Bear Nonsense

Why would the Post run an op-ed by Michael Gerson ["No Friends of the Ice Bears," July 18] that showed a lack of understanding of evolution and of the effect humans have on the environment, while implying that environmentalists are bigots?

Mr. Gerson said, "If the ice floes . . . were to melt entirely, the bears could probably adapt by genetically joining their relatives on land." Not in the few decades that this event is predicted to take. Fruit flies maybe, mammals, no. This is junior high school biology.

Mr. Gerson also said that "a disturbing minority of the environmental movement seems to view an excess of human beings, not an excess of carbon emissions, as the world's main problem." The emissions problem wouldn't exist without people. More people mean more pollution and more demand on resources. It's simple.

Finally, Mr. Gerson said, "But no movement will succeed with this argument: Because we in the West have emitted so much carbon, there needs to be fewer people who don't look like us." No, Mr. Gerson, environmentalists understand there is a need for fewer people who aspire to live like "us" -- including us. And that most of the world's emissions growth will be in less-developed countries. Again, it's simple cause and effect.

I found Mr. Gerson's veiled accusation of bigotry offensive and simplistic. I think he owes environmentalists an apology. And I would ask The Post to be more discerning about what appears on the op-ed page.

ERIC WEINSTEIN

McLean