Climate has always changed
Thanks to Mark Peters for his recent letters discussing the inconsistency of climate change predictions and accuracy. The technique used by some to say “almost all scientists agree…” is called an appeal to authority, and is often used by proponents of a position to obscure facts, or in the case of man-caused climate change, the absence of them. The facts of climate change include the reality that climate has always changed, that the causes are varied, with dependent variables not yet well understood, and hence the predictions based on resultant modeling are necessarily unreliable.
In was not so many years ago that global cooling was the imminent threat to public safety, and now recently, we are supposed to live in fear of warming. Instead, we should realize that climatology, as a science, is perhaps a 50-year-old profession. That the globe’s weather processes are complex and yet to be effectively described by even well thought out theories. I struggle with calling man-caused climate change even a hypothesis, instead thinking that speculation is the correct term. Given that man-caused climate change is speculative as to cause and effect measurable by commonly used statistical methods to establish veracity, then it is immoral and unjust to legislate and regulate individual rights in terms of business opportunities and choices of technologies and products.
I oppose legislation favoring one technology over another, one industry over another, and instead support free market solutions to meeting individual needs and wants, while consistently protecting the rights of others to make their own choices. However, the transgression of imposing one’s morality or viewpoint on others through the use of government force (legislation, regulation) is immoral and unjust. The recent action of some several states’ attorneys general to restrict free speech through government subpoena of email is an example of rights violation though government force.
Human life has benefited immensely through the productive application of capital and technology. Our life spans have lengthened greatly since the onset of the Industrial Revolution. If climate change is a problem, instead of merely a fact of life on planet earth, then a free people, unshackled by dogma, will solve it.
Time for term limits for opinion columnists
For those who are longtime residents of North County, Marsha Sutton’s columns are getting predictable: stirring up drama; sticking up for the (deserved) underdog; ambushing unsuspecting interviewees; and, some might argue, boosting SDUHSD Trustee John Salazar’s extreme and unpopular views. Just look into the history of Prop CC and her coverage of the three sacked DMUSD superintendents during the recent recession; you’ll see how she carelessly she wields her power as the only education columnist in town.
As soon as I saw Time for Term Limits, I thought to myself, “OK, this is going to be about Marsha’s pick Lucille Lynch not winning a seat on the SDUHSD board… with a hint of John Salazar’s term limit recommendation.” As I patiently waded through the lengthy article, I found that yes, Salazarian term limits was the subject, and yes, trustees in the SDUHSD were the prime examples of term limits gone berserk (according to Ms. Sutton).
We have already collectively held our breath while Ms. Sutton had the audacity to write a column praising candidate Lynch – during the election! – using the loophole of calling her a parent. I am yearning for a new education columnist who writes more succinctly and more thoughtfully.
Afterthought – Writing this with the CV News next to me, I just glanced over and saw a picture of longtime SDUHSD Trustees Beth Hergesheimer and Joyce Dalessandro, all smiles, attending a CCA gala. I cannot remember ever having seen a picture of Trustee Salazar attending SDUHSD events. Maybe he’s the one who is burned out already?
SDUHSD parent, former CDM PTA President
Time for term limits?
When did Marsha Sutton become such a bore? Her columns have become turgid and repetitive. Education Matters, March 2, 2017 is no exception. Has she simply been around too long? How many decades has it been?
We get it, Ms. Sutton, that you do not like board members, administrators, teachers, especially if they make more money than you do; you have told us so - frequently. We get it that only you can make the darkness light; we know you have never admitted to being wrong, in spite of some spectacular errors – who can forget 2006? We get it that you have to take two pages to say what could be said in one short paragraph. Maybe it’s time for you to go and find a new job; axe grinding comes to mind.
The fact is that if I have to choose who should make decisions about local children, I will take an experienced school board member with a tangible and worthy record any day over your slow-drip poison pen. Time for term limits? As a general rule, I do not favor term limits for elected officials, but I could be persuaded that some education columnists should be termed out, and the sooner the better. To use your own words, “It’s nothing that smart, committed individuals can’t learn.” This newspaper would certainly benefit from “fresh vitality, energy and new ideas.” At some point, veteran columnists might “need to step aside - and step aside completely – to give other voices a chance to be heard,” “…especially someone who still has children attending district schools.”
Two bills that should be stopped
Two very concerning bills are being considered in the State Senate this session, Senate Bill 18 and Senate Bill 54, and I’m asking for the public’s help to defeat them.
SB 18, or the “Bill of Rights for Children and Youth in California,” is a bill that sounds like it was designed to help the children and youth of our state, but would insert the government into the sacred parent-child relationship by creating a standard for measuring “bad” parents – discarding the God-given parental right to raise and provide for their children.
Why set a standard unless you plan to enforce it on every parent and child? It is evident in the draft of the bill, that it contemplates the state power to seize or restrict parents’ access to children that aren’t receiving what they determine to be the correct “research-based essential needs” and “special care” from their parents or guardians. Parent who homeschool, choose alternative vaccine schedules, allow their child the occasional sugary drink, or have other beliefs that run counter to the current political majority are all rightfully concerned that SB 18 would allow the government to step in and force them to parent against their beliefs.
You were the one at their bedside, you are the one who will be fighting for your children their entire lives, and you should be in charge, not the government.
SB 54 is the next step in making California a “sanctuary state” that protects deportable felons from federal immigration authorities. The bill prohibits state and local law enforcement agencies from giving any information to federal immigration authorities regarding serious felons in their jails and prisons, making it harder if not impossible for the federal authorities to find these criminals in order to deport them. The result is that these felons return to our communities when their sentence is up, rather than being deported. These are not “Dreamers” – undocumented immigrants brought her as young children who’ve committed no other crimes. These are felons convicted of crimes such as: assault with a deadly weapon, date rape, and burglary.
If you agree that these bills should be stopped, please co-sign our petitions to the authors of these bills on my website at www.sen.ca.gov/anderson. SB 54 will be heard in the Senate Appropriations Committee on March 13 and I will personally be delivering the names of everyone who has signed my petition to the author. SB 18 has not yet been set for a hearing but I will be doing the same when it is scheduled.
Senator Joel Anderson, Senate District 38