baltimore aureole:

chinese coal mine fires release 360 million tons of CO2 annually - more than all the cars and trucks in the US combined.

Let's go to the linked article for what it really says:

"The Chinese fires also make a big, hidden contribution to global warming through the greenhouse effect, scientists said. Each year they release 360 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, as much as all the cars and light trucks in the United States."

Why did you feel it necessary to inflate the impact of the Chinese problem? Giving you the benefit of the doubt here, were you merely mistaken? Do you have another link that shows you were right, but that you simply failed to provide?

baltimore aureole:

the largest chinese coal mine fire covers an underground area 3000 miles long and 450 miles wide, and burns more coal annually than is produced in pennsylvania, ohio, and illinois combined.

Again, let's go back to the linked article:

"One coal fire in northern China, for instance, is burning over an area more than 3,000 miles wide and almost 450 miles long.

"The direct and indirect economic losses from coal fires are huge," said Paul M. van Dijk, a Dutch scientist who is tracking the Chinese blazes via satellite.

He estimated that the Chinese fires alone consume 120 million tons of coal annually. That's almost as much as the annual coal production in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Illinois combined."

Why did you report that just the one fire consumes more coal annually than the given U.S. states, rather than all of the Chinese mine fires, as the article states? Why did you write (within a sentence which, as I've just shown, was itself erroneous) that the Chinese fires burn up "more" coal, when the article states that it's really only "almost as much as?" (Well, we're far beyond the benefit of the doubt now, aren't we?)

A small point: The article never states that the fire you refer to is the largest of all, although that can be inferred because otherwise the author likely wouldn't have chosen it as an example. Moving on...

baltimore aureole:

the oldest chinese coal mine fire has been raging for 40 years.

This statement is nowhere to be found in the article. However, it does say that:

"...some of the fires have been burning for centuries with few people aware of the problem."

...which would actually have made your point stronger if you had chosen to bother reading your own link.

There may even be more things wrong with your synopsis that I didn't catch, but then I don't plan on making this my life's work.

baltimore aureole:

yes - by all means. let's piss and moan about the unsigned kyoto treaty. america is the worst nation on earth.

The point of concerning ourselves with global warming at all is that we can only do what is possible within the confines of our own government, our own laws, and our own lives. While it certainly does matter that China (and India, and so on) are very heavy polluters (and not just of the air), it doesn't absolve the U.S. (or anyone else) of the responsibility to clean up our/their own backyard. Just saying "Oh yeah, well they don't have to, so we're not going to either!" doesn't get us anywhere, and is disingenuous besides. It's not as though the Who Cares Brigades would suddenly be in favor of vigorously fighting global warming even if every other nation on Earth were on board.