Flush with funds partly derived from their campaign to destroy nuclear power, the "Union of Concerned Scientists'' is now running lavish ads on the editorial pages of the New York Times (see New York Times of February 2 and 4, 1996). A large photo of the children includes the heading "If you worry that too much junk food can damage their health, consider what junk science could do to their planet.'' Junk science is then defined as that questioning the crisis scenarios of ozone holes, global warming, and species extinction. "Antienvironmental-ists'' are equated with those who think that cigarettes are harmless.
"Chemicals May Steal Our Future'' is the title of the article which was embellished by the charming creature (representing the chemical industry) who is about to devour a hapless human in the figure. Written for the Los Angeles Times by one Donelle H. Meadows, professor of environmental studies at Dartmouth College, the subheading reads, "Substances we have thrown into the environment affect both our ability to have children and our propensity to get cancer.'' With the usual scare scenarios about cancer and endocrine disaster, Professor Meadows offers the following new principle - "Chemicals, unlike people, should be assumed guilty until proved innocent.'' The article finale is a shower of tears for the children. The final punch line - "As long as we are able to have children, anyway.'' We thank Dartmouth College for making this warning possible.
