Last week the Wall Street Journal published a ridiculous op-ed titled "Climate Science in Denial" claiming that "global warming alarmists have been discredited, but you wouldn't know it from the rhetoric this Earth Day."
Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic does an exceptional job dismantling this ridiculous claim:
Actually, the subhead should be revised: "Global warming denialists have been re-discredited, but you wouldn't know it from the rhetoric in today's Wall Street Journal." Far be it from me, a non-scientist, to dispute the scientific expertise of an MIT professor of meteorology, Richard Lindzen, but then again, Lindzen's selective recitation of the litany of arguments against global warming practically begs a rebuttal.
First, he mentions "Climate Gate" -- those e-mails from the Climate Research Unit from the University of East Anglia. He suggests that the e-mails show "unambiguous evidence of the unethical suppression of information and opposing viewpoints, and even data manipulation."
The e-mails were actually quite ambiguous and contained evidence of churlishness and defensiveness from scientists whose data had long been under attack from climate denialists.
Much of the media has done a particularly bad job covering the climate crisis. Instead of informing the public about the facts, they have treated the issue as if the same political divisions they exuberantly cover also exist in the scientific community. They don't.
Cross-posted from Al's Journal