Readers write: Bad precedent, a 108-year celebration, scientific agreement
Letters to the editor for the Dec. 5, 2016 weekly magazine.
Chicago Cubs players celebrate during a celebration honoring the World Series champions at Grant Park in Chicago on Nov. 4, 2016.
Nam Y. Huh
Bad precedent
Regarding the Oct. 28 article “In ‘stunning victory’ for defense, jury acquits Oregon’s Malheur occupiers” (CSMonitor.com): Acquitting the Oregon standoff defendants not only opens the door to others taking up arms against the government, but it also signifies a win for the National Rifle Association. The NRA’s stronghold on our government is alarming. And we have no one to thank but our elected legislators. The Bundy acquittal has set the wrong precedent.
JoAnn Lee Frank
Clearwater, Fla.
A 108-year celebration
The Chicago Cubs won the World Series this year, something they hadn’t done since 1908. Something else happened 108 years ago that has significance to all mankind – not just Chicago Cubs fans.
That year, 1908, marks the beginning of The Christian Science Monitor’s new approach to the journalism prevalent in those days. As so many celebrate the Cubs’ epic win of the Series, all who read this can share a moment of appreciation for how the Monitor has brought balance, accuracy, and insight to the news around the globe. Now that’s a true world championship that everyone can celebrate.
David K. McClurkin
Beachwood, Ohio
Scientific agreement
Your Oct. 17 cover story on ending the water wars in Washington State’s Yakima Valley (“How the water wars may end”) was great, but I have one tiny quibble.
In talking about climate science, the article uses the term “consensus of scientists.” That is inaccurate because “consensus” implies that it is a matter of subjective opinion among the scientists. Actually, it is a matter of hard objective science (within limits of uncertainty). Rather than “consensus,” the language should be “the preponderance of objective data and analysis.”
William H. Cutler
Union City, Calif.