1218SCHOOLAUDDavid Shumake, Gainesville’s assistant superintendent for curriculum and instruction, talks about the benefits of attaining charter system status.
As most Georgians know, on Nov. 13, Gov. Perdue, along with some high profile Atlanta preachers and a number of duped lay people, assembled on the steps of the Capitol to pray for rain.
Granted, Scripture does indicate that the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much. However, in my opinion, if all the righteousness possessed by this prayer group was atomic energy, there wouldn't be enough to blow Gov. Perdue's nose. Only a true politician could conceive and have the guts to gather a group of people under the guise of praying for rain at a time when it's smooth cloudy and all prognostication, from the Farmers Almanac to the National Weather Service, is predicting rain.
As I listened to the religious rhetoric and watched the comical gestures of supplication, I was reminded of how ineffective the prophets of Baal were in their vain attempts to bring fire down from heaven to consume their sacrifice. The only thing that seemed to be missing from the governor's attempt to bring rain down from heaven was hysterical shouting and ritual blood-letting.
The governor and other like-minded people seem to believe that what little rain fell in the area was an "affirmation" of their prayer efforts. However, I am a firm believer that science and skills all prevail over superstition and ignorance. Therefore, as The Times reported on page one of the Nov. 16, issue that "Cold front brings rain to Georgia," not prayers for rain.
So in the future, all you Elmer Gantry rainmaker types pray for cold fronts. By doing so you will be killing two birds with one stone. In addition to replenishing North Georgia's water supply to the point where industry and developers can resume the rape and plunder of our communities, you will be doing your part to help solve the "global warming" problem.
William P. Clark
Are mussels in Florida really endangered?
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that two species of freshwater mussels in Florida bays are in danger of extermination unless the Corps of Engineers continues to release quantities of water greatly in excess of original or normal low flows in the Chattahoochee River.
Does something seem out of sync in this scenario? If these mussels existed before the reservoirs were built, they certainly endured natural flows lower than any they have endured since lake construction.
I'm not privy to Corps flow records, but common sense would tell you that they have been augmenting flows during low flow periods for various reasons, including sewage dilution, for the past 40 years.
If this is the case, how could the mussels' viability be of concern, as long as flows equal to lowest recorded natural levels (pre-dam construction) are maintained?
It would be interesting to know just what criteria the Fish and Wildlife Service used in justifying "endangered" status. Since the mussels have been enjoying elevated flow levels for many years, is it possible that some other limiting factor may be affecting their population level?
As far as I'm concerned, it is ridiculous to put the welfare of a few hundred mussels before the needs of millions of people, even if it means the mussels' demise.
It would be even worse to burden the people along the river corridor if it is determined later that faulty science was used by a government agency just "playing it safe."
Monte E. Seehorn