A foreclosure story; a global warming denier; helping the Earth heal

Do some homework

Re “Living on borrowed time,” Feb. 27

This article, about homeowners who are still in their home after a possible foreclosure sale, made some good points but could have been more clear about the legal status of the property.

This couple appeared to be uninformed whether their house had been sold in a foreclosure sale. The article states: “The bank sent a notice by FedEx in October demanding $3,000, and when the Harrisons called to discuss this notice, they were told they had four days to vacate the house.” Who told them this, and why did they believe them?

With proper legal representation, they could have known whether or not there had been a notice of default or notice of sale recorded against their property; if the house had been sold; and if so, if the new owner had started legal eviction proceedings.

Also, the borrowers would have been provided appropriate defenses for each stage of the proceeding, starting with the loan modification application.

Deborah R. Bronner
Los Angeles
The writer is an attorney specializing in foreclosure law.

A science teacher’s view

Re “Getting global warming right,” Editorial, March 3

In Wednesday’s editorial, you again attack the rationality of global warming “deniers.”

As a fifth-grade public school science teacher, I am one of those deniers -- as are thousands of respected climatologists.

Global warming scientists simply do not have solid scientific evidence behind their claims. What they do have is human-programmed computer modeling, error-filled statistical sampling, government-driven “crisis” funding and an anti-capitalist ideology.

Actual science is driven by facts, logic, inductive reasoning and a love of the truth.

Global warming is a hoax, plain and simple.

Ray Shelton
Glendale

Mother Earth needs you

Re “It’s no longer a garden spot,” Opinion, March 2

This Op-Ed is one of the most important articles The Times has ever published.

To continue on the path we’re on is to choose not just a bleak future but probably no future at all. An economic system that encourages constant expansion and consumption, mixed with exponential population growth, is poisoning the ecological balance.

The canary in the coal mine is already dead and buried under tons of dirt from the mountaintop-removal mining business.

Perhaps a new belief system is now needed, in which Mother Earth is elevated to her rightful position as creator of all life, and where sustaining her health is the paramount concern of all civilized people.

We need to find our way back into the wilderness, where the true promised land awaits us.

James Martin
Claremont

The Earth has never been in a “quasi-steady environmental state.”

Tectonic plates move continents around, ice ages come and go, and the sun is expected to do strange things to our planet before it finally expires.

Keeping our planet in the status quo isn’t an alternative. Nor is restricting population growth and every person’s upward striving -- unless professors Bruce E. Mahall and

F. Herbert Bormann want to name the people who will be forbidden from having children and consigned to a life of relative poverty.

Arthur Armstrong
Manhattan Beach

The writers eloquently state what things must be done to “determine the fate of life on our planet.”

But who would step forward to save us from ourselves? I can’t think of any institution or individual with the resources and the will to do it. But I can think of many with the resources and the will to defeat it. Are we doomed?

Thomas Mann
Pasadena

It won’t matter if one believes or doesn’t in what is happening to our Earth -- whether it is our fault or not, the results will be the answer.

Or to quote a famous line in a movie, the Earth will say, “Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.”

Saran Kirschbaum
Los Angeles

Methane mechanics

Re “Manure power raises a stink,” March 1

It’s admirable that farmers are trying to help clean up our air, and sad that they are getting mucked up in the process.

But the straight poop is that we’d all be a lot better off if the farms were converted to produce food that didn’t have to pass through a cow before it gets to consumers.

For the health of our environment as well as humans, isn’t it time we intelligently decide it’s better not to “have a cow”?

Tim I. Martin
Corona

Though it is true that these innovative dairymen who made significant investments in digesters with generators that don’t meet the air requirements are in a tough spot, this is only a partial view of the issue.

It is unfortunate that The Times’ story did not discuss a solution that is working and meeting the air district’s requirements: capturing the methane, scrubbing it and injecting it into a utility’s existing natural gas line.

Our Vintage Dairy digester is an example of a project that injects bio-methane directly into the pipeline. Other dairies in the state are pursuing this option as well.

Despite the strict regulations on air quality, there are solutions available that can meet the needs of both the dairy farmers and the regulators.

Renee Rippchen
Bakersfield
The writer is vice president of sales and marketing for BioEnergy Solutions.

Diagnosing disorders

Re “It’s not too late to save ‘normal,’ ” Opinion, March 1

Thank you for the excellent article by Allen Frances on the ever-narrowing definition of “normal” created by each new revision/expansion of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

He missed the mark widely, though, in asserting that the tendency of experts to expand their own favorite disorders is not caused by their own conflicts of interests “but rather from a genuine desire to avoid missing suitable patients who might benefit.”

This ignores a huge economic incentive for so-called experts to enrich themselves and their pharmaceutical enablers by widening the definition of mental disorders.

Frances should leave the discussion of perverse economic incentives to behavioral economists. We have a medical-care crisis today precisely because the economic incentives for providers are wildly out of whack.

Joseph Bonino
Glendale

The development of DSM-V has been a complex process involving more than 400 clinicians, researchers and patient advocates. The drafts of the revised diagnostic categories are now available for public comment. Although the effort began over 10 years ago, it is still very much a work in progress. Final decisions ultimately will be based on a careful review of the most current data available.

No one has all the answers. Specific criteria will and should continue to evolve and change over time, based on research findings. However, the current proposals represent a significant step forward in our ability to design and conduct more accurate studies into the causes and treatment of psychiatric disorders.

David Fassler, MD
Burlington, Vt.
The writer is a clinical professor of psychiatry at the University of Vermont and secretary-treasurer of the American Psychiatric Assn.