Dear Editor:
So Cameron Diaz is more luscious as a blonde than a brunette? Since when does Grist publish this type of sexist garbage and then not remove it from its website, despite the protests of readers?
Our family has supported Grist in the past but will no longer do so. From now on, I'll rely on environmental news sources that don't denigrate women.
Courtenay Dusenbury
Atlanta, Ga.
Dear Editor:
"[S]lightly less luscious now that she's a brunette"? Treating women like sex objects is wrong. I am a woman who reads your column every week, and I am sick of seeing articles, especially in Grist List, that glorify the objectification of women. If next week's column doesn't contain a humongous apology and a vow to never again publish such sexist material, I quit reading your list. I don't suffer sexist pigs.
Sara Jund
Dear Editor:
Hey, your blonde vs. brunette Cameron Diaz comment is out of place here. I'm a brunette, myself, you see, and though I don't lack for comments that I look like Sonia Braga -- another brunette -- even by personal friends of hers, and therefore am not coming from a place of insecurity, there are many other brunettes out there who might well be offended and alienated, for their own reasons. The loyalty of Grist readers who might help make a difference in this world is, I think, more important to maintain than indulging in such divisive and self-indulgent comments.
Marcela Cruz
Editor's Note: The author of the piece in question is a total babe brunette herself, and intended only to note that Diaz -- like most people -- looks better with her natural hair color. So don't go getting all hysterical.
Dear Editor:
Live8 was a scam. So [are these Live Earth concerts]. Rich people make themselves richer, pretending to care. Famous people make themselves famouser by pretending to care. And a bunch of overfed middle-class gluttons get to see another concert, pretending to care. And still nothing changes. Give me a break. Now that it's hip to "care" about climate change, every Tom, Dick, and Harry can drive their car to these electrified shows. For what? Grist was once funny, even incisively witty (although never very deep). Now, you're becoming part of the problem. Can someone please tell me why this is environmental news? Or why Grist editors waste their time promoting it? Seriously? Is there a carefully observant mind in residence over there in your Seattle hip shop? Or is everyone of you vying for top billing on the "too cool to be careful/thoughtful/helpful" slate?
Ick, ugh, puh-lease! Open them eyes, stop surfing the web, and get back to the earth.
Dear Editor:
I think you're mistaken about microwaved tea losing its heat faster than water heated in other ways. There's no physical reason why the molecular excitation caused by microwaves would be any different from that caused by a flame or electric element. Heat's heat, in other words.
The reason it may seem like microwaved foods and tea don't keep their heat is that they're not evenly heated. If you taste a cup of tea right after you take it out of the microwave, you're tasting the hottest part, but it'll even out quickly to a cooler temperature.
Solid or semi-solid foods have to sit for a while for the temperature to equalize after they've been heated in a microwave. That's why microwaved food in an insulated container doesn't seem to stay warm as long.
Virginia Downs
Lubbock, Texas
Dear Editor:
Umbra, I'm usually a fan of your well-informed responses, but your comment that, "in my opinion, microwaved water doesn't hold heat long enough to make decent tea" just doesn't hold water. The heat capacity of water is unrelated to the method used to heat it; water of a certain temperature doesn't "care" how it got there.
I challenge you to a blindfold taste test of tea made with water heated in the microwave vs. water heated in an electric kettle.
The microwave is clearly the most efficient method to heat water for any purpose. Not to mention that an electric kettle is an appliance that is only good for one purpose (heating water) while a microwave can serve many functions (heating anything) making it superior from the manufacturing and durable goods standpoint as well.
Dear Editor:
While I applaud IKEA's wonderful environmental initiatives, please remember the human cost of keeping prices so low. Over half of Ikea's products are manufactured in developing countries, where workers are not (or are barely) paid a livable wage, are required to work overtime for little or no extra pay, and are prevented from engaging in collective bargaining.
Dear Editor:
Sorry, folks, but David Feld was way off base with his comments. First, there are a number of species of Canada geese. The one Mr. Feld refers to is the giant Canada goose, which is non-migratory and almost became extinct by the middle of the last century. Wildlife biologists in several states decided to introduce resident populations on a broader scale and thus reduce the possibilities of the entire species dying out if something catastrophic happened to the remaining population found only in Missouri.
Over the decades following the initial transplant effort, the population expanded, then exploded. Remember, this species was never migratory -- they've always nested and remained in one place. At first the geese were relocated around various lakes that also served as wildlife areas. Then, over the years, as the population grew, the birds spread out to colonize places offering food, nesting habitat, and safety. Unfortunately for the geese, these were water features at golf courses, city parks, and other small lakes within urban areas.
Today the once-endangered giant Canada goose is a fixture in a number of communities, and often cursed by city dwellers who despise the mess they make around their tidy city lakes. Most criticize the amount of goose poop, especially golfers who don't want it on their shoes and (golf) balls. As you might imagine, there is no natural predation in cities to keep numbers in check, and as it stands, the geese may soon outnumber the golfers.
Basically, the saga of the giant Canada goose is simply one of a biological effort to save a diminishing species that succeeded all too well. To date, some states now allow hunting seasons, but that doesn't make much of an impact around the country club. I have them on a pond near my urban residence, and find they're a beautiful addition to the neighborhood. As for goose poop, I long ago learned how to keep my shoes clean.
Gary Lantz
Norman, Okla.
Re: We're Just a Lincoln Your Chain
Dear Editor:
I absolutely love your style of punnery and humor! What prompted me to write this was "Barack in the saddle" on Feb. 16. You guys are great -- keep up the great work.
Joyce Jordan-Peek
Cameron Diaz films eco-documentary, takes on role as planet’s publicist
Comments
View as Threaded
Ivriniel Posted 3:23 am
03 Mar 2007
I found David Feld's comments somewhat questionable myself.
Especially his claim that Canada geese in Canada are migratory. Perhaps he'd like to come to Toronto and explain that to the geese that are taking over my neighbourhood?
We have a flock of geese living in the school yard, another one living in the mall parking lot, and a third one living on the front lawn of the local Sikh temple.
Canada geese will stay anywhere in their breeding range where there is adequate food and open water throughout the winter. What's more, their breeding range is not restricted to Canada, as Mr. Feld's comments implied.
Ivriniel
Permalink
Ivriniel Posted 3:33 am
03 Mar 2007
If you're making tea in a uncovered cup instead of a pot, you'll be hard pressed to have it keep warm enough for long enough to make a proper cup of tea regardless of what method for heating the water you use.
Ivriniel
Permalink
Delay And Deny Posted 1:46 am
04 Mar 2007
Wait a minute -- a bunch of guys rapping about Cameron Diaz' hair color is sexist...but Cameron Diaz playing an airhead in "Full Throttle" is hearing women roar?
Permalink
caniscandida Posted 3:42 am
05 Mar 2007
http://www.birds.cornell.edu/AllAboutBirds/BirdGuide/Cana ...
But David Allen Sibley refers to the Common Canada goose as "the largest and most widespread." And the National Geographical Society's "Field Guide to the Birds of North America," Second Edition, with an apparently outdated range map showing no presence in southern Ontario and Quebec and the NE US, gives the names of four subspecies, none of which is B. c. maxima. Similarly, Peterson refers to "the Atlantic race," and implies that that is the largest.
The Cornell page also supports Ivriniel's observation that Canada geese are found year-round in southern Canada. One would need to distinguish whether the same individuals are year-round residents, or whether there is seasonal alternation of northern and southern populations.
I am grateful to Gary Lantz for commenting on the beauty of these animals, and on how it is not too difficult a problem to learn to co-exist with them.
Permalink
Ivriniel Posted 12:09 am
11 Mar 2007
According to the Canadian Wildlife Service's Hinterland Who's Who on Canada Geese there's dispute about how the various races of Canada Geese should be organized but this is what the CWS has to say about the Giant Canada Goose:
One race, the Giant Canada Goose, used to breed in southern Canada and the northern United States but disappeared from most of its range by the late 1800s. Early settlers may have gathered Giant Canada Goose eggs and rounded up and slaughtered many of the geese during the flightless moulting period. Beginning in the early 1900s, Canada Geese from captive breeding flocks were reintroduced into the southern parts of their former range. This practice continued through much of the 20th century, and Canada Geese were eventually restored in Pennsylvania, New York, Ontario, and west to southern Alberta. During this period, geese were also introduced to areas where they may not have bred before.
These reintroduced populations have since exploded, and Canada Geese have become a nuisance in many areas. The birds thrive under the close protection and feeding opportunities they find in parks, near suburban wetlands, and on lawns or golf courses. Because no hunting takes place in these areas, there are few natural factors working to limit population growth and disperse the birds. Populations of urban Canada Geese are still growing, and the range of these birds is still expanding. Problems associated with geese include droppings on lawns and beaches, which may contaminate drinking water sources, aggressive behaviour toward humans, and collisions with aircraft. Wildlife managers are increasingly being asked to balance the careful conservation of some types of Canada Geese with programs designed to limit or reduce populations coming into conflict with agriculture or other human activities. To deal with problem geese, the Canadian Wildlife Service has liberalized hunting regulations as much as possible. It has also allowed other management options under permit.
http://www.hww.ca/hww2.asp?id=35
In any case, according to Wikipedia the American Ornithological Union reorganized the subspecies of Canada Geese in July of 2004. Maybe your bird books predate that?
Ivriniel
Permalink