|
Kudos to the writer of the brilliant satirical piece on “Global Warming.” (April 18 issue) The humor begins with the title: anyone with even a cursory understanding of the topic wouldn’t use the tabloid term “global warming” when discussing the complexities of climate change. I roared with laughter when television programs, casual Internet searching and “The World Book” were cited as authoritative sources of information. Most instructive and perhaps most subtle is the implication that the Information Age has created a reckless type of half-wit, who obtains some dubious information and then considers himself competent to comment on complex issues. For a person to think that he is “informed” after “a couple of hours of library and computer research” defines buffoonery. A little knowledge is truly dangerous.
Climate change is complex and requires much additional study; however, any credible and prudent thinker knows that we should take these observations seriously and work with the rest of the world to reduce the burning of fossil fuels. Many of the proposed steps are really questions of convenience as opposed to onerous lifestyle changes. Do we really need to drive SUVs to distant shopping centers? Could we walk, car-pool or consider public transportation? Does every indoor space have to be air-conditioned? Small changes could have marked benefits.
Television and the Internet bombard us with constant and often contradictory information. From this morass, free-associating imbeciles cherry-pick those pieces of data that seem to support their views. This process of selecting one’s support is the opposite of scientific inquiry where one dispassionately reviews all relevant information prior to formulating hypotheses. The true scientist then asks questions and tests hypotheses as opposed to manufacturing answers.
The fact the Lazy-Boy dilettantes feel comfortable taking a strong position opposing true scientists who actually study these phenomena is both comical and frightening. Those who carefully study important issues and then make their concerns public may run the risk of being labeled “anti-American” or “radical”. The only thing “radical” is that they actually think before they speak. As the pieces make clear, there may actually be idiots out there who watch TV, read the World Book and surf the Internet who think they are the experts.
Thanks for the “celestial” laughs
Darby Bray
James J. Mischler’s letter of April 18 reiterates the old right wing mantra that absolutely nothing we do will have any effect on the environment whatsoever, so thus, by implication, we can ignore any conservation measures, no matter how reasonable or sensible, since it won’t have any impact. All I would ask people who share that view (to do) is to use common sense. No one except environmental extremists (or wackos to quote the extreme right) claim that human activity is solely or, even primarily, responsible, but to argue that what we do in our modern industrialized society has nothing to do with physical changes on the planet defies logic.
Bottom line is, let’s not add to the problem by ignoring it. Like it or not our contemporary lifestyle does have some effect. The only question is how much. Why not try to have a positive influence, not a negative one.
Mike Holz
Dayton, Ohio
We have known Velvet Welz and her family for several years. Our oldest son was fortunate enough to have been one of her students. Our whole family is saddened by the situation Mrs. Welz and her family find themselves in.
We have known her to be a kind, sweet and gracious woman. There are many in Oakwood who share this view. There are also many in our community who struggle with many things.
We certainly do not condone the actions of Mrs. Welz, but many of us have also done things we are ashamed of and would un-do if we could.
The article in the April 25th edition of the Oakwood Register contained needless details that served no constructive purpose in our opinion. Mrs. Welz has a lovely family including young children here in Oakwood who must certainly be suffering terribly. In light of this the printing of unnecessary information seems thoughtless and unkind.
Our family will continue to support Mrs. Welz and her family. Should she take the appropriate steps to correct this situation, we would completely support her returning to her teaching position.
Sincerely,
Dr. James K. Horlacher
Kris Horlacher
Jake Horlacher
Holly Horlacher
The recent letter claiming that global warming is false flies in the face of many years of established scientific research by highly-credentialed scientists worldwide. Recognizing that natural weather cycles throughout history have resulted in changing climatic conditions, there is no question that the use of fossil fuels in the last two centuries has created a rapid accumulation of factors that have dramatically warmed world temperatures, especially during the last two decades. To suggest that conscientious hihly-trained scientists who are seeking to preserve our planet are “militantly- motivated anti-U.S socialists” is reprehensible.
To imply that a couple of hours of library and computer research will illuminate the complexity of such an issue as global warming is absurd. Further, the suggestion that there is NOTHING we can do is fallacious. There are many ways that individuals and families can begin to alleviate this threat by recycling and reusing everything, buying fuel-efficient cars, obey the speed limit and keep your tires inflated, turn out lights when not in use, replace incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent ones.
Mainly, we need to enforce existing clean air laws pertaining to pollution emitted by coal burning energy plants and many industries. The Ohio Legislature just passed a law that weakens our Ohio regulations, ensuring that we continue to be one of the most polluted of the 50 states. Urge Governor Taft to veto this egregious affront to our Ohio citizens!
Finally, the larger question is: What if the scientist are right?
Joanne Granzow
535 Garden Road
Oakwood
I am more than a little startled with the lack of response to the map and links that the Register provided to the Oakwood community regarding the 10 known sexual offenders that live in our midst. Perhaps the readers did not realize the significance of the map, and the links in it that led to within the Montgomery County Sheriff’s site that held the names, addresses, photos and crimes of the offenders? Or perhaps that lunatic shooter in Maine has now made it “politically incorrect” to ask questions about these types of criminals, and people are simply afraid to seek knowledge?
I did take the Register’s lead and explored the site. I was more than a little surprised to find that among the ten men listed on that map, there is a convicted rapist living three blocks from the Jr/Sr High School, a convicted child pornographer is living three and a half blocks from Smith Elementary, and just one block from Starbucks and Graeters lives a gentleman who exposes himself in public. Because sexual offenders cannot be “cured” and the recidivism rate is so high, I had quite a few immediate questions about these men in particular. Unfortunately, there is no area on the Sheriff’s site to answer the following questions for me, so perhaps they need to be questions posed to the community at large?
1) These offenders are required to register with the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Dept.; but does Montgomery County then share that information with our local police department? Do the local police then keep our schools, businesses and library informed?
2) When these offenders are moved into our neighborhoods, the Sheriff’s Dept. is required to notify anyone living within 1000 feet of their residence. Does this notification only happen at the move in time? When neighboring homes and businesses are then subsequently sold and reinhabited, do the new families/owners get notified about these offenders that are living in their new neighborhood?
3) What role has the Dayton Metropolitan Housing Authority played in owning/renting any of the apartments/houses that these men are in? And were they instrumental in placing these offenders here? If so, what can our City Council do to keep DMHA from continuing to use our city as a halfway house? (As if the 2004 apartment fires weren’t enough of a DMHA lesson!)
4) Because I suspect that the links on the map site provided new information to both our City Council and police departments, and because this is an active walking/jogging, family oriented community; shouldn’t there be a better way to communicate current information on these offenders’ locales from the sheriff’s office to the city officials to schools and through the schools to the parents?
5) How safe should we assume ourselves to be as we walk our dogs, let our children ride their bikes to the park; or as we stroll over to the library? Do the police have guidelines for the public to look to as we adjust to the new constraints that we all must feel with the knowledge of these ten offenders in our small city? Do we continue to jog in the Lonsdale/Dellwood area now? Should we allow our children to use Triangle as a walking route to the Shops?
I care deeply about the “Oakwood deer”, and I am educating myself about global warming. However, it is time to face reality and recognize that the famous “dome” no longer exists; and that we, as a community, need to be asking some hard questions about core issues such as community values and family safety. Public answers to the above questions would be a good first step. Parents who dedicate the same passion, energy and concern to the safety and whereabouts of their children as they did to the deer issue would be a very good second step. This is an issue that can not be ignored, and we need to explore it further, no matter how awkward or painful.
D. Collins
Oakwood Resident
top of page
|
