NYT readers weigh in

In the NYT there are six letters to the editor about Andy Revkin’s much-discussed article. Naturally, my favorite is the one that says …

… on every major point, starting with the question of whether climate change is an established scientific finding, the middle stance agrees with the Gore position and rejects the Bush deception. The notion that the truth is midway between two poles of debate is a longstanding American myth, but it does not work in this case.

Grist relies on the support of generous readers like you to cover the stories that matter most. Thank you for donating.

• One Time
• Monthly

• $120
• $180
• Other
• Donate

• $10
• $15
• Other
• Donate

Secure · Tax deductible · Takes 45 Seconds

Did this article feel meaningful?

Make others like it possible: Give now in under 45 seconds.

• One Time 💚
• Monthly

• $120
• $180 💚
• Other
• Donate

• $10
• $15 💚
• Other
• Donate

Secure · Tax deductible · Takes 45 Seconds

While neither "An Inconvenient Truth" nor the so-called middle stance is the final word on climate change, both are responsible efforts to get at the truth. By contrast, skepticism about global warming is a position unmoored from reality.

Word, Daniel Segal. Word.