OPINION:
In my op-ed “The overblown and misleading issue of global warming” (Web, Jan. 2), I made a reference to “ignorant people abusing the freedom of the Internet.” Following the publication in The Washington Times, somebody alerted me about a commentary published Jan. 12 on joannenova.com.au with the made-up title “Professor Retires and Becomes a Climae Sceptic.” This is so inaccurate and misleading I cannot imagine how they even thought of it. Or if they thought at all before they posted it. As a result, the site attracted reader comments, some of which are simply idiotic.
Those who know me and my work know that I did not wait to retire in order to express my opinions. I have been expressing my views for many years, including years during which I was employed. In fact, my Washington Times piece is a summary of the “Statement” I posted on my website years ago. My university never interfered with my research, which was funded in its entirety by U.S.-government funding sources.
I wrote to the offending wesbite to complain and they did correct a few things but that does not make it right. I am sure the story has been picked up by other sites. It is very unfair for both sides of the debate to be subjected to this kind of misinformation by pseudo scientists who serve not science, but political factions. And this is why many climate scientists are not willing to express their opinions openly.
It is thus unsurprising that we have ended up having two extremes dominating the debate. On the one side are those who claim all global warming is caused by humans, and on the other side are those who insist that none of the warming is due to human. Most likely (as I argued in my op-ed) the truth is somewhere in between.
ANASTOSIOS TSONIS
Milwaukee, Wis.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.