Letters to the Editor

Letters to the editor - week of May 11

Evidence is overwhelming

Bill Atwood’s discourse on “Climate Change/Global Warming” does ring hollow, as the title of his April 27 column suggests. It is apparent that he is not interested in the truth but is replicating the decades old propaganda needed to protect many large businesses from slowdowns.

Climatologist and oceanographers from around the world have been actively engaged for many decades in following the trends of global temperature variations in our atmosphere and oceans. These scientists have been meeting together on a regular basis over the past century and have decades of research data from all parts of the globe.

The evidence, as NASA tells us, “is overwhelming and compelling.” Most of the change has happened in the past 12 years.

Studies show that Americans internalize propaganda when it reinforces their prejudices or opinions.

Whether this vast number of world scientists is 97% or 79% is immaterial - it is indisputable that there is an overwhelming consensus, based on decades of very expensive research, that the world is in trouble.

Are humans causing it? There are many contributing factors not all human and historical research does show that global warming and climate change has happened ages ago, but over centuries of time.

Now we are looking at very rapid changes over a few decades not centuries. Man is not only responsible for adding to the natural causes but is causing these natural causes to increase exponentially.

You can listen to these political propagandists or you can step out of the dark and do your own research and read sources like National Geographic or NASA to find all the truth including likely consequences.

What ever happened to the very wise tactic, “Erring on the side of caution?”

David L. Drown, Oakhurst

Cavanaugh is one of the best

I have been reading Peter Cavanaugh’s column (For Your Consideration) in the Sierra Star for a long time and have come to believe he is one of the most insightful, compassionate, brightest, and well informed political columnists, not only in California, but in the nation.

His information is impeccable - his humor is brilliant - and his writing abilities are first-rate.

I always look forward to reading his enlightening words each week in the Star.

Lee Underwood, Oakhurst

Generally accurate

Kathleen Goetsch’s guest commentary (Star - April 20) about meeting with Tom McClintock’s aide was generally accurate, but misleading on a few points. Goetsch said this meeting was the first time Oakhurst residents have shown up to air their concerns - she apparently missed the Jan. 25 meeting at which around 50 people met with Rocky Deal.

Second, Goetsch is simply wrong in asserting that “none of them” attended any of McClintock’s (presumably many) town halls. Since becoming our representative in 2013, McClintock has held precisely two public meetings in Oakhurst, the last in 2014. I was there, along with several other Democrats. The next – and last – time McClintock spoke in Oakhurst was at a closed-door, invitation-only session for Oakhurst Area Chamber of Commerce members only, Aug.18, 2016.

Goetsch declared we came because we are mad at Trump. Well, lots of folks are - and with good reason. But we are also mad at McClintock. He is part of the do-nothing Congress that spent the last seven years of the Obama administration putting party ahead of country, just to punish President Obama for the unforgivable sin of providing health care to millions.

We are mad about McClintock’s positions on climate change, health care, and many other issues. Elected officials across the country are finding their constituents are really mad - as McClintock experienced in Roseville and Mariposa in February.

Matt Reed did a good job defending his boss, although his quizzical response when I asked if McClintock was concerned about Trump’s bizarre behavior (“I don’t know what you’re talking about”) elicited groans and laughter.

Ms. Goetsch is correct that both sides need to engage in dialogue. I might suggest dialogue based on fact. Many on the left are frustrated by those (most notably President Trump) who simply dismiss proven facts that don’t conform to their viewpoint.

Charles Bednar, Oakhurst

  Comments