Bill Z. has sent me a link to the New York Times op-ed
The content of the op-ed is simple. Stephens – who looks like a classic lukewarmer to me here, not too much more skeptical than Andy Revkin – says that it's wrong to expect that one is 100% certain. Only fanatics do so, sane people know that they're 65% right if they're really good, and the climate alarmists claiming certainty should be ashamed.
OK, that's a simple message. Everything else are redundant decorations and fancy language. I do see that Stephens' writing resembles that of some true masters of literature as an art but I am not quite sure whether I am the kind of guy who fully appreciates this aspect of someone's writing. Clarity, efficiency, and especially accuracy of the content are way more important for me.