Feedback
 February issue |
Talk to Us» E-mail us at: |
“May Cooler Heads Prevail” Feb. 2010
In his Editor’s Page, A. Kam Napier said he felt “had” by researchers at the Climatic Research Unit who exhibited unscientific and unethical practices regarding their research on global surface temperatures.
i found it very unfortunate that you chose to bash the over 2,500 climate scientists who were the basis of the [United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)] statement that global warming is real and is “very likely” caused by humans. I have worked in the scientific field all of my life and to ignore the years of hard work climate scientists have done based on stolen e-mails is irresponsible. The fact remains that there is overwhelming complementary evidence that global warming is a serious problem. You state that the 1996 IPCC’s predictions are wrong, but fail to mention that this was a probability statement, not an absolute statement. Data do not lie. Scientists sometimes do. Personally knowing the high ethics of most scientists, I find it difficult to swallow that you think thousands of scientists to be so motivated by “grant dollars and reputations” that they would intentionally mislead the public about such an important issue. There are always doubts on the conclusions of such data, but the anti-science tone of your editorial is an insult to those, including myself, who strive to find answers to important questions. —RAY SEBASTIAN
Those who were “had” wanted to be had and were easily seduced. The millennial hysteria fit their internal narrative, one promulgated by the media: “Humans are bad.”—HARRY BERGERON, ONLINE SUBMISSION
“We Know the Drill,” Afterthoughts, Feb. 2010
Executive editor Kathryn Drury Wagner asked: With Hawaii’s dental decay rates so high, isn’t it time to reconsider why we’re not fluoridating the water?
Our government has published some concerning documents, and yet doesn’t put them out to the public in the news. I only found out from my U.S. Congressman Bill Young, who sent me his copy of the National Academy of Sciences Report for Congress: “Health Effects of Ingested Fluoride,” in 1993. My son, Charlie, suffers moderate Dental Fluorosis from an infant formula Neo-Mulson, that was as high as 7.34 ppm fluorides, back in 1962. This apparently affected many babies because the Journal of Dental Research, Special Issue, International Symposium on Fluorides, Vol. 69, Feb. 1990, in article by Drs. Pendrys and Stamm, noted the ADA and manufacturers met and decided the fluoride levels in infant formulas must be lowered. —ANITA KNIGHT, ST. PETERSBURG, FLORIDA
I applaud anyone who has the political courage to say what is right and true. Fluoride supplementation is safe and scientific. Here’s a positive note to help offset all the nasty negative communiqués you are sure to receive over this issue.—RUSSELL H. MASUNAGA, D.D.S. DIRECTOR, HAWAII DENTAL ASSOCIATION DENTAL SAMARITANS
Two at the Top: Then and Now, Feb. 2010
Dining columnist John Heckathorn revisited two of Honolulu’s best known restaurants, Alan Wong’s and Chef Mavro. He realized both were multiple Hale Aina Award winners, but had not been reviewed in 15 years.
I suspect there would have been fewer “oohs” and “ahs” from Heckathorn’s Californian guests if they’d been New Yorkers. In fact, why bring in Mainlanders at all? We’re perfectly capable of judging our eateries on our own terms.—BILL LOFQUIST, HONOLULU
Ahana Koko Lele
In “Astounding Honolulu,” the cover story for our February 2010 issue, the dates for the “baby swapping” were incorrect. Kamehameha Schools’ Senior Cottage Baby program ran from 1924 to 1970. In our January story, “A Massacre Forgotten,” about the 1924 Hanapēpē Massacre, the writer reported that National Guard soldiers were flown in to Kauai; they actually arrived via interisland steamer.
