DEMEANING WORDS WON'T HELP WARRIORS

As a lifelong Hawaii resident who went to college elsewhere, I still cheer for our university's athletic teams, irrespective of how their seasons are going. Our UH football team is facing a tough season, and I for one am not going to abandon them. They continue to fight their way through the adversity of graduation, injuries and the loss of recruits, as they do their best to represent our university and, by extension, our state.

For David Shapiro to castigate Greg McMackin for the difficulties of the team is inappropriate, to lob personal attacks is truly without class and to criticize UH for hiring a former assistant coach is ridiculous. Nearly every Division I NCAA football coach began his career as an assistant, including the great Joe Paterno at Penn State. Coach McMackin's salary is well in line with what other universities pay their football coaches. In 2007, the Chronicle of Higher Education reported that the average Division I football coach's annual salary was $1 million.

Demeaning and insulting words from a local newspaper columnist certainly won't help the Warriors' efforts. Some positive support from sideline critics like Shapiro would help dispel the notion that Hawaii fans support only winners.

randy perreira | Executive director, Hawaii Government Employees Association

GLOBAL WARMING

CONTROVERSIAL VIEW DESERVED PUBLICATION

I think Mr. Metzler (Letters, Nov. 9) misses an important point. He states that Mr. McDermott's commentary (Nov. 2) voicing great skepticism about global warming has no place in the Honolulu Advertiser.

The editorial section, which includes commentary, is the place for people to express their opinions. Skepticism about global warming is an opinion held by a significant percentage of the population. It is my opinion that not only was it proper for that commentary to be published, but this newspaper had an obligation to publish it or a similar commentary. It is not the editorial staff's job to vet each commentary, but rather to ensure a broad range of opinions are presented.

The global-warming issue, while complex, will affect nearly everyone, whether it is loss of coastal real estate due to sea-level rise or increased energy costs brought about by increased regulation of fossil fuels. Mr. McDermott's commentary did spark debate on the editorial page about the global-warming issue, so it seems to me the system is working!

robert whittier | Aiea

DATA DON'T WARRANT ECONOMIC UPHEAVAL

Poor Bob McDermott. His article critical of global-warming theory (Nov. 2) caused a plague of Ph.D. letters to fall upon his house. However, the Ph.D.s failed to mention the ongoing dispute among scientists regarding the fundamental underpinnings of global-warming theory.

In science, the credibility of supporting data is everything. Accurate global temperature data is essential for evaluating the global-warming hypothesis that rests on the proposition that temperatures have risen sharply in the 20th century. This conclusion, described by the famous hockey-stick graph used in the UN IPCC report, comes from temperature data derived from analysis of tree growth over the last century. The statistical methods used to come up with this temperature data have been shown to be flawed. Google Ross McKitrick and Stephen McIntyre for the details.

The accuracy of temperature data from other sources is also in dispute. Surface temperature collection sites are commonly located so that temperature data are compromised. Satellite-based microwave technology used to measure the temperature of the lower atmosphere is also in dispute.

The question is this: Is the scientific data good enough to warrant the drastic economic upheaval that global-warming theorists advocate? For me, the answer is no.

Jeff pace | Kapahulu

FORT HOOD

SHOOTING QUALIFIES AS SUICIDE TERROR ACT

How is what "suspect" Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan did at Fort Hood any different than the actions taken by the many Islamic "suicide bombers" in Iraq, Afghanistan and, more recently, Pakistan?

This "suicide shooter" at Fort Hood had no intention of walking away from his act of terror, just as his fellow suicide bombers know their fate well before they detonate the bombs strapped to their chests.

Plain and simple, the Fort Hood shooting was a "terrorist attack" on Americans in America by an Islamic "suicide shooter." There, I said it. Someone had to say it. Everyone is thinking it but are too afraid to actually say it out loud for fear of being called a "racist." The politically correct police will be knocking at my door soon.

paul e. staples | Kailua