Denying climate change doesn't change it
This summer saw the perma-frost melting in Siberia and methane “fountains” bubbling up from newly formed lakes in that previously frozen land. Mountain guides in the Alps have reported new freshwater lakes at 10,000 foot altitudes. Corals are continuing to bleach from heat, and island nations are watching beaches disappear. As all this happens we are still being subjected to letters by locals who “know” this is just a liberal plot.
Why do you continue to publish letters denying science? Would you also publish letters calling electricity witchcraft? Climate scientists – people who are every bit as smart as our local letter writers but who actually do these studies professionally – have long agreed that humans are responsible for creating greenhouse gasses that are literally heating up the globe we live on. This is not open for layman debate as experts have already done the math.
There are variables to consider, but the core math is simple: Carbon molecules hold more heat than oxygen molecules, and if you pump enough carbon molecules into the atmosphere you will begin to create predictable changes. This math was originally presented in 1896 by a Nobel Prize winning chemist and has been verified many times since. Still we continue to pump billions of tons of carbon mixes into the air day after day, decade after decade, never once considering that we live on a closed system. Eventually that system will predictably react to a carbon overload.
The majority of world leaders recognize that climate changes will likely have huge impacts on how we do business, where and how we live, and create issues of global refugees, and problems with global food supplies. One may be happier calling this a liberal plot, but like the melting perma-frost in Siberia, these are factual realities and denying them does not change them.
Shaking head over Uber driver rape case
You have free articles remaining.
I can't be the only one who was left shaking their head while reading the story of the Uber driver and his sentencing for rape, right? So many things wrong with the situation, one hardly knows where to begin.
He was arrested at the Mexican border by ICE agents. I don't suppose he was trying to leave the country, since he was wanted for raping an intoxicated woman? No, probably just wanting to do some early Christmas shopping in Tijuana.
He "agreed to serve 364 days in County jail as part of his plea agreement." Why are we offering this guy a plea deal? Then his attorney says that Abdul will only serve half his sentence, thanks to PC4019. This means that an inmate, if sentenced to "county" jail, will serve a term of four days for every two days spent in actual custody. What?
And the kicker to this story ... he'll be released on the day of his sentencing. As a good friend of mine always says, "you can't make this stuff up."
And get this. He's not even an American citizen. He's living in our country on a granted asylum application. But wait, there's good news. He has a job when he gets out, with a relative in Santa Maria. How about we boot him out. Wouldn't matter to me if this guy was from Italy, Portugal, Germany, France or any other country. Let him take his criminal behavior and seek asylum in some other country.