"This global-warming fraud is designed to reduce our standard of living."
A sampling of readers' letters, faxes and e-mail.
Let's clear the air: Start by eliminating the pall of hypocrisy
Editor, The Times:
I read with interest Sen. John Kerry's and Teresa Heinz Kerry's "Too much hot air on global warming" [Times guest commentary, April 3]. The most glaring error on an otherwise excellent piece was their quote of a 1.4-degree increase in global temperature this millennium alone. I could not verify that data anywhere.
What I could verify was 1.1 degrees in the past 100 years.
Few doubt that our actions are causing changes in our environment. But the Kerrys say nothing about reducing emissions from the number-one source in Washington state. Mount St. Helens, by itself, puts out thousands of times more CO2 than all the autos in the nation combined!
The Kerrys further state that anyone standing in the way of renewable resources ought to be voted out of office. Does that include his buddy, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., who has repeatedly blocked experimental wind- and tide projects in Massachusetts because they might block someone's view?
And Sen. Kerry has agreed with him. So he should be voted out as well. If he disagrees, then he is, indeed, producing a bunch of hot air.
And, did I mention, President Bush put more money into alternative energy research in his first four years in office than did President Clinton in his entire eight years. That seems to be ignored for some reason. I think it's because it's an inconvenient truth (or something).
— David Beckenbaugh, Fall City
Five liberal justices of the Supreme Court have succeeded in perpetuating one of the most colossal frauds in history on the people of the United States by allowing the EPA to regulate carbon emissions. They believe that a basic element in the Periodic Table (carbon) and a minor trace gas in the atmosphere (CO2) are pollutants. Unbelievable! ["High court tells Bush: Take action on global warming," page one, April 3.]
This global-warming fraud is designed to reduce our standard of living.
The mainstream news media worldview prevents them from questioning the false science that purports to prove that climate change is caused by human activity. They want this to be true.
The so-called "hockey stick" world-temperature graph on which the United Nations has relied to reach its "consensus" on warming has been proven fraudulent, and purposely so.
A simple calculation based on the past 30 years' of world CO2 production shows that, if all CO2 generated by humans since the 1800s (about 305 billion tons of carbon) were halted now, it would take about 900 years to change the world temperature by even 1 degree centigrade.
— Jack Leicester, Shoreline
Come rain or decline
Two recent articles struck me as tragically ironic: one, about threats to the dependability of a high-quality source of drinking water for 1.3 million people due to global warming; the other about threats to the quality of a dependable drinking water source for 20,000 people in Snohomish County due to poor development ["Nickels watershed view: City's supply OK for now" and "Development near Echo Lake gets go-ahead," respectively, both Local News, March 29].
Given the gloomy predictions of the effects of global warming on water in our region, isn't it important to do the best we can to protect all water sources for the future, especially aquifers dependent upon rainfall?
Bad development threatens both drinking water and local streams. Not only does the Quinn's Crossing development threaten to contaminate the Cross Valley aquifer, it also threatens Bear Creek, one of the last streams left in the Lake Washington watershed with healthy, self-sustaining salmon runs.
The McMansions being built at Quinn's Crossing are also being touted as "green homes." Excuse me?
A large development of huge homes being built atop a pristine drinking-water source and the headwaters to one of the last, best salmon streams in a 680-square-mile watershed is green?
— Brian Bodenbach, Carnation
Waste efficiency, oxymoron
Why is Waste Management, our garbage and recycling service, exempt from environmental friendliness? Left to run into our drain fields and streams, oil spills are often deposited on the streets by its trucks. The oil spills are hurting us environmentally and are also an eyesore.
We have called Waste Management and complained. We live on a small private road. A representative came by to look at the many spills and said, "you should be thankful that we are picking up your waste on your road and not requiring you to leave your containers on the main road."
In other words, the trucks lose oil all the time and if we want to continue having our road serviced, then we should be silent and not complain.
We are deeply discouraged by seeing these oil spills running into our streams, hurting our fish and hurting our own personal health.
Waste Management, please do your part to protect our environment by adopting a more healthy maintenance regimen of your service vehicles. Please try harder to stop the oil leaks.
— Mark Thompson, Redmond
An energetic slump
Is it just me or is the depressing news about the state of our world environment gracing magazines and news covers more now than ever? Does anyone else feel frustrated?
I know: Purchase energy-saving light bulbs, buy an ultra-fuel-efficient car, and recycle — all of which I'm doing, minus the car, since it's a bit too expensive for our budget now.
Join the World Wildlife Fund and the Natural Defense Council — done that; write letters to your senators — done that; write letters to senators on the committee for Energy, Natural Resources and the Environment — yep, did that too; travel to Washington, D.C., for a rally — check!
Do our world leaders really care? I don't think so, since very few are willing to step up to the plate and make the tough decisions needed to help our environment recover because it may not look so good for the economy today and their image — today!
What about tomorrow, what about 10, 50 years from now?
I'm making noise and will continue, but it sure feels like no one is listening! Maybe a few more of us need to start making some noise.
— Karen Quarré, Woodinville
The fans are hungry
Get your broccoli dogs here and ice-cold jeer
Well, well, well. So the Food Police have the Safeco Field concessionaires shaking in their aprons over trans fats ["Trans fats vanishing from culinary lineup at Safeco Field games," Local News, March 31, and "The skinny on Opening Day," editorial, April 2].
Never mind that they (the fats) may be more tasty, more stable (i.e., less rancidity) and, probably, cheaper for the consumer.
Ah, but those food cops haven't gone far enough. I think the only food item that should be served at Safeco oughta be — broccoli. Life-preserving broccoli. And that served only with fat-free cheese sauce.
And, in keeping with the effort for better health, there shall be no beer or (gag) soft drinks available for sale on site. No, no, no. Only bottled, distilled water. Of course, since icing down on a hot day can be hazardous, said distilled water must be delivered at room temperature.
To your health!
— Fred Hering, Bothell