Scientist James Hansen has been raised almost to sainthood for his early sounding of the climate-change alarm and for his adamance since. He testified before Congress Monday on the 20-year anniversary of his global climate change testimony, saying roughly what he has been saying all along.

One reply to this week's testimony went to Andrew Revkin, environment reporter for the New York Times, who posted on his blog the comments of Vic Svec, senior vice president of Peabody Coal, the world's largest private miner of coal. From my headline, you can tell that I don't give the comments the slightest credence, and I would be wary of trusting anyone who does.

Burning coal is just bad, period. Yes, we need electricity, but the only people who say we have to get it from coal have a financial interest in coal. Yes, I would be unhappy if my fortunes were tied up with coal and faced the prospect of losing those fortunes, but the greater good is so obviously paramount that I'm still surprised when anyone talks like this with a straight face.

Svec's first absurd comment is when he says that "blaming big oil and big coal for the broad array of opinions about climate change is disingenuous." What's disingenuous is that anyone related to Big Coal would disclaim a connection to public opinion about its big product.

Demon Coal is behind the Americans for Balanced Energy Choices, which seeks to mislead just by its name. True, they are Americans, but they imply a grass-roots beginning that is bullshit. I can understand why they wouldn't call themselves Rapacious Coal Giants for a Profit-Ensured Future.

Svec also proudly spouts this: "Speaking for Peabody, our time and energy are being devoted to satisfying an energy-hungry world’s need for coal and advancing the commercialization of carbon capture and storage technology." It's the word "need" that is most off. There is no need for coal. There has never been a need for coal. People discovered they could get electricity from coal so coal became a resource, but we can get electricity from other resources too. We have a need for electricity. Not coal.

As for carbon capture and storage, no independent studies have shown that it's likely to be even part of the greenhouse gases solution. And, again, the only people who are pushing it are people who want to continue selling coal.

Of all the comments I read on the page, I most enjoyed the reply from Cynthia, one of Revkin's readers: "Sounds like a drug dealer's defense to me." Yes, it does.