’s termination of use fits the time line of what I observed here. Correlation does not prove causation but it sure as hell should make one take notice. And the lack of correlation in the time line of lead shot going out of use for hunting and the increase in raptors tends to make me believe that was not the primary problem. So I tend to believe there was validity to the argument and studies showing the connection with DDT to thinning egg shells.
          It is one thing to read and pick and choose what you want to believe. It is another thing to have observed changes yourself. So if it wasn’t DDT nor lead shot then what was it? I’ll stick with the DDT idea until a better explanation which correlates with the timeline come along. So in a word NO, I reject you rejection,

          • Lance says:

            The Boxer

            “Such are promises
            All lies and jest
            Still, a man hears what he wants to hear
            And disregards the rest.”

          • gator69 says:

            One of the most notorious DDT “factoids” is that it thinned bird egg shells. But a 1970 study published in Pesticides Monitoring Journal reported that DDT residues in bird egg shells were not correlated with thinning. Numerous other feeding studies on caged birds indicate that DDT isn’t associated with egg shell thinning.

            In the few studies claiming to implicate DDT as the cause of thinning, the birds were fed diets that were either low in calcium, included other known egg shell-thinning substances, or that contained levels of DDT far in excess of levels that would be found in the environment – and even then, the massive doses produced much less thinning than what had been found in egg shells in the wild.
            So what causes thin bird egg shells? The potential culprits are many. Some that have been reported in the scientific literature include: oil; lead; mercury; stress from noise, fear, excitement or disease; age; bird size (larger birds produce thicker shells); dehydration; temperature; decreased light; human and predator intrusion; restraint and nutrient deficiencies.

            Most of this evidence was available to the Environmental Protection Agency administrative judge who presided over the 1971-1972 hearings about whether DDT should be banned. No doubt it’s why he ruled that, “The use of DDT under the regulations involved here does not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds or other wildlife.”

            Yet it’s the myths, not the facts that endure. Why? The answer is endless repetition. The environmentalists who wanted DDT banned have constantly repeated the myths over the last 40 years, while most of DDT’s defenders lost interest after the miracle chemical was summarily banned in 1972 by EPA administrator William Ruckleshaus.


            You have been lead to believe that which is not so, cange your mind.

          • Gail Combs says:

            I will agree that there was something going on.

            In the late 1960s I walked ~ a mile through the field between my home and the boarding stable where I kept my horse. I came across a lot of dead and dying crows.

            It was mainly corn fields so perhaps a different insecticide?

            I also remember the come back of the hawks.

            Of course at that time the Genesee River flowing into Lake Ontario ran all different colors, stank to high heaven and had strange twisted plant growth along the banks.

            My boy friend moored his boat on the Genesee and we sailed it down the river and into the lake.

  4. Scott says:

    I was a big believer in the “Population Bomb” and the “Silent Spring” in the 1970’s.
    Today, I realize they were perhaps two of the most destructive tomes ever written.

  5. Bart says:

    You should put a link to your twitter account on the right side links.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.