The Post really doesn’t get it. George Will wrote a column suggesting that there was a broad scientific consensus in the 1970s regarding the threat of global cooling. This is simply not true. Moreover, this untruth is readily verifiable. And George Will attempted to sow doubts about global warming by citing a bogus analysis of research findings, from an organization that has publicly said that the analysis was bogus and that their research in fact says just the opposite of what George Will argued. And then of course there is the fact that there is a broad scientific consensus regarding the threat of global warming, supported by overwhelming evidence.
But the Post simply wishes they had asked Will for a clarification, and laments the missed opportunity toÂ “foster debate” between “informed viewpoints.” Another way of putting this is that the Post has no problem misleading its readers on basic questions of science, and is willing to publish — and stand behind — blatant falsehoods in order to create the desired level of ignorance.