# Silent Spring > **Under primitive agricultural conditions the farmer had few insect > problems. These arose with the intensification of agriculture — the > devotion of immense acreages to a single crop. Such a system set > the stage for explosive increases in specific insect populations.** > Single-crop farming does not take advantage of the principles by > which nature works; it is agriculture as an engineer might conceive > it to be. Nature has introduced great variety into the landscape, > but man has displayed a passion for simplifying it. Thus he undoes > the built-in checks and balances by which nature holds the species > within bounds. **One important natural check is a limit on the > amount of suitable habitat for each species. Obviously then, an > insect that lives on wheat can build up its population to much > higher levels on a farm devoted to wheat than on one in which wheat > is intermingled with other crops to which the insect is not > adapted.** Emphasized portions are the sentences that conveyed the message efficiently to my taste: measurable facts punctuated with concise claims. The middle sentences probably appeal to people who already buy the author's point: they re-state their own convictions with added cosmological sugar ("the principles by which nature works"), antagonizing metaphors ("agriculture as an engineer might conceive it"), sweeping generalities ("man has displayed a passion for simplifying it"), and romantic allegories^[See also: the Gaia hypothesis and its [criticism][gaia-critic].] ("the built-in checks and balances by which nature holds the species within bounds"). These sentences take a grim and uncomfortable (and well-documented) reality, and transform it into a lyrical fresque of Good versus Evil. They take what could be the basis for a technically deep and insightful report, and twist it into a sublime, emotional, and *simplified* depiction of some Universal Truth. What bothers we with this vocabulary is that it is indistinguishable from zealotry. Cults thrive on broad, universal explanations for complex issues: Us versus Them, individual redemption for collective sins, Mother Nature… To me, these tropes are red flags; they invite me to wonder where the fallacy is: why should the speaker need to appeal to some nebulous higher principle? Is it as universal as they claim? Why can't they root their point into observable evidence? I actually do buy the authors's point; I merely wish it didn't come with fake gold plating, since it makes people I want to share it with go "Wait, what's up with that cheap cheesy decoration? It looks silly". [gaia-critic]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis#Criticism_in_the_21st_century > Parathion is one of the most widely used of the organic phosphates. > It is also one of the most powerful and dangerous. Honeybees become > ‘wildly agitated and bellicose’ on contact with it, perform frantic > cleaning movements, and are near death within half an hour. A > chemist, thinking to learn by the most direct possible means the > dose acutely toxic to human beings, swallowed a minute amount, > equivalent to about .00424 ounce. Paralysis followed so > instantaneously that he could not reach the antidotes he had > prepared at hand, and so he died. Parathion is now said to be a > favorite instrument of suicide in Finland. In recent years the > State of California has reported an average of more than 200 cases > of accidental parathion poisoning annually. In many parts of the > world the fatality rate from parathion is startling: 100 fatal cases > in India and 67 in Syria in 1958, and an average of 336 deaths per > year in Japan. Yet some 7,000,000 pounds of parathion are now > applied to fields and orchards of the United States—by hand > sprayers, motorized blowers and dusters, and by airplane. The > amount used on California farms alone could, according to one > medical authority, ‘provide a lethal dose for 5 to 10 times the > whole world’s population.’ It gets worse. > Potentiation seems to take place when one compound destroys the > liver enzyme responsible for detoxifying the other. Chapter 4 in a nutshell: > In 1943, the Rocky Mountain Arsenal of the Army Chemical Corps, > located near Denver, began to manufacture war materials. Eight > years later the facilities of the arsenal were leased to a private > oil company for the production of insecticides. Even before the > change of operations, however, mysterious reports had begun to come > in. Farmers several miles from the plant began to report > unexplained sickness among livestock; they complained of extensive > crop damage. Foliage turned yellow, plants failed to mature, and > many crops were killed outright. There were reports of human > illness, thought by some to be related. > > The irrigation waters on these farms were derived from shallow > wells. When the well waters were examined (in a study in 1959, in > which several state and federal agencies participated) they were > found to contain an assortment of chemicals. Chlorides, chlorates, > salts of phosphoric acid, fluorides, and arsenic had been discharged > from the Rocky Mountain Arsenal into holding ponds during the years > of its operation. Apparently the groundwater between the arsenal > and the farms had become contaminated and it had taken 7 to 8 years > for the wastes to travel underground a distance of about 3 miles > from the holding ponds to the nearest farm. This seepage had > continued to spread and had further contaminated an area of unknown > extent. The investigators knew of no way to contain the > contamination or halt its advance.