Editor:
This is a comment on the article in Farm and Dairy (Nov. 6, 2014 issue, page A8) about global warming, “UN climate change report (etc.)” by Karl Ritter, Associated Press.
The Cuyahoga River, as it passes through Cuyahoga Falls, (Ohio) has cut a path some 150 feet deep and has been eroding into the shale deposits. Standing along the river and looking upwards you can see layer after layer of various kinds of sandstone and the occasional three or four inch band of that black substance called coal. Above the rim, some 10,000 years ago there was they say an ice cap about one mile thick and also they say perhaps three or more glaciers before the last one.
Somewhere along the millions of years that this now exposed rock represents there were obviously as many “climate changes” as layers of rock. Since humans have been around this area for only a tiny sliver of time — — who then, may I ask can be blamed for the eons of changes represented in the rock? What “pollution” melted the ice cap?
As a child, many years ago, I was always with the family on its summer fishing trip to Canada. I still recall the drive through Tonawanda, N.Y. and the seemingly thick green air and the relief to be into Canada. That, of course, should not be tolerated and I have been told it has ended, however, I sincerely doubt such would ever add or detract in the climate changes reflected in the exposed sandstone/shale banks along the Cuyahoga River.
Common sense seems never to pop into the minds of radicals. No Emissions? Shall they try to control volcanoes? earthquakes? plug cattle and horses? stop the growing of certain foods? Why not save the earth with a 100 percent elimination of all human and animal life?
Jim Hudkins,
Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio
