Some time ago Art Raiche suggested to me that, “In all honesty, I suspect that it would be easier to hold readings of Dawkin’s “The God Delusion” in Mecca than to get the Sydney Morning Herald to print letters critical of AGW. At least the response would be more direct.”
Today, the Sydney Morning Herald Letters Editor wrote:
“CLIMATE change is always a problematic issue for the letters page, and Michael Duffy’s opinion piece last Saturday sparked vigorous exchanges all week. Readers on both sides hold views with something approaching religious fervour, while grounding their arguments in science. If we publish the views of sceptics, we are accused of airing theories with as little credibility as creationism. If we don’t, we are accused of censorship and taking sides.
“It seems to me much better to have all kinds of opinions in the open – the letters page is not a peer-reviewed journal, and even if it was that would not necessarily give it authority in this debate. All we can do is plead for politeness, brevity and a bit of nuance…” Mike Ticher Letters editor
I am impressed! Thanks Mr Ticher.