Bryan Walsh, not content simply to peddle silliness linked to global warming alarmism in the pages of TIME, devotes his latest article to a commemoration of the 50th anniversary of Rachel Carson‘s Silent Spring.
And here’s another shocker: Walsh believes TIME‘s original review of the book missed the mark because of Carson’s gender.
When my predecessors at Time reviewed ecologist Rachel Carson’s book Silent Spring 50 years ago this month, they were less than impressed. While the piece praised her graceful writing style, it argued that Carson’s “emotional and inaccurate outburst” was “hysterically overemphatic,” which I believe is a fancy way of saying that the lady writer let her feelings get the best of her.
Or, perhaps, those predecessors had a clue that Carson’s arguments were based more on emotional appeal than fact.
