We welcome letters, but please include your
full name, address, and daytime telephone number. We edit all
letters for libel, length, and clarity. Send letters to Letters, Illinois Times, P.O.
Box 5256, Springfield, IL 62705; fax 217-753-3958; e-mail editor@illinoistimes.com. FOR MANI, FREEDOM WASN’T FREE Bruce Rushton’s story on the life and
death of Mani the hawk was very well written and informative
[“Freebird,” March 30]. The only flaw in the story was
part of the headline: “After a lifetime in a cage, Mani the
hawk had seven weeks of freedom — and now his liberators may
lose theirs.” The liberators are not facing a
“loss” of their freedom — they forfeited it
through their criminal actions. To suggest that their cause or
rationale was noble — that is, the hawk deserved to be free
— undermines the legal process, as well as the concepts of
education and knowledge. Many laws exist to protect the ignorant. For
example, it is unlawful to sniff paint due to potential self-harm.
Other laws exist as protection from the ignorant, such as many of
the wildlife/conservation statutes. As Rushton explained, Mani was not capable of
survival outside of his environment; he had become dependent upon
his caretakers to provide sustenance, sanctuary, medical treatment,
and protection. The fact that he lived to be 27, tantamount to a
human living well over 100, is a testament to the excellent care he
received. To those who surmise that they would rather
live free and die early than live long in captivity (“Give me
liberty or give me death”?) need to remember that Mani was
doomed to an early demise shortly after birth; when a human removed
him from the nest, he was denied imprinting of his species
and the natural (as in “nature”) way of learning to hunt
and survive. Without any doubt, Mani’s extended life-span was a
direct result of the intervention and care by numerous entities and
people. I wonder: Had Mani not been stolen from his
home, not been exposed to the extra stress and anxiety, and not
lost as much weight as he did, how much longer could he have lived?
It seems to me that his
“liberators” may well have been his executioners. Brett Cameron Mount Zion THIS IS NO LAUGHING MATTER Jeff Davis’ letter on global warming in
the March 23 edition is misleading and inaccurate in several
respects. It is true that the earth has warmed and cooled many
times. Through the study of ancient ice cores from Antarctica it is
possible to compare atmospheric concentrations of the dominant
greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, in the atmosphere with temperature
variations over the past 400,000 years of the Earth’s
history. A comparison of the two trends indicates a very tight
connection between changes in carbon dioxide and temperature. But
suddenly, in the 1800s, as the Industrial Revolution takes off,
atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations begin an unprecedented
upward climb, rising rapidly from 280 ppmv (parts per million by
volume) in the early 1800s to a current level of 376 ppmv —
77 ppmv above the highest concentrations previously attained in the
course of the preceding 400,000 years. The point is that the rate of change is much
greater in recent history than in the past. The Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change, after years of investigation and in
consultation with thousands of scientists, was able to conclude in 1995 that
the dramatic increase in carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere
over the past 150 years is largely due to anthropogenic (human-caused)
effects. Other evidence of the reality of their conclusion continues to
accumulate including effects on many ecosystems and species, including
humans. Mr. Davis then proceeds to dismiss any
political responsibility for this situation, especially that of
President George W. Bush. I agree, in part — Bush is not the
only one responsible for our predicament. Past presidents and other
leaders worldwide must be held responsible for their inaction on
this problem. However, as the leading total emitter by far of
greenhouse gases, the United States has a unique responsibility to
seek and implement solutions, of which there are many. However, the
Bush gang has gone far beyond inaction. In particular, political
operatives in the current Bush administration were found guilty of
not only inaction but of censorship and actually rewriting the
government’s own scientific findings on climate change to
minimize their impact. The censorship issue became much more
prominent in late January 2006, when it became clear that one of
the world’s most prominent climate scientists, Dr. James
Hansen, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space
Studies, had been subjected to having political operatives sit in
when he discussed climate science with the news media and was
pressured not to speak on certain specific issues. I have followed
Jim Hansen’s work for 23 years, and I believe there are few
scientists who are less driven by ego or malice.
Mr. Davis said he “chuckles” over
these issues. Perhaps the following quote from Jim Hansen will
cause Jeff to choke on the chuckles: “We have to stabilize
emissions of carbon dioxide within a decade, or temperatures will
warm by more than 1 degree. That will be warmer than it has been
for half-a-million years, and many things could become
unstoppable.” Alex Casella Professor emeritus, Physics and Energy
Studies, University of Illinois at Springfield Springfield TIME TO GET INFORMED This is in response to the letter from Jeff
Davis, “Ridiculous reason to bash Bush” [March 23]. I
ask him: “Where have you been?” Mr. Davis, have you no
time to read any newspapers or newsmagazines, watch network news,
or even catch a few cable-channel news bites? The debate is no
longer whether global warming is a natural phenomenon or a manmade
one. That’s old news. The climatologists, geologists, and other
biologically based scientists have already clearly spoken out about their general
consensus. They have unequivocally stated it is manmade on several
nationally organized platforms. Undeniable. Carbon-based fossil fuels burned by factories,
utilities, automobiles are the biggest culprits. Why do you think
talks of new energy/environmental policies are the hot topic? Jim
Hightower, with whom Mr. Davis disagrees, is actually and
truthfully right on target [see Hightower, “Greenland is
melting,” March 16]. The Bush administration has been
consistently and systematically dismantling all worthwhile,
effective, and necessary environmental laws and regulations. Big
Oil, Big Coal, and Big Timber have paid heavily toward Bush’s
campaign. He’s acted as their puppet to assure their payback.
No, of course he alone doesn’t have the power to actually
stop global warming, but he has repeatedly failed to sign on with
other countries to implement new protective regulations. He not
only has the power but also the obligation, as this country’s
leader, to immediately put forth new effective policies that would
drastically reduce these harmful emissions that cause global
warming. Mr. Davis, if you can refrain from laughing
long enough, perhaps you’ll find the time to catch up on all
the factual research. Janet Roth-Shaw Springfield DARFUR IS TODAY’S RWANDAN GENOCIDE This week, we remember the 12th anniversary of
the Rwandan genocide and promise one another that we will
“never again” allow genocide to happen on our watch.
Yet, in these weeks, thousands will die in the ongoing genocide in
Darfur, where the Sudanese government and their Janjaweed militias
have successfully destroyed 80 to 90 percent of the villages. The
genocide has expanded into neighboring Chad, where the Janjaweed
are systematically slaughtering targeted ethnicities. The international community has a
responsibility to protect people from genocide. The only government
to label the situation in Darfur genocide is the United States,
giving each of us a unique power to protect. Let us remember Rwanda
by defending Darfur. The U.S. must take every step necessary to
negotiate an international peacekeeping intervention. Without
immediate action we abandon thousands, perhaps millions, to a
massacre. Catholic Relief Services, Africa Action,
Committee on Conscience, and Save Darfur are organizations working
to end the genocide and provide relief to the victims. Each has a
Web site with resources on how you can become involved. Victoria Compton Springfield
This article appears in Apr 6-12, 2006.
