NYT’s Justin Gillis on ‘phony skeptics’ who are guilty of ‘cherry-picking studies, manipulating data, and refusing to weigh the evidence as a whole’
Gillis: 'In other words, the climate scientists see themselves as the true skeptics, having arrived at a durable consensus about emissions simply because the evidence of risk has become overwhelming. And in this view, people who reject the evidence are phony skeptics, arguing their case by cherry-picking studies, manipulating data, and refusing to weigh the evidence as a whole.'
