• 

Letters to the editor: Feb. 1, 2019

Only current online subscribers may access this article and/or our N-R e-editions.

One-day subscriptions available for just $3.

For all subscription offers, click here.

Already a subscriber, please .<0/p>

Comments

Lulu

Thank you, Patrick Evans, you are absolutely accurate, as well as eloquent, in summing up Starrett.

Don Dix

Wendy Smith -- if one were to actually 'get the information, do the research' about 'dire warnings from the IPCC', this is what would be found:
Climate models used to promote agreement and compliance are conspicuously and consistently wrong.
Nearly all climate predictions for the last 30 years have not materialized or been grossly over-estimated.
80% of the IPCC members have had absolutely no dealing with the climate as part of their academic studies (the chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, was trained as a railway engineer).
When Mother Nature refused to cooperate (global warming), it became 'climate change' (to cover any blip or inconsistency not expected).
The IPCC (leaders) has admitted their mission is more about re-distribution of wealth, and less about the environment.
And most importantly, CO2 is 'vital to life on Earth', not a pollutant as the EPA has labeled.

Oregon is controlled and governed by people who's main objective is to create new and different ways to extract more money from the citizens. Drafting money measures (ie: M66 &67), raising licensing fees for businesses, raising fines, and foolish spending on half-wit programs (OWIN. Oracle computer lawsuit, BETC, etc.)

The Clean Energy Bill is just another in a long line of the legislature wasting tax dollars -- a legacy of very expensive failures.

  • Most viewed
  • Most commented
Web Design and Web Development by Buildable