Letters to the Editor | Letters to the Editor | Bend | The Source Weekly - Bend, Oregon

Opinion » Letters to the Editor

Letters to the Editor

We would all be better off if humans were not changing the climate

2 comments
A little snow wasn't stopping this #SourceKid from having fun over the weekend! Photo by Amanda Klingman. Tag @sourceweekly on Instagram to get featured in Lightmeter. - AMANDA KLINGMAN
  • Amanda Klingman
  • A little snow wasn't stopping this #SourceKid from having fun over the weekend! Photo by Amanda Klingman. Tag @sourceweekly on Instagram to get featured in Lightmeter.

IN RESPONSE TO "CLIMATE CHANGE," LETTERS, 9/26

A recent letter to the editor claimed that a revolutionary new research paper has "proven" that the "climate change hoax" has "collapsed" after better modeling the effects of humidity and cloud cover on global mean surface temperatures. This sort of letter is a perfect illustration of why, as highlighted in a Source article from the week before, so many Americans are confused about climate change. Science is a process that goes through peer-review, in which experts in a field analyze a report and determine whether it has sufficient rigor in data, interpretation, and reasoning to merit publication. No peer review = not science. In contrast, the research paper that the reader shared has not passed peer review, and if analyses of climate scientists are any indication, it never will due to numerous flaws in reasoning and a model poorly anchored in physical reality. (For details see https://tinyurl.com/y4dznwm9.) 

We would all be better off if humans were not changing the climate. Unfortunately, the best science indicates we are. And if you are trying to figure out this issue for yourself, beware of anyone using the words "climate hoax." The science is the science. Even if the science were by some miracle to change in a much more favorable direction for the future of humanity, it could only be changed by better data or a better understanding of the climate system. A hoax, on the other hand, is a deliberate attempt to mislead, which is not what climate scientists are doing. If anything, they have been too conservative with their estimates of what lies in store.

—Matt Orr

IN RESPONSE TO: "SIGNS," LETTERS, 9/18

Far from Jon Peters' personal experience that his neighbors' yard signs represent "passive aggressive bullying," I find them to be community beacons. If you bother to pay attention, you see there are people sending goodwill messages of sobriety support; nudging our conscience by reminding us not to forget the immigrant families; a message board dedicated to personal expressions of hope; encouragements to personal salvation; and affirmations of core values re: human dignity, diversity, and tolerance. The signs are intermittent throughout the community, but I'm always delighted when I encounter a silent, outspoken neighbor.  While I don't know who they are, or what they look like, I know they are providing an important, albeit silent, contribution to our city. I experience these neighbors as our silent leaders, our watchmen & watchwomen. Their faithful witness shows them to be the better angels among us. To characterize their affirmations as "passive aggressive bullying" is patently absurd, hopelessly misguided, and just plain mean. Heads up: October is National Bullying Prevention Month. The goal is for communities to work together to stop bullying and put an end to hatred and racism, with a special focus on the impact of bullying on children of all ages. World Day of Bully Prevention is Oct. 7th. 

—Katie Jones

The two-sentence letter from Jon Peters told Bend more than we ever wanted to know about him. He managed to shine an enormous spotlight on his personal struggles by challenging his neighbors' inherent First Amendment rights to express themselves with yard signs. Why this should perturb him to such a degree that he perceives others' freedom of expression as "passive-aggressive bullying" is a reflection of some deeply flawed misunderstanding of our pluralistic society and one of the hallmarks of our democracy. Nowhere is it written that a good neighbor surrenders basic Constitutional rights to keep the peace with some cantankerous neighbor. Jon, the First Amendment will always beat out snowflakes in my book. If Jon is interested in neighborly love, I suggest he close his eyes to signs that offend his delicate sensibilities and invest his energies in being a good neighbor, irrespective of whether he agrees with lawn sentiments. My hunch is that his letter belies more profound intolerance and interpersonal difficulties with neighbors and family. Perhaps he should look in the mirror and see the bully there. I think the gift card to Palate was wasted on him, what ails him will not be fixed with java!

—Felicia Lazlo

STOPPING FOR RED LIGHTS

So, Bend, please educate me. Almost every time I am driving along Colorado after exiting northbound 97, as I approach the green light at Arizona, someone exiting southbound turns right on their red light without stopping and without noticing that I am headed toward them with the right of way.

I've been trying to think of witty comments in response to this phenomenon, but I'll just stick with: Please stop. Literally.

- Shari Adams

Letter of the Week:

Shari: That's actually witty enough! Come on in for your gift card to Palate.

—Nicole Vulcan

Comments (2)

Showing 1-2 of 2

Add a comment
 

Add a comment

Latest in Letters to the Editor