My response below, to the article (August 20) referenced above, has too many characters, by a factor of two, to qualify for insertion online, and is of a nature and size that there's no chance it will be published as a regular letter to the Post so I'm submitting it this way hoping that your editors will perhaps consider at least permitting longer online responses in the future..
While it’s clear that the politics related to “climate change” are “hot”, so is the science. Eilperin and Achenbach, in their front-page article (August 20)
have shed no new light on the science.
The term climate, unlike weather, is meant to cover much longer time spans. In just the past 1.3 million years our planet has experienced 13 ice ages, each followed by a brief warming period. We have the good fortune to be living during a brief warming period. Climate change has been ongoing since the origin of our planet some 4+ billion years ago. It's not always pleasant. When there are no longer any reports of shrinking glaciers or disappearing ice fields the next ice age will surely be underway.