Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

This is risible. The editorial board of the New York Times questions the motives of those who reject the anthropogenic global-warming (AGW) hypothesis. ("A few may genuinely believe global warming is a left-wing plot. Others may be singing the tune of corporate benefactors.") This smear goes both ways. Those who accept the AGW hypothesis do so because of the beneficial effect it has on their careers. Either it's permissible to question the motives of both sides or it's impermissible to question the motives of either side. The Times, being hyperpartisan, questions the motives of only one side, which is why it's losing its readership.