Views and deabtes on climate change policy
Home | Panelists | Staff Blog | RSS

Planet Panelists

Archive: November 22, 2009 - November 28, 2009

Science calls for us to be open minded

The scientists at the University of East Anglia who sought to curtail opposing thoughts were acting out of selfish reasons, seeking to justify their own positions on climate change. The same can be said for those who have used this forum to make personal attacks on members of this Planet Panel.

By Rick Edmund | November 26, 2009; 9:19 AM ET | Comments (6)

An admission that the science is sound

The fulminations of climate skeptics in the wake of the release of electronic documents stolen from the University of east Anglia demonstrates more clearly than ever that the skeptics don't understand either climate science or the scientific method.

By David F. Hales | November 25, 2009; 12:43 PM ET | Comments (14)

Potential impact on public's integreity of science

It would be a mistake in my opinion to address this issue along the lines of the question. It is larger and more important than so called "renowned scientists" and skeptics.

By William O'Keefe | November 24, 2009; 1:24 PM ET | Comments (3)

A minor tempest

This little tempest should remind us that like the rest of us, renowned climate scientists are people with a normal quotient of character failings. Albert Einstein reportedly treated his first wife badly, but that certainly has no bearing on the genius of his scientific achievements -- any more than Pablo Picasso's private behavior devalues his astonishing art.

By Robert J. Shapiro | November 24, 2009; 11:48 AM ET | Comments (14)

A passionate debate can bring benefits

Passion is a good thing when it drives people to work hard and overcome obstacles. Passion is a bad thing when it causes you to close your mind to other points of view, no matter how strongly you disagree with them.

By Pam Faggert | November 24, 2009; 11:27 AM ET | Comments (1)

E-mails not a surprise to scientists

This is a fascinating development, not because it sheds light on climate change, but because it pulls back the curtain on scientific research in a highly politicized environment.

By Bernard Finel | November 24, 2009; 11:08 AM ET | Comments (4)

Convincing skeptics

The impressive thing about this conspiracy is that they managed to convince the planet's glaciers, sea ice, and hydrological cycles to play along.

By Bill McKibben | November 24, 2009; 10:58 AM ET | Comments (13)

A purposeful distraction

The widely posted Climate Research Unit e-mails are being misrepresented by climate change deniers as evidence that the science supporting human-caused global warming is fatally flawed or, worse, corrupt.

By Donald F. Boesch | November 24, 2009; 7:35 AM ET | Comments (11)

Don't judge a book by its cover

The story here is a simple one and it could apply to any one of us. Think of all the e-mails you have written over the past 10 years.

By David Hone | November 24, 2009; 6:03 AM ET | Comments (6)

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2009 The Washington Post Company