Paul Hsieh has written a Letter-to-the-Editor of the WSJ about the disputed settleness of climate change.
If a respected MIT scientist like Mr. Lindzen argues that "the science isn't settled," and other scientists disagree, then doesn't the very dispute itself prove that the science isn't settled?
The point is: dispute about how "settled" the science is implies that it isn't very "settled" at all... unless you're able to convince people that the dispute is being promoted by sources who have no place in the debate. That's what prominent climatologists were attempted to do, until their dishonest methods and manipulations were recently revealed thanks to the Climategate hacker.
(It's the fourth letter here, though the page's format is quite confusing. If you look at the underlying HTML you'll notice that Dr. Hsieh's letter is the only one that wasn't given an invisible anchor tag, making it impossible to link to the letter directly. Strange.)