To the editor:
In regards to a March 8 letter to the editor: Should humans, being the pre-eminent species, not feel an obligation to improve upon our technology and methods? Is that not the entire concept of intelligence, to aspire to more efficient forms of existence? And if so, should our relationship with our world not improve as well? For what are we without the soil we stand upon? Which leads me to form the question: Why is the idea that we alter our world a divisive and political issue?
It is an easy concept to confirm. Every year a simple thing like raising crops requires replacement of the nutrients exhausted. How is it difficult to conceptualize the idea that the entirety of the Earth’s population — with our hundreds of millions of vehicles, deforestation, open-pit mining, fossil fuels, etc. — can influence our global climate? Especially since our actions are devoid of remunerative steps. Why do we insist upon belittling ourselves with the politics of the matter instead of taking steps toward improvement and refinement?
Furthermore, if this year’s winter in our small part of the world can be indicative of the overall existence, or lack thereof, of climate change, then what would our winter of 2011/2012 indicate about such events?
Joseph Wiechman, Freeport