Readers Write: July 20

Risks of climate change inaction monumental

Depending on the study, the expert scientific consensus that climate change is real and caused by humans varies between 93 percent to 99.9 percent. Considering the monumental risks involved if we do not act, that certainly would seem convincing evidence to act. But what if the chance of it being real was only 50 percent, or 25 percent, or even 10 percent? With the risk of badly damaging life on earth as we know if for countless billions of people for many generations to come if we do not act, would even that 10 percent chance be enough to act? It is a matter of risk assessment. Now, considering the fact that we have clean energy alternatives available for almost the same price as fossil fuels, would it not be prudent to rapidly begin that conversion? How much risk are we willing to take? The fate of the world may depend on our choices.


Selective advocacy for 1st Amendment

So Columbia University’s Knight First Amendment Institute is suing on behalf Trump-blocked Twitter users on Constitutional grounds. I must have missed its lawsuits on behalf of conservative speakers who were blocked by Antifa and other violent protesters at Berkeley and other public universities across the country on the same First Amendment grounds.

Bias and hypocrisy are patently obvious and must be pointed out at every turn. The citizenry cannot accept this as any kind of new normal.

And oh, after the litany of Hillary Clinton’s crimes by James Comey and her “lack of intent” to break the law, Donald Trump Jr.’s non-crime should be a blip on the media radar instead of a full-fledged cry of treason from intellectual giants like Tim Kaine.