Letters to the editor for March 4, 2009

George Will's March 1 column ("[Unnamed] experts debunk my [accurate] climate column") is sillier than the Feb. 15 column he is defending. None of the organizations he references concerning global warming and the extent of polar ice take the positions he ascribes to them. All of them make very unequivocal statements completely contrary to Will's assertions about their positions, as anyone can plainly see from a cursory viewing of their websites.

For example, Will references the U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center's reporting that a satellite monitoring sea ice malfunctioned and underestimated the extent of Arctic sea ice by 193,000 square miles, and he chides the New York Times for not reporting this. The NSIDC did indeed report the malfunction and subsequently reported that it switched to another satellite monitor. It further states that "the temporary error in the near real time data does not change the conclusion that arctic sea ice extent has been declining for the past three decades."

Will also exhibits a sort of nihilism wherein scientists are generally wrong and diametrically opposed viewpoints supplant each other endlessly. Actually, scientists are occasionally right (see the flat earth vs. round earth controversy), and some things are knowable.

Is there some reason anyone listens to George Will? Whatever the truth may be about global warming, he is not a reliable reporter on the subject.

GREG PETERSON, MINNEAPOLIS

•••

George Will's March 1 commentary about global warming provides a research center's web statement to support his claim that one stat in his commentary of two weeks ago was narrowly accurate. But he doesn't bother to mention that the same statement from the research center points out that the isolated fact Will cited should not be extrapolated to the "no global warming" conclusion that he ineptly tries to build.

Will's arguments about global warming are equivalent to saying: "It's really cold here today, so global warming can't be real."

CHUCK PRENTICE, EDINA

I was very disturbed to read about the lawyers who are grossly misrepresenting the facts about Asperger's syndrome ("Defense: Autism played role in Craigslist killing," Feb. 27).

Asperger's is not a mental illness, and it is not a form of mental retardation. People with Asperger's have average or above-average intelligence and are not emotionless. More importantly, Asperger's does not in any way make a person unable to tell right from wrong, nor does it make people more likely to commit a crime.

Asperger's is a neurological disorder related to autism, which reduces social skills and can cause hypersensitivity to sounds, smells or touch. People with Asperger's are socially awkward and think in unusual ways, but they are able to tell right from wrong. To suggest that people with Asperger's are somehow more prone to violence and crime is gravely wrong and unfair.

ELLEN SCHOUSBOE, ST. PAUL

A Feb. 28 letter says that if small businessmen want to avoid the additional taxes the president's plan is going to impose on them, all they have to do "is invest more of their income into their company, thus reducing their personal income tax liability."

Sorry -- that's not the way it works. The income that is available to be invested into the business for growth is money on which the tax has to be paid. Yes, this investment can be reclaimed over the next five to 30 years through depreciation, but it does not reduce current year tax liability one bit. Higher taxes will markedly reduce private investment, and thereby jobs.

In his address to the joint session of Congress, the president said that we need "credit liquidity so businesses can make their payroll." This may be true from time to time in the short term, but if you continue to borrow to make payroll, you will soon be out of business. Payroll and other costs must come from the margin made on the goods or service provided. As it should be, this is before income taxes. The only organization that can continue to borrow with no plan to ever pay back is the federal government.

JAMES CABAK, PLYMOUTH

The commitment of President Obama and Congress to reform the health care system is laudable and will help us achieve the vision of reforms that improve access to high-quality, affordable coverage for Americans, regardless of health status or employment ("Tough going as Obama, Congress focus on health care," Feb. 21). About 57 million Americans were in families that had problems paying medical bills in 2007 -- an increase of 14 million people since 2003. The troubled economy only increases the need for health system reforms.

It is a sad reality that the uninsured live sicker and die younger. We need comprehensive health system reform that makes private insurance more affordable, increases the value our nation receives from its health care spending, and enhances prevention and wellness for America's patients. With all Americans covered, patients will have better access to regular and preventive care that can help reduce the cost burden on the entire health care system. The American Medical Association is actively working to improve the health care system for America's patients and the physicians who care for them.

JOSEPH M. HEYMAN, CHICAGO;

CHAIR, AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION