Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Bret Stephens" in English language version.
First of all, I was born in New York and I'm wondering why Wikipedia keeps insisting that i was born in Mexico. But I was born to a father who had been born in Mexico and had a family business there...
While Stephens has garnered moderate praise from the left for being anti-Trump, he has written on other topics that may anger most Times readers. His views on climate change have created the strongest backlash, so far, with liberal site ThinkProgress questioning the hire on Wednesday and calling the writer is a climate science denier.
Stephens has been one of Trump's most outspoken conservative critics
There was particular concern that Stephens would import his penchant for climate science denialism into the Times, a fear that was validated when Stephens devoted his very first column to that subject
The naming of a "climate agnostic" as a regular columnist risks turning the newspaper of record into a vehicle for the spread of ignorance
That Stephens doesn't bother to cite which climate-change facts are uncertain may be because he knows exactly what he is doing, and he's aware he wouldn't win that argument. Or it may be because he himself has fallen prey to his own argument about epistemic uncertainty, and so he no longer thinks the evidence matters. Either way, his accusation—that it is not the facts you should question, but the entire system that creates facts at all—is terrifying.
In other words, the people obstructing climate policies are justified because climate "advocates" are too mean to them, and claim too much certainty about the future. This is of course nonsense.
