Letters to the Editor 05/18/2005

To the Editor:

To all who attended the combined concert at the high school on May 9, wasn’t it great? The high school concert band was outstanding. We are so glad we got to hear their performance right before they departed for the state contest.

The Air Force wind ensemble was also wonderful.

To those who missed it, we can only say that next time the high school or middle school has a musical or drama performance, be sure to attend. We have an outstanding music program in the Sisters School District. These kids are GOOD! and they have excellent teachers.

Your next opportunity to see Sisters High School students perform is this weekend at the musical revue Musical Chairs.

We.are looking forward to going and hope to see you all there!

Paul and Sue Edgerton

s s s

To the Editor:

I am a home owner at Black Butte Ranch, but I feel so strongly about the future of the City of Sisters.

I was born and raised in Corvallis, Oregon, and spent many summers on the Metolius River where my grandparents had a cabin.

There are wonderful memories and Sisters was one of them. Now that we have a home at BBR we bring our grandchildren up to this area and what fun it is to take them into Sisters for a short visit.

We love all the quaint stores that the local people have tried so hard to make a living at. That is the beauty of Sisters — local people doing business. Sisters is still a charming city, but things can go bad quickly when nobody is minding the store.

I hope the planning commission and the city council can work together to put an ordinance together that will keep Sisters a wonderful charming place to bring our grandchildren.

Gail Emmons

s s s

To the Editor:

In response to Andrea Schleufer’s letter (The Nugget, May 11) concerning her autistic daughter: I can completely relate because I have a son with a type of autism (Asperger’s Syndrome).

Our son, who is 12 now, began to read at the age of two; he could hum an entire song after only hearing it one time; but would not respond when we called his name — completely absorbed in a world of his own.

The good news is that we love Sisters and are very thankful to live here. One of the reasons we moved here is because we were very impressed with the schools.

The bad news is, because our son’s disability affects him mostly on a social level, he is often made fun of, coming home very discouraged after being called cruel names. As a result of this, we are home schooling next year.

My point? Everyone is always saying what a unique and wonderful community Sisters is — and I agree! So let’s be unique from the rest of the world and change our mind-set, teaching our children to be accepting, compassionate and tolerant, rather than judgmental, ignorant, avoiding or treating others who are different in a negative manner.

It starts with the adults first!

Holly Faludi

s s s

To the Editor:

Although these comments are too late to affect the school board election, Mr. Piatt’s remarks in Wednesday’s May 11, Nugget should not go unchallenged.

I will follow his lead and be blunt as well; intelligent design (ID) should not be in the science curriculum because it is not science.

Science develops explanatory structures based on evidence derived from measurements of natural phenomena. These “theories” stand or fall on their ability to explain the natural world. This experimental approach has proven remarkably successful in describing and predicting natural phenomena.

Airplanes fly, we fix human bodies, send machines to Mars and realize myriad other benefits all because the scientific method works so well.

Evolution is the result of applying this method to living things and forms the basis of all life sciences. The great majority of biologists, including many with religious convictions, accept evolution because the supporting evidence on every level is so overwhelming (in spite of Mr. Piatt’s assertion to the contrary).

In contrast, ID is a collection of ideas mostly from biblical themes. These ideas do not lend themselves to empirical verification so cannot be tested by scientific methods. The general ID approach was proposed before Darwin, but rejected because its ideas could not be tested. ID is also a recent incarnation of creationism, an attempt to infuse religious ideas into the scientific curriculum. The only “fear” of ID in the scientific community is its effect in diverting support and resources from true scientific effort.

Because ID cannot be addressed by the scientific method (although perhaps appropriate for classes in philosophy or history of religion) it does not belong in science classes. Our students have much to learn about science; unnecessarily adding peripheral subject matter to their studies is counterproductive.

Bob Thomas