The Global Warming Debate

I was delighted to see your cover story promising information about another side of the global-warming issue, but I was disappointed to see that you focused primarily on politics rather than science. You miss the key point. The debate is less about whether the Earth’s climate is warming as it is about the extent to which man’s activities contribute to warming. The good news is that many of the efforts put forward to reduce human contributions to warming are positive from a cultural and general environmental perspective regardless of whether they will materially affect warming. But because global warming has taken on the religious fervor of the temperance movement, it risks imposing rules that may harm developing nations and, by knee-jerk ridicule of those with differing perspectives, it creates a climate that is inhospitable to discovering the truth.

Grace Novick

Providence, R.I.

Kudos to Sharon Begley for her superb, well-researched and -written, comprehensive, much-needed debunking of those who claim that “Global Warming Is a Hoax.” I hope it will provide the breakthrough we need to start effectively responding to global climate change. There is another issue that bears out the quip that denial is not just a river in Egypt: the failure to address the major impact that animal-based agriculture has on global warming. According to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization’s November 2006 report “Livestock’s Long Shadow,” livestock agriculture emits more greenhouse gases (in CO2 equivalents) than all the world’s transportation sources combined, and the report projects that the number of farmed animals will double in the next 50 years. So among the many steps essential to avoid the potential unprecedented catastrophe from global warming, a major shift toward plant-based diets is essential.

Richard H. Schwartz

Professor Emeritus, College of Staten Island