Revkin in his comment section: "...many [climate skeptics]...are very well educated on the science"; "I don't claim impartiality, by the way. I am partial to reality, which is why I've written on climate overstatement as much as climate understatement. "

The 'Revkin' Collection in the Climate E-mail Release - Readers' Comments - NYTimes.com

[Tom Fuller] It's fine for Morano to opportunistically show up on the climate stage when things get interesting enough for him to make some money off it--it's not okay for him to impugn the character of one of the best spokespersons for the planet working in this language.

The 'Revkin' Collection in the Climate E-mail Release - Readers' Comments - NYTimes.com

If a Andrew Revkin Award existed, I would nominate Walter Duranty (a former NYT reporter) as a worthy recipient. Duranty misinformed his NYT readers in the 1930s about the Ukraine mass starvation.

The 'Revkin' Collection in the Climate E-mail Release - Readers' Comments - NYTimes.com

I have always believed you believed what you say, I still do - but, you need to see this through the eyes of all of us, and your many readers, who are aghast, not that you believe in AGW theory, but that you allowed yourself to become part of the workings of what have proved to be a fraudulent-cabal.

The 'Revkin' Collection in the Climate E-mail Release - Readers' Comments - NYTimes.com

I'm sorry, Andrew, but you should have gone to ground on this. I don't think you can claim your emails have been taken out of context anymore, especially when you're considered a "Key journalist" and someone they can "trust"—trust for what I wonder? To make matters worse, your contempt for the "10s of millions of disengaged or doubtful or simply under-edcuated Americans (02 Jan, 2007)" or the "big chunk of America -- people whose understanding of science and engagement with such issues is so slight that they happily sit in pre-conceived positions (26 Sept 2006)" shows you in the most unflattering, elitist light. And with +220K more emails attached to a dead man's switch, it likely won't get any easier for you or anyone who claims innocence or impartiality.

The 'Revkin' Collection in the Climate E-mail Release - Readers' Comments - NYTimes.com

[Revkin] The stats above aren't a matter of belief. They are revealed in thorough surveys. The disengaged and under-educated, by the way, have all manner of unfounded beliefs on global warming, nuclear power, genetically-engineered foods, vaccines, electromagnetic radiation, and more. They are hardly all "climate skeptics," many of whom are very well educated on the science. I'll have to deal with being unflattering. As for elitist, I'm also not saying these are bad people. I don't claim impartiality, by the way. I am partial to reality, which is why I've written on climate overstatement as much as climate understatement.