|
|
|
MailTribune.com
  • LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

  • Thanks for running the James Gash piece, "I depend on my gun, but NRA doesn't speak for me." This is a gun owner's voice that needs to be heard. — Julia Sommer, Ashland
    • email print
      Comment
  • Thanks for running the James Gash piece, "I depend on my gun, but NRA doesn't speak for me." This is a gun owner's voice that needs to be heard. — Julia Sommer, Ashland
    I have family members buried in the historic Central Point Cemetery, so I read the recent article about the owners' plans to repair the tombstones vandalized in March of 2011 with great interest and an equal amount of skepticism. The owners received the court-ordered restitution money from the vandals and publicly announced plans to have Oregon Granite and Stone repair the markers well over a year ago (MT Oct. 30, 2011). Lots of good weather and dry days have come and gone in a-year-and-a-half. As of Feb. 1, they had not contacted the company to be put on a spring repair schedule.
    What will it take to get the owners to follow through on their promises to repair the markers that families bought to honor their deceased? The cemetery is crying out to be restored and beautified, and yes that is a reference to the Central Point Cemetery Restoration and Beautification Foundation that they established to do just that! I can see no evidence that anything has been done by a few caring individuals, unconnected with the owners. The cemetery has been allowed to languish in a totally neglected condition. — Glenna Brewold, Ashland
    Two similar scientifically naive deceptions have recently resurfaced to deny the science of climate change. One claims the current global warming is natural variability, the other that carbon dioxide could not be the cause because its concentration is too small.
    Of course climate scientists are aware of historic climate changes and generally understand the factors inducing past patterns. The basis of scientific methodology is testing hypotheses. Scientific confidence in a relationship grows when all other possible causal factors have been rejected by analysis.
    Thus is how climate science investigates global warming. All other possible factors that might induce the warming we have seen over the past century have been rejected by analysis. Increasing concentration of carbon dioxide stands as the only remaining factor able to cause the warming we have seen. Indeed, without the human-induced atmospheric carbon dioxide increase, these factors would have caused global cooling through the first decade of this century.
    The warming properties of atmospheric carbon dioxide were suggested in the 1820s and subsequently confirmed — even at the low concentrations known to exist. The idea is not new. Anyone denying this conclusion must propose and confirm a factor potentially causing global warming unknown to science. — Alan Journet, Jacksonville
Reader Reaction

      calendar