Conclusion: It’s hyperbole
I have heard many people say, “A picture is worth a thousand words.” I failed to come up with any published research to support this statement. So I decided to conduct my own research.
I went to the Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary. It has numerous pictures and thousands of words. I tried to determine the relationship between the pictures and the number of words that describe the picture. I found a great variation.
For example, a picture of a megaphone was described in 10 words. A picture of some roots was supported by 301 words, which appeared to be the maximum number of descriptive words.
Therefore, I must conclude that “a picture is worth a thousand words” is a hyperbole and should be treated as such.
I think an actual look at an object is worth a thousand pictures.
However, this may also be a hyperbole.
Vaughan Jasper
Lewiston
Breaching not the answer
I appreciate Elaine Williams’ coverage of the Port of Lewiston meetings, but I need to correct her article in Thursday’s Lewiston Tribune.
When she included my statement that removing the dams would not cause the port to close, she failed to include the rest of my conversation.
Some people have indicated that the only reason I am against dam breaching is because it would close the port. That is not true. I am against breaching the dams because I don’t believe it will help with fish survival.
Congressman Simpson’s plan does not address ocean conditions, where salmon spend most of their lives. It doesn’t address predation.
I care about salmon recovery, but I don’t believe breaching the dams is the answer.
Mary Hasenoehrl
Lewiston
Trump is not a good leader
I am amazed that some Republicans are putting all their eggs in one basket, thinking they can’t win again unless Donald Trump remains the guiding force of the party.
Have the Republicans been fed lies so long that they don’t believe any decent, un-lying, un-self-serving candidate could possibly unite the party and win in the next election?
That is like saying there were no viable Republican candidates before Trump came along.
As one who helped get Reagan elected, I am appalled by this kind of thinking.
Joan Kopczynski
Spokane
Kudos to the vaccinators
My husband Dave and I were fortunate to receive the COVID-19 vaccination after registering for an appointment at our local health department. Members of the National Guard were there to usher us in a timely manner, and the process was seamless and efficient.
Kudos to our health department staff, Mike Larson and the National Guard for a wonderful experience and keeping Idaho safe. Thank you for your care.
Elizabeth Kendrick
Lewiston
Opinion can be a fine line
I have considered Brian Rhoades’ ideas about the columnists who cause so much damage by stating their delusions as if they were facts.
It is indeed sometimes dangerous, but I disagree that the Tribune editors bear responsibility for their subscribers’ lack of critical thinking skills.
It has been proven that it is very difficult to dissuade people from their sincerely held beliefs.
Consider the Religion section in the newspaper. The columnists in that section are sincere about what they believe and may be completely wrong. They shouldn’t be denied a voice simply because their statements can’t be proven.
I only hope that the Tribune will be able to continue entertaining me and offering various opinions for me to consider, along with the actual news. There is value in knowing what other people think.
Jody Favre
Lewiston
Prager’s nonsense
Dennis Prager’s column (Feb. 14) is a display of total scientific ignorance. There is no evidence that either hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin has any effect whatever on any kind of viral infection, and no biochemical reason to expect that they would.
The malarial parasite inhibited by hydroxychloroquine and the worm infections treated with ivermectin involve multicellular organisms. Disrupting multicellular biochemistry is done with drugs that don’t resemble the RNA or DNA inhibitors needed for viral infections.
And no, hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin are not totally harmless and risk-free, though they are well tolerated by most people.
Scientific opinions are based on scientific evidence, not politics. They are not “left wing” or “right wing.” People who push opinions that are out on a wing may not like science that doesn’t support their views, but science is based on evidence.
Don Matteson
Pullman
