Posted: Sunday, February 10, 2008 10:00 pm
Climate data readily available
In his editorial of Feb. 4 ("A place to go for actual facts"), Hasso Hering states that "The only real question (with regard to climate change) should be: What do the data say?" Such information is already available. The 2007 IPCC report summarizes data through the instrumented era (roughly 1860 to present), combined with the best scientific assessment of the physics controlling the climate system, and finds unequivocal evidence for the dominance of the human contribution to global climate change over the last century.
Local skeptics need to drop the aggressive rhetoric towards climate change scientists unless they are willing to invest the time to become truly familiar with the science. Even without a Climate Research Center at OSU, the expertise exists in the mid-valley to explain climate science to intellectually open skeptics. For example, Mr. Hering talks of a gradual change in Arctic sea ice. In fact, the "gradual change" is a roughly 40 percent reduction in summer sea ice area over about the last decade, seen in the satellite data record that extends back to the late 1970s. Satellite data also show that, overall, Antarctica is losing ice and thus contributing to rising sea level, even though the continent's interior is thickening slightly through increased snowfall consistent with predictions for a warming climate. The temporary mid-20th century climate cooling seized upon by skeptics is scientifically well understood as a temporary effect of emissions from volcanic activity and a peak in industrial pollution.
The bigger concern with the proposed Climate Research Center is not that it will be used to crusade against contrarian opinions, as suggested by Mr. Hering, but that local climate-change denialists will choose not to access or trust the skills and information provided through the center unless its conclusions reinforce their preconceived notions. I look forward to being proved wrong.
Laurence Padman, Corvallis
Unsafe for fire training?
In Tuesday's paper, it was reported that Crowfoot School is unsafe for firemen, so it will be torn down instead of used as a practice burn. Huh? Not safe for firemen? Why? There is "only one hydrant and it's half a mile away."
This was a school! And it was safe for children for 70 years while several hundred children went to school there - but it's not safe for firemen in a controlled fire? Makes me wonder what the condition of actual safety there is for other, still operating schools.
I was a survivor of the fire in the gymnasium at Central High School in Independence in 1963. The student body was in bleachers at an assembly when the fire was buckling the floor from the basement while the principal was giving awards.
And the firemen who responded to that fire had never had an opportunity to learn how to fight it until they were there and watched the roof collapse.
Why would that not be used now as a regional training opportunity? Gym fires don't happen often, but I'd sure like my firefighters to know what would happen and how to avoid getting hurt it there was one.
Maybe rethinking that decision of "too dangerous" could be turned into a live training exercise that could save lives one day.
Norma Rice, Albany
Belts: A matter of inches?
I read with great interest your article headlined "You had better buckle up: Police officers are watching."
My 19-year-old daughter was pulled over on Tuesday morning on her way to college. It was her first-ever experience being pulled over by the Albany police.
After the standard "Do you know why I pulled you over?" inquiry, she was told that her shoulder seat belt was 2 inches from the proper position. Then the officer proceeded to write her a warning citation.
This has got to be the most ridiculous waste of tax money ever. She was clearly wearing her seat belt, and with a heavy coat and shoulder-length hair how could anybody from a distance discern 2 inches?
This smacks of a police state. Two inches? What gives?
I know there is "real" crime in Albany, but it seems the police are more concerned with seat belts and their precise location.
Whatever happened to the old "to protect and to serve"? This is neither protecting or serving. And with last year's issue over the Corvallis officer who held the record for the most DUI tickets, one has to wonder if the police themselves are spinning out of control.
I think a follow-up article is warranted to find out how many others were inconvenienced and what purpose this serves.
John Robinson, Albany
Recent history: Another view
Ignorance of history, because of today's education system, may be excused. Ignorance of yesterday's happenings is inexcusable. Kenneth Houston's letter, 2-4-08, "Those times were bad?" reeks of both.
"Bill," as Mr. Houston called him, and his "alleged" affair? Apparently "alleged" and "is" are synonymous in liberal speak. "Eight years of the most productive periods of prosperity?" If you check you will find that in that eight years President Clinton decimated our military, disallowed our CIA and FBI to converse on intelligence and made it illegal to use anyone convicted of a felony to be used as an undercover informant in our fight against terrorism.
During his eight years America and American establishments, ships and citizens were attacked numerous times. His response? Bomb a pill factory to get the news off his "alleged" affair.
Maybe you can stand another eight years of the Clinton administration, Mr. Houston, but America cannot.
Larry Crompton, Scio
Driving license: Wrong issue
I would like to express my opinion regarding not allowing "illegals" to have a driver's license. Wise up! Will this stop anyone from driving? No!
We have seen folks with suspended driver's licenses continue to drive and those who want to support their families will continue to drive whether they are legal or illegal or have a license or not! The penalty will be on us.
If we have an accident with a person who is not licensed, likely that person will also not have insurance. Wait and watch our insurance rates go up. At this point, you are not required to provide proof of citizenship to obtain insurance. You just have to have a driver's license.
If the insurance companies begin to require proof of citizenship, we will be in worse trouble. More uninsured drivers. We have a lot of hard-working illegals in this country and taking away a driver's license is not the answer. Why not focus on trying to reduce the number of new illegals coming into the country and forget the driver's license issue?
Meri Surry, Lebanon