Last Friday, the New York Times introduced a new, conservative columnist: Bret Stephens, former editor at the Jerusalem Post and the Wall Street Journal. He's also a former climate-change denier, who now says he believes that human activity is responsible for global warming. But, in his first column he wrote that, "claiming total certainty about the science... creates openings for doubt [when] much that passes for accepted fact is really a matter of probabilities." The response has been deafening... from readers, including scientists, saying the paper's encouraging climate-change denial. The Times' Public Editor says readers need to hear different perspectives and it's time for "Busting up the paper's mostly liberal echo chamber." But scientists say climate change should be treated as an emergency that could be worse than predicted.
Scientific uncertainty and the politics of climate change
Erik Wemple - Washington Post - @ErikWemple, Michael E. Mann - Pennsylvania State University - @MichaelEMann, Mark Hemingway - Weekly Standard - @Heminator, Marcus du Sautoy - University of Oxford - @MarcusduSautoy