Goose Creek Raingage Network

Ope

The Rachel Carson Letters and the Making of Silent Spring

Environment, conservation, green, and kindred movements look back to Rachel Carson’s 1962 book Silent Spring as a milestone. The impact of the book, including on government, industry, and civil society, was immediate and substantial, and has been extensively described; however, the provenance of the book has been less thoroughly examined. Using Carson’s personal correspondence, this paper reveals that the primary source for Carson’s book was the extensive evidence and contacts compiled by two biodynamic farmers, Marjorie Spock and Mary T. Richards, of Long Island, New York. Their evidence was compiled for a suite of legal actions (1957-1960) against the U.S. Government and that contested the aerial spraying of dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT). During Rudolf Steiner’s lifetime, Spock and Richards both studied at Steiner’s Goetheanum, the headquarters of Anthroposophy, located in Dornach, Switzerland. Spock and Richards were prominent U.S. anthroposophists, and established a biodynamic farm under the tutelage of the leading biodynamics exponent of the time, Dr. Ehrenfried Pfeiffer. When their property was under threat from a government program of DDT spraying, they brought their case, eventually lost it, in the process spent US$100,000, and compiled the evidence that they then shared with Carson, who used it, and their extensive contacts and the trial transcripts, as the primary input for Silent Spring. Carson attributed to Spock, Richards, and Pfeiffer, no credit whatsoever in her book. As a consequence, the organics movement has not received the recognition, that is its due, as the primary impulse for Silent Spring, and it is, itself, unaware of this provenance

Evaluation of a low powered 3-cm radar for quantitative rainfall measurements

Includes bibliographical references.Enumeration continues through succeeding title

Christopher Lasch's the culture of narcissism the failure of a critique of psychological politics

Christopher Lasch's bestseller The Culture of Narcissism had, beyond doubt, a significant impact-it was even read in the White House. Today it is not only still frequently taught and referenced, there are also still empirical studies conducted which try to verify Lasch's assertion of the preponderance of the narcissistic personality. This paper re-reads the book as a critique of psychologization processes, and this allows us to discern, besides the flaws in Lasch's approach, a fundamental insight which goes largely unnoticed by both Lasch's opponents and his proponents. Following this, the article will situate subjectivity within the matrix of psychology, science, psychoanalysis, and politics. In this way a critique of contemporary forms of psychologization-psychologization under globalization, as it were-is made possible

Evaluation of a Low-powered 3-cm Radar for Quantitative Rainfall Measurements

published or submitted for publicationis peer reviewedOpe

Laboratory control of thumbsucking by withdrawal and re-presentation of reinforcement

A 5-year-old boy was shown cartoons, and punished for thumbsucking during alternate cartoons by turning off the cartoons for as long as his thumb remained in his mouth. Thumbsucking weakened during such periods. During alternate periods of uninterrupted cartoons, thumbsucking promptly recovered, suggesting a quick discrimination process. Two other 5-year-old boys were shown the same cartoons; withdrawal of the cartoons was made contingent upon thumbsucking for one, and randomly yoked for the other. Then their roles were reversed. Contingent withdrawal and re-presentation of the cartoons controlled thumbsucking rate; yoked withdrawal and re-presentation did not

The additive nature of the human multisensory evoked pupil response

Pupillometry has received increased interest for its usefulness in measuring various sensory processes as an alternative to behavioural assessments. This is also apparent for multisensory investigations. Studies of the multisensory pupil response, however, have produced conflicting results. Some studies observed super-additive multisensory pupil responses, indicative of multisensory integration (MSI). Others observed additive multisensory pupil responses even though reaction time (RT) measures were indicative of MSI. Therefore, in the present study, we investigated the nature of the multisensory pupil response by combining methodological approaches of previous studies while using supra-threshold stimuli only. In two experiments we presented auditory and visual stimuli to observers that evoked a(n) (onset) response (be it constriction or dilation) in a simple detection task and a change detection task. In both experiments, the RT data indicated MSI as shown by race model inequality violation. Still, the multisensory pupil response in both experiments could best be explained by linear summation of the unisensory pupil responses. We conclude that the multisensory pupil response for supra-threshold stimuli is additive in nature and cannot be used as a measure of MSI, as only a departure from additivity can unequivocally demonstrate an interaction between the senses