The debate on Global Warming has become as futile as a discussion of the Mideast without ever mentioning Iran, Iraq, Syria or Afghanistan.

While concerned scientists exhale ever-increasing volumes of hot air the causes of global warming grow unchecked. Solar energy is being received at the greatest rate in the last 1,000 years. Population growth - banned from the debate by religious pressure groups at the Rio Summit - is at its highest level ever (remember it's PEOPLE who cause it all!) Aspirations to higher and higher levels of consumerism have infected virtually the entire population of the planet. Green areas are being destroyed to support the growth in population and "living standards"
Water vapor, now identified as a critical catalyst in all Greenhouse processes, forms the basis of hydrogen power and many other "green alternatives".
To the Intelligent and Informed observer, it looks as if we've already admitted defeat and are behaving as if the problem will go away if no one admits it exists.
Most alarming of all, we are ignoring the fact that paleoclimatic records prove that the planet has more often than not been a hostile place to live - too cold as well as too hot for comfort.
By the way, what is our strategy for reversing a runaway cooling cycle?
Verily, Know thy planet as well as thy self. And be HONEST!

The planet is as cool as Fonzie. All's I know is the forsythia is in bloom---and its January 27, not March 27, and I was in shorts all day.

What cowardice... You are still not allowing comments on the washpost blog, and have not posted any of the emailed comments to the article where you say you stand by the 'directed contributions' statement (it must be noted that you earlier suggested you would post emailed comments... Also, Howell promised she would reply to all email sent to her -- I sent two very polite emails a week ago and still no reply -- so now I'm being a little less polite.)

Also you have not linked to reporting by Bloomberg and The Wall Street Journal that shows your position to be untenable. Further, it's incomprehensible that you have had no mention of the report by Dwight L. Morris and Associates.

Krugman in the NY Times today finishes demolishing the sad excuse for journalism that has been your coverage of the scandal surrounding Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

As Krugman says, "these journalists are acting as enablers for the rampant corruption that has emerged in Washington over the last decade."

Strong words, and wholly deserved.

And will Jim Brady ever address this:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/1/27/22034/6577

And will Jim VandeHei ever address this:
http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2005/7/25/21720/6087/22#22

Is there anyone at all left in the national politics beat of the Post who is not in bed with Republican operatives, either metaphorically, literally, or both?

P.S. -- Dear all-mighty Censor of the uncouth plebeians: I don't believe these to be 'personal attacks'. They are issues and credible allegations that are out there in the open and that the Post needs to respond to.

It's way beyond sad, it's becoming downright scary. The Bush administration is attempting to silence NASA's top climate expert http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/science/earth/29climate.html?th&emc=th. Meanwhile, right wingers with anger management problems and no science degree are claiming there is no such thing as global warming - but they have no scientific basis to back up this claim. It's actually commonly known that with increased levels of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, comes increased global mean tempuratures. Case in point; the planet Venus. Venus is similar to Earth in size and distance to the sun. There is a thick cloud layer which blankets the entire planet. With so little UV light sneaking in, you would think the planet would be relatively cool, however, the surface tempurature is around 900 degrees farenheit. The reason for this: very high levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide. It is widely understood by scientists that burning fossil fuels on Earth, which produce water vapor and carbon dioxide as byproducts of burning, would produce a rise in atmospheric temperature. Furthermore, if the rising temperature approches the boiling point of water, the oceans would convert to water vapor, the water vapor would increase the effectiveness of heat trapping and accelerate the greenhouse effect, this would cause the temperature to rise further, thus causing the oceans to evaporate faster, etc. This "runaway" is also called a "positive feedback loop". With the oceans gone, the atmosphere would finally stabilize at a much higher temperature and at much higher density, because all the water would now be in the atmosphere.

With all we know today, what's the point in gambling any longer? There are so many alternative energy sources that we should be at the forefront of developing this technology. We have the means to start cleaning up our act. We can turn things around! My brothers and sisters, it's incredibly foolish to continue on this path.

I was very disappointed by the article about the so-called "tipping point" in the Post because I believe that it is nonsense. In response to the post by Listen Up, I would say that I am a retired professional scientist, 150 refereed papers, $3million in grants, honorary degree etc etc. My field is not climate science but it bears some resemblance in that it has required me to study the absorption of solar radiation in the terrestrial atmosphere.
The IPCC has made extensive use of a paper by Michael Mann and others which purports to show that the Earth's temperature has incresed sharply in the last century. This work has been sharply criticised by others, the initial criticism coming from two Canadians, Steve McIntyre and Ross McKitrick. They explain their reasoning on their website, climateaudit.org and in published papers in refereed journals.
It is true that Mann and collaborators have rejected this criticism, but their comments are primarily on own their web site, realclimate.org where they can remove critical posts.
More recently, extensive criticism of Mann et al has come on two other independent sites,
www.eurotrib.com/story/2006/2/2/7340/85099
and
www.dailykos.com/comments/2006/1/20/7194/94155/62#62.
It is quite noticeable that the reponses of Mann et al are much harsher and more strident than the comments of the critics.
I am sorry that the Post published their article without being aware of the current state of the science. I remember a previous articel in Outlook, of perhaps a year ago, which was just as bad.
Stssgabs100

of course it's something to be concerned about. (global warming) hello don't you idiots get it when it's 70 degrees and it's late January when ther's supposed to be 3 feet of snow!!!! hello something isn't right!!!!!

Shame on the post. Your cartoon of a wounded soldier marks the lowest possible, irresponsible piece of jornalism in the history of the fourth estate. I will never read the post again.
May you rot in hell for the damage you have done to our military. Why??

can someone help me.... im writing a report on global warming and climate control.... please... i dont understand.

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.