Printed Letters: April 30, 2014
Take small, innovative steps to reduce carbon
Thanks to the Sentinel for its editorial last week, “Hedging our bets on carbon emissions.” The editorial acknowledged that we don’t have all the answers, but wisely recommended that we respond to the uncertainty about climate change to stave off potentially dire consequences.
We need to embrace responsible development and innovative energy policies. Our businesses, communities and political leaders must work toward common-sense policies that will reduce carbon pollution and benefit Colorado’s economy.
Throughout the state, we are exploring new forms of energy and means of extraction. Denver International Airport recently reported on innovations that greatly diminish the amount of fuel airplanes exhaust while waiting for take-off, as well as changovers to bottle-friendly water fountains resulting in substantially reduced sales of plastic water bottles.
I can imagine people scorning these “small” steps, but the reality is that as these steps are multiplied and magnified manyfold, they will result in change.
Let’s do as the Sentinel suggests and take many of these steps individually, as businesses, as local governments and through the state, to direct major inroads into carbon pollution. We owe it to ourselves and to future generations.
Montrose letter writer correct in questioning global warming
I’ve read the editorial, “Hedging our bets on carbon emissions,” several times. It was basically a rambling discussion searching for a reason to blindly accept the unproven claim that carbon dioxide is causing “global warming.” The climate scientists to whom you refer for authority cannot conduct a test in “Earth’s dynamic atmosphere” and never include the “sun-Earth system” in their discussion.
The letter in the Sentinel on April 27 from George E. Cort of Montrose more than adequately challenges the reliability of those he correctly labels “man-made global warming alarmists.” He points out this is not “settled science” and questions if a scientist or other expert could actually claim science is settled.
I question how they claim it is “science.” I label it “politics, power and profit.” We have been drawn into an argument and need to end it. I see no logic in trying to disprove what has never been proven.
The “dynamic interactive relationship between the sun and Earth” is “settled science.” We need to understand how this system works. I’m not a scientist or an expert. What credentials are required to understand how the system works?
The sun is the primary energy source for what happens on Earth. Earth orbits the sun, rotates on its axis and varies axis tilt constantly. Therefore, the effect of the sun’s radiation at any location on Earth is constantly changing. Nothing is ever stable.
Earth is in an area permitting surface water, and the atmosphere is mostly water vapor. Oceans and the atmosphere are variables in the system. Changes in exposure of these variables from the sun’s radiant energy produces both varying temperatures and pressures in the oceans and the atmosphere. The law of nature dictates both temperature and pressure must try to stabilize. That is impossible and produces the climate and local weather on Earth.
Blaming radio talk shows and Fox News is far too simplistic
I was reading the editorial page when I ran across a letter to the editor by Jim Ciha headlined “Manipulative politicians can control ignorant population.” The letter needs another point of view.
As a moderate conservative, I concur with his assessment about the widespread ignorance of our population and the frustration it creates in a free society. Admittedly, there is much to be done in that regard, but to simply put the blame on Fox News and conservative talk radio is an outrageous assertion. Constructing a stand on one solution to very complex problems doesn’t pay the rent or put someone to work.
The only things the reader takes away from this piece is that the apple of ignorance doesn’t fall too far from the tree and one should reach for the ideal — not empty platitudes.