LTE San Diego Union Tribune - Finding right words for 'global warming'

Submitted by Webmaster on Mon, 05/11/2009 - 22:30

Regarding “Global warming? Use new words, consultants say / Term said to have a liberal image” (News, May 2):

While it is extremely frustrating that wording makes such a difference for so many people, I think it's important that we listen to such studies. Although a rose called “garbage” would smell just as sweet, perhaps we wouldn't see so many on Valentine's Day. Whatever we call it, it's most important to do it, and what's really important is to set a price for carbon.
Only when we truly value the toll that fossil fuels take on our health and our deteriorating atmosphere will we be able to really fix our economy and our planet. Whether it is by a “carbon tax,” a “cap and cash back” or a “pollution reduction refund” apparently does matter, but not as much as actually doing it.
DANIEL RICHTER
La Jolla

‹ The Climate Change Bill - LTE to New York Times Misleading column on climate science - LTE San Diego Union ›

The NY Times, PBS, (BBC for

Submitted by yuridebura (not verified) on Wed, 09/02/2009 - 05:51.

The NY Times, PBS, (BBC for the most part) and the ABC-NBC news networks are accurate most of the time and dig deeper into the facts and report the opinions in a fair and balanced manner. I watch Charlie Rose idaho real estate, Brian Williams, and read the Economist and NY Times from cover to cover and they really do care about facts. Having said this, sometimes even they interview people with extreme and rare views, sometimes experts not in consensus and sometimes people who are not experts in a given field and this is one way even these reputable news mediums can distort things. Also there was a scandal at the NY Times a few years ago with a brilliant young writer who made up the news at it suited him and sensationalized marginal world events into a fictional story. PBS is the best programming in the world, but they are not infallible and they are actually over funded and not in need of public funding, but this does not change the fact that they report on global climate change and other world events impeccably indiana real estate. The Economist is fair to both republicans and democrats, but shows how alternative energy sources are economically feasible and rewarding and how the science of climatology is progressing. It is hard to convey just how selective you have to be to dismiss the evidence for climate change. You must climb over a mountain of evidence to pick up a crumb: a crumb which then disintegrates in your palm maryland real estate. You must ignore an entire canon of science, the statements of the world’s most eminent scientific institutions, and thousands of papers published in the foremost scientific journals. You must, if you are David Bellamy, embrace instead the claims of an eccentric former architect, which are based on what appears to be a non-existent data set. And you must do all this while calling yourself a scientist massachusetts real estate.