Letters To The Editor – For The Record

I HIT the ceiling when I opened my November MINING ENGINEERING and after waiting a week to cool off I' still find it necessary to express my resentment of the gross libel embodied in the editorial introduction to Norman Stines' legitimate criticism of my paper on "Russia's Mineral Potential" (p. 949). The underlying thesis of my article, and a point that I tried to make even more clearly in my oral presentation at the St. Louis meeting last February, is that we should not over estimate the present and near-future mineral production of the USSR. The words that I resent in your boxed introduction are: "Opinions range from those presented by Paul Tyler ... to those of Norman C. Stines . . ." This is not merely an understatement that can be defended by admitting that the range goes much farther to the left, beyond me. It represents the appraisal that 90 pct of your members will carry away, namely that I am not only an incompetent observer-which may be true-but always that my bias is to applaud the efficiency of the beasts in the Kremlin-which is not true. Notwithstanding my efforts to clarify the record I now find myself branded as being at the opposite pole from 'Mr. Stines among the red-eyed worshipers of Communism or at least among the timid souls that shake in their boots in the belief that the Soviet system has created an invincible as well as an evil menace to the decent peoples of the world. My ideas are somewhere in the middle ground between Mr. Stines' complaisance or contempt and the exaggerated fears of several other observers whose views have received wide acceptance. PAUL M. TYLER MINERAL TECHNOLOGIST & ECONOMIST 5005 EDGEMOOR LANE, BETHESDA, MD. The introductory paragraph to Mr. Stines' criticism of Mr. Tyler's article (Russia's Mineral Potential, June issue MINING ENGINEERING, page 494) is erroneous as pointed out in author Tyler's letter above. In his article he objectively presented an estimate of the mineral position of the Soviet based on the statistics available to him which sources are credited in the first paragraph of his article. We happen to know that, Mr. Tyler was reluctant to prepare the article for the Mineral Economics Division sessions at the 1951 Annual Meeting and did so only because of his loyalty to AIME. It was thought that this article would be a basis for discussion of this important subject at the Annual Meeting. We apologize to Mr. Tyler for any embarrassment our introduction, may have caused him. Editor