To the editor: Your article on California piers imperiled by local weather change quotes a researcher as saying, “There’s restricted sources, and we’ve to assume strategically about what are we going to guard?”
This pondering has to embody the truth that people are usually not taking local weather change significantly. Sure, tens of millions of us are, however billions are usually not.
It has been beneficial that individuals cease utilizing fossil fuels, however that’s not working too properly. The failure of this comparatively straightforward process doesn’t bode properly for every other rational thought on the matter.
Gregg Ferry, Carlsbad
..
To the editor: The destruction of California piers by storms exacerbated by local weather change raises the query — why have these piers within the first place?
The piers advanced from industrial transport use to leisure for the general public. If piers will proceed to be destroyed by nature and if tens of millions are spent to rebuild them, why trouble spending public funds to take care of them?
Bob Ladendorf, Los Angeles
..
To the editor: The lack of California piers could not appear to some to be such a giant deal within the huge scheme of issues. However this is only one symptom of our perilous future if we don’t management the warming of the Earth by our burning of fossil fuels.
There may be overwhelming scientific proof of the perils of further warning of the Earth. Hurricanes Helene and Milton, supercharged by local weather change, have been simply two latest examples.
In the event you haven’t but been personally harmed by local weather change, don’t be complacent — it’s going to come for you, your youngsters and your grandchildren.
We want each Republican and Democratic voters to vigorously demand that their congressional representatives take urgently wanted actions to regulate local weather change. Representatives, take heed to voters.
Jack Holtzman and Irwin Rubenstein, San Diego
