It starts like this:
Do you consult your dentist about your heart condition? In science, as in any area, reputations are based on knowledge and expertise in a field and on published, peer-reviewed work. If you need surgery, you want a highly experienced expert in the field who has done a large number of the proposed operations.
You published "No Need to Panic About Global Warming" (op-ed, Jan. 27) on climate change by the climate-science equivalent of dentists practicing cardiology...
... and gets even better. Go read it!
More like this
"Snazzy safety glasses," I said to the dental hygienist who was just about to ask me to open wide. Something about the pink rims caught my eye and led me to a remark that showed my age:
"I remember when dentists didn't wear gloves, or masks, or eye protection."
Larry Moran sneers at the creationist habit of stoking their numbers by claiming that M.D.s are "science professionals", and therefore bolster their generic claim that 'growing numbers of sci
Quacks have no shame, but once reputable science and engineering magazines should have some vestiges of it.
Nice. I hadn't realized the WSJ actually published the letter.
Better link:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240529702047409045771932707274726…
Do Denialists believe that authors will never read what they are quoted as saying? Trenberth noted how he was misrepresented, and how other experts are aware of how he was misrepresented. Unfortunately, these corrections do not always make it to the same audience that hears the misrepresentation.