Is the New York Times enabling a debate that most rational people think is long over? The latest conservative pundit to be hired by the New York Times has progressives and environmentalists concerned. Bret Stephens, a Pulitzer Prize winning "opinion journalist" from the Wall Street Journal made his first splash onto the op-ed page of the Times recently with a controversial piece entitled "Climate of Complete Certainty." In this editorial he asserts that climate science should continue to be debated, despite a preponderance of credible evidence sounding the alarm for immediate action. This week on Sea Change Radio, we speak with two PhDs with differing responses to Mr. Stephens's perspective and place at the Grey Lady. First, we're joined by Joe Romm, the founding editor of Climate Progress, who is critical of the new hire. Then, we hear from psychologist Pamela Paresky who, as a friend of Stephens, thinks that his brand of climate action denialism could actually be a catalyst for productive dialogue that might ultimately bring conservatives over to recognizing the threat of climate change.
![<?php echo $config['site_title']; ?>](/static/images/rp-navimg.gif)
![Support the <?php echo $config['site_title']; ?>](/static/images/support.png)
