Editorial writer continues cycle of 'Chicken Little'
Editorial writer Jamie Lucke's April 26 column, "It's about the climate, not the coal," doubled down on the April 14 editorial that likened all cretins who question man-induced "climate change" to those who supported slavery.
I suppose that the climate is indeed changing — remember the ice ages — but there really is a legitimate debate about whether and to what degree mankind is responsible.
Remember when the alarm was about global warming until folks had to observe that the globe just isn't warming? Oops, better switch to climate change.
The hard left sure isn't interested in debating this matter. No, anyone who doesn't toe the party line is likened to a slavemaster, unworthy of a hearing. Better if they were just silenced.
As a lad, my mother told me the story, Chicken Little. Seems Chicken Little was out in the rain and became panicked that the sky was falling. Well, perhaps Lucke is right about this. We questioners are probably just too stupid to understand. Perhaps I could understand this issue if only I were a journalist rather than an engineer.
Analogy doesn't work
Jamie Lucke protests too much. By doubling down on the editorial board's previously stated view that those who support Kentucky coalfields are somehow in the same league as the southern plantation owners who profited off the backs of slaves, she only succeeds in highlighting once again her apparent lack of moral seriousness.
The correct response to those of us who found her initial analogy lazy at best and offensive at worst was to find a better one.
Her refusal to do so suggests that she simply can't bring herself to admit that there is a difference in kind between an issue like climate change — about which reasonable people can disagree as experts study mountains of complex data regarding its causes and effects — and an intrinsic evil like human slavery.
That's too bad, since our public debates will go nowhere if we can't even agree on fundamentals like this.
So allow me to suggest that a better starting point for this debate is for Lucke to concede that neither she nor I have all the answers when it comes to climate change, and that because of that, we would far better serve her readers, particularly those in coal country, if we debate this very complicated set of questions on the basis of the facts rather than through crude and unhelpful analogies.
Sen. Mitch McConnell
Jobs over environment
The Sunday column by Jamie Lucke attacking the Kentucky coal industry shows just how out of touch the Herald-Leader is with everyday non-elitist Kentucky Democrats.
The paper keeps pushing a far-left elitist anti-coal and pro-deviant lifestyle message that is anathema to the average Democratic voter in the commonwealth.
Folks in Eastern Kentucky care about the jobs and money generated by the coal industry. Why not invest in clean coal technologies that keep people working? Yes, I care about the environment, but I care more about keeping folks in good-paying jobs.
Ever wonder why the Democratic Party keeps losing elections all over Appalachia? I will tell you why: The message the national leadership and its handmaidens at the Herald-Leader keep pushing is out of tune with the average voter, who once voted Democratic.
We want to keep our jobs and our guns and we don't like to be told how ignorant and backwards we are for adhering to traditional family values.
So if the Herald-Leader is really a voice for Kentucky Democrats, y'all badly need to get a clue and change your message.
Climate always changes
It is generally accepted that Earth has had at least five different ice ages. There were no humans for most of those cycles, so I guess the defrosting was probably due to lots of cows and methane, huh?
And I don't know what made it get cold again, unless the dinosaurs were burning too much coal trying to keep warm.
Then, in the 1960s, we were bombarded with information that another ice age was imminent. And, as editorial writer Jamie Lucke would have it, we were told we had better stop burning coal as the resulting particulates were blocking out the very sunlight we need. Today, those particulates seem to be holding in the carbon.
I don't care if New York is covered in water 5 million years from now, 500 years or even five. Let those future residents deal with it, just like long ago residents dealt with conditions they had, and we deal with today's conditions.
The climate has been evolving and changing for eons. One cycle killed the dinosaurs, another killed some things we've never even heard of, and another will kill us, or at least some other species. But remember, we always seem to need a crisis.