Two Sides to Every Story

My letter to the editor will be in response to the following article:

http://www.startribune.com/nation/83845817.html?page=1&c=y

This article talks about a new agency, similar to the National Weather Service, proposed by the Obama administration to monitor and predict the effects of global warming.


In your article "With climate change comes new federal agency to track it" several good points are brought up. The article acknowledges that extremist views of global warming are not to be taken as the truth, as well as stating that an accurate prediction can help farmers and other people who rely upon the land for their well-being make good decisions for their businesses. However, while not taking an extremist perspective on the issues of climate change, the author still gives the impression that global warming will only have a negative effect that people must prepare for and adapt to. This is not the case. According to GlobalWarming.org, this gradual change in climate will bring benefits as well as potentially harmful conditions. These benefits include longer growing seasons, more rainfall, and fewer deaths due to cold, which right now outnumber deaths due to excessive heat. Most people are unaware of these potential benefits (I myself was until I did a little research after reading your article) and I believe it is the media's responsibility to publish such information, providing readers with multiple sides of a story, allowing them to make their own decisions.