It mattered little to the climate-change hysterics that Stephens actually agreed with them that climate change is real and man-made.
But he dared to question some of the research, and got trashed with profanity-laced tweets from Leftist journalists.
Because nothing says “intelligent argument” like a bunch of “f-bombs.”
On Friday (appearing in Saturday’s print edition), the New York Times published its first column by Bret Stephens, the former Wall Street Journal columnist recently hired as a “conservative” voice.
Its theme was that the political “hyperbole” about climate change doesn’t match the underlying science — even if one trusts the underlying science. That alone was enough to send journalists into unhinged and often profane orbit.
Here are the key climate-related excerpts from Stephens’ column….
Last October, the Pew Research Center published a survey on the politics of climate change. Among its findings: Just 36 percent of Americans care “a great deal” about the subject. Despite 30 years of efforts by scientists, politicians and activists to raise the alarm, nearly two-thirds of Americans are either indifferent to or only somewhat bothered by the prospect of planetary calamity.
Why? The science is settled. The threat is clear. Isn’t this one instance, at least, where 100 percent of the truth resides on one side of the argument?
Well, not entirely. As Andrew Revkin wrote last year about his storied career as an environmental reporter at The Times, “I saw a widening gap between what scientists had been learning about global warming and what advocates were claiming as they pushed ever harder to pass climate legislation.” The science was generally scrupulous. The boosters who claimed its authority weren’t….