That's where you come in

A few questions

Mr. Kolodenko took the Creation Museum to task ["Presently Tense," June 20] for "cherry picking" the New York Times article on the museum's website. One of the reasons for the existence of the museum is to attract paying customers, and the website is an ad to attract those customers. Does he also think it's dishonest for a movie ad to quote only positive portions of a review?
Speaking of cherry picking, it appears that Kolodenko did a bit of cherry picking himself in his treatment of the Bible. There are many miracles recorded in the Bible, but supernatural events make up a very small portion of Scripture. And which is harder to believe, that Jesus walked on water, or that the design apparent in nature came about without a designer?
Is the universe only 6,000 years old, as the Creation Museum presents it to be? I don't know. It would appear to be much older. By the way, the Bible never claims that it was created just a few thousand years ago.
I would assume, since he is able to recognize "fake science" when he sees it, that he has a background in "real science." Perhaps he can answer a few questions I have concerning Darwinian evolution:
1. If one species evolved over time into another, the fossil record should contain millions, if not billions, of transitional fossils. Where are they?
2. How were species able to reproduce while the complementary reproductive systems of males and females were still evolving?
3. Bacteria contain tiny motors called flagella, used for mobility. All of the components of these motors have to be present at the same time for the motor to function. How could these motors have evolved?
4. Where is the evidence for life coming into existence from non-life (abiogenesis)?
Evolution may currently be the predominant explanation for the origin of life, but more and more scientists are beginning to question the theory. For cogent arguments in favor of Creation by well-qualified scientists, I suggest you read Darwin's Black Box by Michael Behe and The Privileged Planet by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay W. Richards.

David Schmiedeberg,
Mira Mesa

No ‘soft landing'

In your "Guest Opinion" of June 27, 2007, using Enron as an example of executives getting off after a scandal is off the mark. The Enron executives in question have not floated to earth under golden parachutes. And though the employees will never be totally compensated, Chairman Ken Lay was facing 20 to 30 years in jail when he died on July 5, 2006, and CEO Jeff Skilling is currently serving 24 years in jail.
Together with the millions of dollars in fines that were levied against them, this would hardly be considered a soft landing, and they are certainly not living happily ever after. In fact, one isn't living at all.

George Nelms,
La Jolla

We missed it

Re: "Past Gas" by Kia Momtazi ["Cover Story," June 27]. The bad thing about the Internet is that so few people actually use it, especially "reporters." I cannot give two thumbs up to Momtazi's article on alternatives to gasoline because she completely missed what will take over the market, and very, very soon.
All the alternatives she mentioned, from ethanol to hybrids, all cost something to the consumer. However, she left one alternative out. In this year, MDI cars in the U.K. will begin releasing cars that are powered by air! Instead of burning fuel, they use compressed air that is stored in carbon fiber tanks. Carbon fiber, instead of metal, so that they won't turn into shrapnel death traps in the event of an accident-they'll rupture alongside the tank instead.
They get two to four hours on a charge and can go about 110 kilometers per hour. Combine this with solar cells, which lead into an array of batteries in the garage, that power an air compressor and one onboard battery for the electronics.
Do you get my point? The word Momtazi missed is "free"! No more oil and war and death! This system is 100 percent free energy, cheaper to build and easier on the environment. CityBeat needs to make this system known!

Ken D. Webber,
Mira Mesa

Another alternative

In your June 27, cover story about alternative fuels, the one that was not mentioned, which has a long history in automotive culture, is wood gas.
In the old days, when gas stations were few and far between in rural areas and in poor countries, drivers of commercial and private vehicles would attach a charcoal burner to the rear bumper and run a hose to the engine to re-burn the smoke. Wood chips worked as well. The complete combustion of twice-burned gasses probably reduced pollution vis-à-vis gasoline, but particulate contamination may have been more. During WWI and WWII, when gasoline was rationed, this was used a lot in Europe, and maybe in the U.S. as well.
A more convenient use of this technology would be in the powering of electrical generators for those who want to get off the grid or in areas with no power lines, thus expanding the places where folks can live if they want to get away. This would be especially useful in rural San Diego, with its thousands of acres of dead trees. This low-tech system is far, far cheaper to set up than solar power, and the fuel is free.
Clean up the forests and save money on electricity at the same time. In addition, by adding a plenum around the burner, one could direct the excess heat to the house (and to a greenhouse) for heating. Also, adding water coils to the plenum would heat water for the house. The ashes would make an excellent soil amendment for orchard or garden, to make soap and who knows how many other uses. It is truly a "poor man's alternative" contribution to the environment, in an era when it seems only the middle class (traditional definition: one earner covers mortgage and expenses of a family of four) can afford to implement the alternatives.

Rosa Martinez,
Downtown

Fly to Boston!

What a shame that Michael Moore's movie Sicko ["Film," June 27] was produced and released just before a conservative think-tank (contradiction noted) handled the U.S. healthcare crisis with a solution so basic and simple that the mind boggles! Actually, the well-heeled genius/thinker denied that there even was a crisis when interviewed on the TV business channel, CNBC. When reminded that the U.S. was something like 37th in the world for availability of healthcare and 29th in longevity, this spokesman for the right offered the following proof that those statistics meant nothing and that no crisis existed at all: "When people in Europe want top-quality medical treatment, they fly to Boston!" There in one sentence-the solution to all the health concerns of American citizens!
You say you're a low-income single parent in Missoula with a critically ill child and your insurance carrier is giving you the run-around? Fly to Boston! You say you're a seriously sick senior citizen in Mesa, being told by your retirement health plan that your condition is a not-covered prior condition (i.e. breathing)? Fly to Boston! The probable reason that liberal bleeding-heart advisers never thought of this staggeringly simple solution to all our healthcare concerns is that it is just too simple!
There are no doubt a couple of minor details to straighten out before the idea can be fully implemented. For example, is it necessary to fly to Europe first, and then to Boston? Our people will be in touch with your people.

Lyle Davidson,
Downtown

Inside fireworks

I'm shocked and dismayed that you would allow the following statement to go to press and be distributed all over San Diego ["Presently Tense," July 3]:
"What's in fireworks? ... Shitloads of dangerous, polluting chemicals and heavy metals like lead, chromium, mercury, cadmium, strontium, copper, titanium, magnesium, aluminum, strontium, boric acid, potassium, rubidium, arsenic, tungsten, zinc chromate, radioactive barium, dioxins and much, much more!"
What are you trying to do, scare people to death? Make people so afraid to go to see a fireworks show that they will stop having them? That's far worse than the supposed dangers you are trying to educate the public about. If you had bothered to do any research before you published this, you would have discovered that:
1. Lead, chromium, mercury, cadmium, rubidium, arsenic, tungsten, zinc chromate, radioactive barium, and dioxins are all completely prohibited from all fireworks. Period.
2. Strontium compounds are used to produce the red color in fireworks, but strontium's ultimate reaction product is strontium sulfate, essentially insoluble and the naturally occurring mineral celestite.
3. Copper compounds are used to produce the blue color in fireworks, but copper is also used as a food mineral supplement, and copper is the 11th most abundant metal element in the Earth's crust.
4. Titanium shavings are used in fireworks to produce clouds of white sparks as they burn in the air, but its final reaction product is titanium oxide, an insoluble, naturally occurring mineral also called rutile, and it is a common paint pigment.
5. Magnesium is sometimes used in fireworks to produce very bright sparks as they burn in the air, but its final reaction product is magnesium oxide, an insoluble, naturally occurring mineral also called pericase, commonly used in cosmetics and pharmaceuticals.
6. Aluminum is sometimes used in fireworks, but its final reaction product is aluminum oxide, an insoluble, naturally occurring mineral also called alumina. Aluminum is the most abundant metal element in the Earth's crust.
7. Boric acid is rarely used in fireworks, but it is commonly used for medicinal purposes as an antiseptic and antibacterial, and occurs in nature as the mineral sassoolite.
8. Potassium is used in almost all fireworks. It is also in virtually all food mineral supplements as it is essential to human nutrition. It is the third most abundant metal in the Earth's crust.
9. The chemical reactions that produce the fireworks effects you see and hear take place in the air, and what drift down to the ground are tiny scraps of paper, which are biodegradable.
I can only hope that in the future you will do better research before you allow another fear-mongering article to reach the presses.

Bob Weaver,
Fireworksland.com

Editor's note: Columnist D.A. Kolodenko responds: "The list of chemicals used in fireworks came, in part, from a report by Larry West, a Pulitzer Prize-nominated journalist, who incorrectly included some chemicals that have recently been banned for use in the U.S. and I regret repeating this list. Mercury, lead, and arsenic are now banned but were also listed as fireworks ingredients of concern by San Diego Coastkeeper, the environmental group calling for better testing of Mission Bay. If Bob Weaver, who runs an online clearinghouse for fireworks sales, believes that perchlorates, barium and dioxins from burning copper are not dangerous to children swimming in the bay, then he should welcome the testing."

Pop a pill, D.A.

Re: "Presently Tense," July 3. I understand your frustration with giants like Anheuser-Busch and Pepsi and their version of corporate sponsored amusement....
I understand your frustration with SeaWorld being an overpriced tourist trap....
I understand your frustration with the EPA and the state and local Water Control Boards; I also commend your environmental concern....
And I most certainly understand your frustration with the noise....
But, dude, take a freakin' pill. It's just fireworks!

Jaret Young,
Encanto