E-mail letters, June 25, 2010

Who is being deceptive
on global warming case?

After reading Richard Alward’s column on doubt-mongering and climate change — which asked the question: “Will Americans be fooled again?” — my thought was: Who is doing the fooling here?

He linked the cause-and-effect relationship of tobacco and lung cancer, pollution to acid rain, and industrial chemicals to ozone destruction to carbon dioxide and global warming. Conveniently, he failed to also list the global cooling “science and consensus” of the 1970’s which was to auger in a new ice-age crisis.

He also conveniently forgot to mention the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program which was conducted by the federal government and states that the acid rain special interests “scare mongering” was not based on facts.

He also seems to have forgotten the “climate gate” scandal where data was falsified, misused, or destroyed.  He obviously forgot about that almost every significant statement that Al Gore makes in “An Inconvenient Truth,” regarding climate science has been found to be “one sided, speculative, exaggerated, speculative, or just plain wrong.”

The Antarctic sea ice is significantly larger now than it was even 10 years ago, the Greenland ice is larger, and we had snow in areas this last winter that normally haven’t received it. Yet, we are not supposed to question this scientific consensus.

We should believe that we are capable of plugging numbers into some mathematical formula, with all of the complexities involved, and know a future outcome?  I thought that science should be the search for the truth.

According to Mr. Alward, “Doubt-mongering” is a tactic to manufacture controversy and undermine scientific consensus, using deception and misinformation.  Ask yourself, who is being deceptive in this case?
Michael Higgins
Grand Junction


Cooperative effort needed
to protect Colorado River

The Upper Colorado River was named as one of the nation’s most endangered rivers by Colorado Trout Unlimited and others. Preserving it is critical to our future.

The upper Colorado River and its tributaries are home to many prized trout, whitewater recreation and wildlife. Federal data show average annual use of river water is greater than annual average supply. That really has become noticeable to us as fishermen through the last years of drought.

After 100 years of diversion, the Eastern Slope is greedily asking for more, without making much effort to conserve. Not only I, as a fisherman, will be hurt, but so will recreation income as well as wildlife.

With the leadership of the Interior Department and Secretary Ken Salazar, our state and local governments, and the collaboration of all stakeholders, we can balance competing demands on the Upper Colorado. Working together,we can keep water — and fish — in the river for our future.

As Jonathan Waterman told The Daily Sentinel, rivers aren’t supposed to disappear.
David E.Trimm, President
Grand Valley Anglers
Grand Junction

Leave dogs at home
on very hot days

I am a dog owner and love my dog dearly. And that is why I don’t take her to the Farmer’s Market. I leave her at home where she belongs when the temperatures are as high as they were this week.

I don’t think dog owners realize that when the air temperatures are in the 90s, the temperatures at pavement level can be as high as 100 degrees or more.

I saw many dogs at the market this week straining at their leases trying to get to shade, struggling to breathe and without water. This is cruel. Please have a heart and leave your dogs at home when it is hot.
Peggy Shaw
Grand Junction


Wealth redistribution
is a good thing

Rarely do I agree with the rants of columnist Rick Wagner, but his June 25 column on redistribution of wealth is “right on!” — except for his complaint on the effect of it.

Absolutely, the government should takes steps for redistribution of wealth. In fact, that is exactly what has already been going on for 30 years, except in the other direction toward an obscene preponderance of wealth in the hands of those at the very top of the wealth pyramid. That pyramid has been turned upside down.
Do you really believe that the accumulation of wealth, as it exists today, is an indication of the merit of those who have it? Is it an indication of hard work and intelligence or is it the power of money used to disadvantage those with less?

Government tax policy and labor law, to name just two techniques, have been used by the very wealthy to use their influence — campaign donations — in Congress to change the direction our country took after World War II toward a more fair society, which in turn created the great middle class where all our country’s wealth is generated.

As consumers, our lives are full of “consuming” limited resources. Yes, those who use the most pay for it, but they be should be paying progressively more because their increased usage is bidding the price up that everybody has to pay. It is, indeed, a “progressive tax system” which seems to Wagner to be a bad thing.

There will always be people at the top, middle and bottom of the distribution of wealth in this country, but today it has been skewed heavily toward those at the top, not by normal economic activity but by deliberate utilization of the power of government action to favor those who have the most money
John Borgen
Grand Junction

 



COMMENTS

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.




Search More Jobs






THE DAILY SENTINEL
734 S. Seventh St.
Grand Junction, CO 81501
970-242-5050
Editions
Subscribe to print edition
E-edition
Advertisers
Sign in to your account
Information

© 2014 Grand Junction Media, Inc.
By using this site you agree to the Visitor Agreement and the Privacy Policy