Lee Doren who works for How the World Works posted an excellent critique of this video in 4 parts. We will use this video as our guide and we will summarize all of the mistruths and misleading information. This is part 1 of 4:

Quote #1:

You cannot have a linear system on a finite planet indefinitely 

Why this is innacurate:

• A recent article in National Geographic states that there is strong evidence that the world’s population will slow down significantly or even stop growing before the end of the 21st centire (read the article). There is an argument to be made here that the Earth will be able to sustain the population growth that is expected.
• As we generate more garbage and as time moves on, technological advances in waste disposal, the mere fact that everything is getting smaller and the fact that we are finding new ways to recycle everything we use completely debunks this point made in the video.
• The earth is thousands of miles deep and humans have only scratched the surface of it. It is foolish to use the word finite and crisis in relation to resources this planet has.

Conclusion:

---

Quote #2:

…after all, 50% of our tax money goes to our military 

Why this is patently false:

• This is taken from a partisan, radical anti-war organization called the War Resisters League. This organization conveniently leaves out the spending for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security when they publish false information like this. The reality is that the government does NOT spend 50% of our tax dollars on the military. The REAL number is about 20%.

Conclusion:

---

Quote #3:

The government’s job is to take care of us

Why this statement is false:

• This is a clear misunderstanding of the Preamble of the US Constitution that states:
  “We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.“James Madison, the recognized father of the Constitution is quoted as saying:
  “With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.“He was also quoted as saying this:
  “I cannot undertake the lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents“

Conclusion:
BLATANTLY MISLEADING

---

Quote #4:

1/3 of the planet’s natural resources has been consumed

Why this is patently false:

• Thousands of miles to the center of the earth and the deepest mine that has been recorded is only 15 miles. We’ve only scratched the surface of this planet.
• Natural resources includes metals, trees and water ALL of which has been , and will continue to be recycled. As our technology gets better, we will get better at recycling.

Conclusion:

---

Quote #5:

We are cutting and mining and hauling and trashing the place so fast that we are undermining the planet’s very ability for people to live here!

Why this is misleading:

• Life expectancy is increasing not decreasing. how is this possible if we are diminishing the Earth’s ability to sustain us?????

Conclusion:
MISLEADING

---

Quote #6:

In the United States, we have less than 4% of our original forests left.

Why this is RIDICULOUSLY misleading:

• While it is true that about 1-2% of the country’s ORIGINAL forests remain untouched, 95-98% of our forests have been logged at least once since Europeans settled here. What is conveniently left out of this ridiculous quote is that those forests have been replenished and we have more forests NOW than we did back in 1920!

Conclusion:
BLATANTLY MISLEADING

---

Quote #7:

40% of the waterways have become undrinkable

Why this, too is ridiculously misleading:

• Rivers and waterways have been undrinkable forever….naturally because of bacteria in the water that required it to be boiled.
• Technology has improved the quality of the water on this planet and it will continue to improve, NOT get worse.

Conclusion:
BLATANTLY MISLEADING

---

Quote #8:

This is the Third World, which some would say is another word for our stuff which somehow got on someone else’s land

Why this is absolutely ridiculous:

• This is all about TRADE, we provide technology and investment, the country we are TRADING with provides resources and labor. As a result, we raise that country’s standard of living and they supply us with the resources we use.
• It is careless and ignorant to paint this country in a way that makes it sound like we force our way onto foreign soil and take whatever we want.

Conclusion:

---

>>> coming soon…………..PART II

Lee Doren who works for How the World Works posted an excellent critique of this video in 4 parts. We will use this video as our guide and we will summarize all of the mistruths and misleading information. This is part 2 of 4:

Quote:

We use energy to mix toxic chemicals in with the natural resources to make toxic, contaminated products

Why this is blatently misleading:

• Not all chemicals are toxic
• Not all products we create from natural resources are “contaminated with toxic chemicals”
• It is extremely irresponsible to broadly state that natural resources are mixed with chemicals to produce toxic, contaminated products. In what way would a keyboard or anything plastic for that matter be toxic? If it was ground up and eaten, sure, but otherwise it is harmless.

Conclusion:
BLATENTLY MISLEADING 

---

Quote: 

There are over 100,000 synthetic chemicals in use in commerce today. Only a handful of them have been tested for health impacts and none of them have been tested for synergistic health impacts. that means when they interact with all other chemicals we are exposed to every day.

Why this is again, blatenantly misleading:

• Synthetic or man-made chemicals, in many cases are far less toxic than natural substances
• Where are the sources that cite that none of the synthetic chemicals have been tested for there “synergistic impact on health”? If that is the case, why do we have the FDA? Don’t they test products such as Nutra-Sweet and Sweet-n-Low which are both “synthetic chemicals”?

Conclusion:
BLATENTLY MISLEADING 

---

 Quote: 

We take our pillows and douse them in neuro-toxins and then we bring them home and put our heads on them for 8 hours a night to sleep?

Why this is blatenantly misleading:

• The BFR’s, as she refers to them, are not proven to be harmful to our health like the chemicals that were used in the past. By the way, does this not also classify as TESTING something for it’s affect on our health??
• This films is being shown to 9 year olds. Most adults would be able to immediately dismiss the outrageousness of laying your head down on a toxic pillow that will destroy your brain. Kids however, cannot rationally make the connection that this is not a broad statement that every pillow is bad for you. It is pathetically irresponsible to show this kind of nonsense to children.

Conclusion:
MISLEADING AND NOT AT ALL SUITABLE FOR KIDS 

---

 Quote: 

 Breast feeding has the highest level of many toxic contaminates.

Now breast feeding is still best and mothers should continue to do it.

Could this be any more contradictory?

• We are with the folks at How the World Works on this one….high doses of toxins in breast milk, but mothers should feed their babies anyway???
• Tradeoff of risks is in play here and while much of this video does not illustrate the need for such a concept, this is the one part of the video that does and because the whole video is so biased and one-sided, this seems so out of place.
• Is this a contradiction or is it simply saying the same thing as cars are dangerous, yet we all drive them with the risk that we could get into an accident?

 Conclusion:
MORE SCARE TACTICS 

---

 Quote: 

The erosion of local environments and economies in third world nations ensures a constant supply of people with no other option. Globally 200,000 people per day are moving from environments that have sustained them for generations into cities, many of them into slums.

Why is this misleading and inaccurate?

• Developing nations have had some of the worst levels of poverty ever known to man. What is so outlandish about this quote is that more people have been lifted from poverty and their standards of living improved than the authors of this video will EVER admit BECAUSE of investments in that country’s people.
• There is no better example of this than the country that is mentioned in the video……….India.

Conclusion:
 

---

 Quote: 

 …so what do they do? They move the dirty factories to other countries to pollute someone else’s land.

More ridiculous nonsense:

• Factories are moved to other countires because the products are cheaper to make there, NOT because we WANT to WILLINGLY pollute their land.
• Perhaps the authors of this video should focus more on the jobs that are lost by moving factories overseas than the ridiculous falsehood that we are doing it to push the pollution offshore.

 Conclusion:

---

 Quote: 

 How can $4.99 possibly cover the cost of making this radio and getting it into my hands?

It’s Called Simple Economics:

• This is assuming that the store’s ONLY product is a $4.99 radio. What about all of the other different products that are sold? It all boils down to cost to produce vs. how many items need to be sold to make a profit.
• We move manufacturing offshore to bring the cost of labor down. That translates into lowering the cost of the final product.
• Technology improves the way we harvest the natural resporces needed to make the radio making it cheaper to get those resources. That lowers the price of the radio.
• By employing a workforce of people globally to create and sell the radio, we make it possible for those people the have the money to purchase the radio.
• Supply and demand of the workforce needed to leverage the low skill requirement to work a cash register ensures proportional wages in relation the the skill which also contributes to keeping costs down on this radio.

 Conclusion:
COMPLETELY MISLEADING AND ECONOMICALLY IGNORANT

 

Coming soon……. Part III