Letters for Sept. 10, 2023

The answer to climate change

Sue Lani Madsen’s “Climate change too complex to blame on single cause” (Aug. 31) opens by criticizing a question posed in the recent Republican debate: “Do you believe human behavior is causing climate change?” That’s a simplistically worded question, yes. But I notice she’s silent about Vivek Ramaswamy’s insane response. He called climate change a hoax and urged more use of fossil fuels. Does Madsen agree? I have to wonder.

She calls Michael Mann’s climate hockey stick “discredited.” Really? From Wikipedia: “More than two dozen reconstructions, using various statistical methods and combinations of proxy records, support … the original 1998 hockey-stick graph.” The spike is like nothing Earth has seen for at least 10,000 years.

She preposterously likens anthropogenic climate change theory to the “rain follows the plow” theory. The latter was speculation based on spotty observations, reliant on 19th-century technology, motivated by wishful thinking. Today’s climate change theory is backed by decades of precise measurements and computer analysis and is the opposite of wish-fulfillment.

Nearly all – 97% – of climatologists have long agreed about climate change, and the evidence has strongly vindicated them. E.g., the 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 2010. (“An Inconvenient Truth,” which Madsen contemptuously dismisses, predated all those new records. Al Gore was not wrong.)

Human activity is just one of many causes of climate change, Madsen says. True – in the same sense that a large rock thrown into a pond is just one of many causes of the outsize waves that follow.

Brian Keeling

Spokane

Majority of climate change is nature itself

In reference to the opinion article by Sue Lani Madsen on Aug. 31, I am delighted to know that at least one person associated with S-R understands that the majority of climate change is nature itself. Personally, I would argue than none of the change is man-made.

If the warming trend continues, what is the future? We can expect snow caps to be reduced, we can expect oceans to rise, we can expect difficulty in irrigating crops, we can expect reduced hydroelectric capacity and we can expect unbearable temperatures.

What can be done? For a time, we can attempt to protect coastal cities, but ultimately they may be abandoned. We need to develop major desalination plants for drinking water, as well as for crop irrigation. We will need to install large numbers of atomic power generation plants. We may need to move closer to the poles or to higher elevations; or perhaps, we will have to accommodate the higher temperatures.

These changes are not instantaneous, but planners and politicians now need to be cognizant of these changes when looking to the future. Reducing the use of fossil fuels may be admirable, but it is not going to save us.

Philip Thayer

Spokane

What can we do about climate change?

Sue Lani Madsen’s opinion essay expounds the argument that human-induced global warming is refuted because climate change is complex. Her column contains inaccuracies and misleading arguments.

Every major scientific organization in the United States with relevant expertise (NASA and National Academy of Sciences, for example) acknowledges that several factors affect climate, but by far the most significant factor controlling today’s global climate change is the release of atmospheric CO2 from burning fossil fuels. Furthermore, without a change in human behavior, the condition will worsen to the detriment of human and natural systems.

Madsen misinterprets Borenstein’s 2022 article to fit her narrative. Scientists interviewed readily confirmed that their models don’t yet explain recent La Nina weather events. As a rule, scientists openly admit weaknesses in their models. If they don’t, another scientist surely will find them. But nowhere do they claim climate change is too complicated to be understood nor do they deny human induced climate change.

Michael Mann’s “hockey stick” is not discredited by the scientific community. His 1999 paper has been cited in 2,660 scientific papers and continues to be cited today. Scientists don’t cite discredited papers.

Instead of denying the overwhelming evidence of human induced climate change that will worsen without action, Ms. Madsen should use her talents to help bring us all together to respond to the more relevant and thorny political question: “As a society, what can we do about it?”

Alan Belasco

Spokane

Buffalo herd mentality

If the headline was the only thing used for Sue Lani Madsen’s climate change article, it would have been more accurate than her column that followed. In it, she offers the notion that the West Hills fire was arson, not a result of climate change as Gov. Inslee suggests. In the Lahaina fire, she quotes Professor Mass as saying sugarcane that was formerly irrigated was supplanted by dry grasslands from a wet winter and an accelerating downslope windstorm and “fires had nothing to do with climate change, like zero.”

I am reminded of an analogy I read some time ago that (paraphrased) goes like this:

There was a small town in Colorado that had a liberal paper and a conservative paper. One day, at the bottom of a bluff, the remains of 30 buffalo were discovered. Both papers sent reporters to the scene and the newspapers articles were as follows …

The liberal paper wrote: In the Old West, upon discovery of a buffalo herd, mounted plains Indians would encircle the herd leaving an opening at one end. The riders would then stampede the herd toward the bluff cliff. Once the herd leader took off, the herd would follow the leaders off the bluff and were killed after falling off the edge where the meat and skins were harvested for tribal use.

The conservative paper wrote: Mystery solved regarding the dead buffalo – cause of death was impact with the ground.

Barry Cross

Spokane

McConnell and CMR blocked legislation

Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell pronounced his highest priority was to make Barack Obama a one-term president, soon after Obama became president. Since then, McConnell has opposed everything Democrats have introduced, including legislation Obama and subsequent Democrats continually propose to rescue lower- and middle-income workers, many unjustly left behind. Lately, McConnell has given indications of realizing he’s created a monster – Donald Trump – but lacks the integrity to stand up to Trump. E.g., after strongly criticizing Trump for his leading role in the Jan. 6 insurrection, McConnell voted against convicting Trump in impeachment proceedings.

These angry, marginalized workers with legitimate grievances were understandably drawn to the hateful lies, slander and bigotry of Trump, even though he’s always championed the rich, especially with his tax cuts. Conservative columnist George Will (Spokesman-Review, Aug. 2) concludes likewise that most of Trump’s rhetoric and showmanship merely channeled the emotion behind these grievances. The reward for his followers was satisfying their emotions, not in political accomplishments meeting their real challenges.

Cathy McMorris Rodgers has continually contributed to blocking Democratic-initiated legislation, including key immigration reform supported by then-President Obama that even attracted enough Republican U.S, House and Senate votes to have passed. Now Republicans exploit immigration difficulties resulting from its defeat.

Specifically, on June 27, 2013, the U.S. Senate passed the immigration reform bill by a large 68-32 margin. A bipartisan House of Representatives majority favored it (Froma Harrop, Spokesman-Review, Jan. 20, 2018), but Republican House leadership, including McMorris Rodgers, violated majority rule by disallowing a full House vote.

Norm Luther

Spokane

Voting requires being informed

Recently, in the Opinion section of the Idaho Statesman, a writer stated that Sen. Tammy Nichols thinks calling extremists “extremists” is name-calling. Well, as my granddaddy said, “If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and looks like a duck, by God it’s probably a duck!”

The “extremists” controlling Idaho are responsible for every debacle currently occurring. We are lead by a minority of a minority. Trying to penalize teachers and librarians over what people can read; the denial of sovereignty of a woman over her own body; the denial of self-determination of our LGBTQ+ community; the elimination of reality in history lessons and books; et. al.

The West Bonner County school board kerfuffle was an attempt to destroy public education for the benefit of the extremists’ own beliefs and agenda. Fortunately, the voters came out to stop that takeover.

We are seeing the results of decades of extremist machinations that want nothing less than to destroy the functioning of democracy.

We are seeing the results of ignorance, apathy and non-involvement in the most critically important aspect of being an American citizen – voting!

If you fail to vote, or worse yet, vote strictly on a party label, you are a failure as a citizen of this country.

Voting is a sacred trust granted to us by our Constitution. Failure to participate or blindly follow a party is a betrayal of that trust. Voting requires diligently examining the candidates and issues before you enter the polls.

Only informed voters can maintain democracy.

Gil Beyer

Sandpoint