You recently published two opinion pieces that may, on the surface, have nothing to do with each other. I suggest they do.

Doug Rogers penned a reasoned, impassioned, fact-based piece decrying the ongoing genocide—or certainly, mass death, if one wanted to quibble about definitions—in Gaza.

He asks how otherwise decent, moral people can back a government that supports this murder.

Why don’t people care?

Then we have a letter to the editor decrying the “fact” that there are less “beautiful, clear blue skies” than there used to be. 

The writer claims the reason for this is “Atmospheric aerosol injection and solar radiation management” perpetrated by—she doesn’t really say, though she implies it’s the government of New York state.

Why don’t people care?

She fails to mention the mountains of evidence that actually does explain why weather patterns are different, climate change, and she is correct to assume people will scoff at her claims, not only because they have been debunked by facts and science for decades, but what would be the purpose of these deliberate acts?

A government conspiracy against blue skies?

I said these articles were related. I think that whatever it is that causes people to become impassioned about nonsense is the same thing that causes people to be disinterested in hard truth.

What is it? Human nature, unfortunately.

Pam Arnold
Equinunk, PA